London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East and have access to Premium Chat. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
almost exculsivly? 59 posts inspirt 1 ukog but we think that was a typo.....:-)
TheFooCare: Regarding " Phimx's ludicrous misrepresentation of the tech. Considering these two post exclusively on INSP they don't seem to have learned much"
If my interpretation is ludicrous please correct it. We have all waited a long time for a definitive explanation of the simultaneous output figures produced by Inspirit. I'm sure you will have read my ludicrous posts today which reference Inspirit's RNS statements.
Oh and saying I post exclusively on insp is misrepresentation of the truth. I'll be generous to you and correct your words to "almost exclusively"
they are wasting their time in the Filter bin let them carry on it saves the state a fortune in care costs.
TheFooCare: I know plenty about INSP, exactly the same as everyone else. Are you implying you are gifted with Inspirit knowledge that I have been unable to decypher from the copious RNS statements pouring from the company in this their launch year. Don't keep it to yourself spread the word. For a first posting you seem quite happy to dish out the insults. We all make mistakes including a 3% stakeholder, after all John Gunn bought the Charger from Disenco; the test of time has proven it didn't perform as the next wonder product. Disenco went bust, perhaps John can offload this too and get some of his money back. On the other hand these guys never actually use their own money, it's always some Joe Public that coughs up. Tell us something we don't know about this company, something that your careful sifting has produced..... Please
No actual employees doing any real development, no funds to invest in real R&D, no money to travel to any "partners", only 3D paper models to explain your "Tech".
Idiots ramping this share, hoping to draw in the naive and the greedy.\
No true company would take the clowns seriously.
Over at Octagonal John and Nilesh do rather better. Their total emoluments
J Gunn £540,000
N Jagatia £75,000
Presumably that's where they work hard for their money
the.buffalo: Mr Nilesh Jagatia is the sole shareholder in NJK Associates. So acting as the FD of Inspirit he gets 30,000 for writing the financial reports. With his other hat on, at NJK Associates, he picks up another 30,000 for consutancy fees to the FD at Inspirit. He must consult with himself ! Excellent work
J Gunn 80,000
N Jagatia 30,000
A Samaha 12,000
S Gunn 12,000
Also is the statement " In addition to the above 148,000 wages and salaries for employees has been included in the development costs. Since there is 3 declared employees which include directors I'm not sure what employees would be paid. Presumably P. Booker gets paid somewhere !
Now the Development cost is 169,000 - 148,000 = 21,000 so a massive amount spent on development !!!!!!!!
Also 30,000 was paid to NJK Associates for consultancy fees. N Jagatia (the Inspirit FD) being the only member of that company !
PM709: I followed the Flowgroup story on LSE. It was plain the FLOW wonder/game changing boiler couldn't deliver what was promoted, electricity and heat from a boiler using a scroll compressor. The basic problem is how do you extract energy from an already efficient boiler. Of course on that board as this, people fanatically ramped the share. FLOW went to the wall and £50 Million was fleeced from the great British well intentioned. The FLOW boiler was never physically seen but there were many RNS statements pushing the story. I want people to invest with their eyes wide open, unfortunately even intelligent people can't control their common sense when the promise of easy money is waved in front of their noses. The lure of millions of boilers replaced each year in Europe is a good line to use!
I believe the Charger will never be a viable/commercial product. Inspirit dangle carrots for fools but the carrot fades away over time and is never seen or heard of again. Never a breath of follow up from them. Is that the strategy of a company with a world leading product about to go to market.
While I'm here your statement " These calculation have no impact on marine development! you see they are not going to buy it as product it more like they going use parts of the tech."
You are mistaken , see the latest RNS
… we continue with our discussions on how we can progress adapting our Inspirit Charger engine on two versions of their marine engines…
This clearly means the Charger will be adapted to be used with their marine engines, so Inspirit say! It will run from the waste heat of the marine engine. Therefore the operational performance and efficiency of the Charger is absolutely fundamental to any marine application. Using parts of the tech means simply adapting the heat generating function to run the Stirling engine part of the Charger. That has always been an advantage of the Stirling engine i.e. being able to use different fuels to provide the heat but that necessitates using different burners or heat feeding mechanism to the Stirling engine.
IF THE CHARGER DOESN’T PERFORM AS STATED THERE IS NO MARINE PROJECT, HENCE THE EFFICIENCY FIGURES ARE VERY VERY RELEVENT.
Here are some stranger sums for you.. The total salary cost for INSO is £163K as per the last accounts. JG receives £80k of that, leaving a sum total of £83k for that fantastic team working on this incredible innovation! Oh! I forgot, that there is also a FD employed. Possibly he is working for free, I don't know...
Where is the team required to design and develop this super fantastical magical energy churning, climate saving, world beating, game changing, Unicorn spotting boiler?!!!
Maybe only JG is paid, and the rest are working to save the world...
Phimx, You got he calculation wrong, thats not how its worked out. Im bit busy the next couple of days, but I will lay out proper calculations over the weekend, not that I think it matters for the purpose Im invested.
These calculation have no impact on marine development! you see they are not going to buy it as product it more like they going use parts of the tech.
Just wondering, for share that you are 110% convinced its not going to work out, then why spend all the time and effort? I get it if you were putting one liner deramp, but you are making the effort to type paragraphs.
Weathergeek: So how is it possible to get 6.4 kW max out with 20 KW max in at 15% efficiency ? The point is, you cannot produce 6.4 kW with ONLY 20 kW in if the efficiency is only 15%
From what I've read it's said maximum out put.
So it doesn't always run at maximum. It's not a constant, its what is possible. It's a combination of Gas and Electric so varies on which is being used the most no?
What do Inspirit mean by 15% electrical efficiency ? Is it gross or net ?
Converting 20 kW i.e. the maximum input available - they say so, at 15% efficiency I would get 3 kW out - not 6.4 kW
What calculation gives an output of 6.4 kW with a maximum input of 20 kW ?
Show me please, where's the boffin when you need him ?
I think you are looking at it in the wrong way. you are doing your maths to create a negative answer as that is your purposes and it serves your end. you should look at it from the the point of view that the electricity is an added benefit, normally wasted in standard boilers. the main purpose is still to heat you house utilising the gas as any normal boiler. The electricity is the by product for you to use if you so wish so you cant calculate using 15% efficiency as its main purpose is not electricity its heat. standard gas engines generally have a 93% efficiency 45% eletric and 48% thermal. in this case the thermal is the added benefit as the main purpose of the unit is to provide electricity.
From the INSP web site
Max Gas Heat input (GCV) 20 kW
Max heat Output @80/60 15 kW
Min Heat Output @80/60 5 kW
Max electrical Output 6.4 kW
Min electrical Output 1 kW
“ The appliance offers an overall efficiency of ~90%, divided between electrical efficiency (15%) and thermal efficiency (75%), and compares very favourably with conventional boilers, which typically run at lower efficiency in real world situations and deliver no electrical output at all”
Remember the beauty of the Charger lies in its ability to produce electricity from the waste heat produced from a hot water boiler and there lies its supposed advantage.
Now to produce 6.4 kWe at 15% efficiency you need burn 42.6 kW worth of gas. First question how do we get 6.3 kW out for a maximum heat input of 20 kW ? Second question, the cost. To burn 42.6 kW of gas is about 3.5p per kW so it has cost the owner 3.5p x 42.6 kW = £1.49 for 6.4 kW of electricity i.e. 1.49/6.4 = 23.3p per kWe. That’s a lot more than you would pay the Grid and in the summer your house will be hellish hot – because 36.2 kWt was heating water somewhere or else it was thrown away.
Alternatively if we burn Max Gas Heat input of 20 kW at 15% efficiency the Charger will produce 3 kW. Again 20 kW x 3.5p = 70p. For 3kwe. So it has cost 70/3 = 23.3p per kWe. Again more expensive than the grid.
In the winter perhaps your radiators are going full blast and you need 15 kWt then you are burning 20 kW and have 5 kW waste to produce 5 kW x 15% = 750W of electricity, lets hope you don’t need lights or the freezer or the tele on !
Lets look at another case; what happens if the Charger produces the 1kWe minimum. So we need 6.6 kW into the Sterling engine i.e. it needs 6.6 kW of waste heat, since the boiler is only 75% the boiler needs to burn 26.4 kW to produce the 6.6 kW waste. Cost 26.4 kW x 3.5p = 92.4p equivalent to 92.4p per kWe. Wow that’s some price for a kW of electricity. AND
Note I haven’t even included the 10% waste of energy that occurs because the combine efficiency is only 90%
For newcomers. For many years the Inspirit web site claimed the Charger produced 3 kWe and 15 kWt, simultaneously from 20 kW in, work the sums! No I'll do it, for 20 kW in and 15 kW into heating water there must be 5 kW waste- this produce 3 kW of electricity thus the efficiency is 60% WHAT!! This was then upped to 6.4 kWe again with 15 kWt at 20 kW input. It seems perpetual energy had become a reality! the efficiency is now 128% ! Around December 2019 their web site went down and a new site appeared, it had been redacted and no longer was 'simultaneous' mentioned. Strange because many thousands of hours testing had been carried out, including by third parties ….. and nobody noticed any oddities. The claims for those figures are still in the RNS statements.
So being no boffin I doubt my figures, can someone correct my maths and explain how the Charger operates - given their figures ?