Member Info for 13thmonkey

Methane can be renewable, this can in effect turn atmospheric CO2 into solid and safe black carbon, microbes and such create methane from rotting plant matter and such, this separates it into h2 and carbon.

This is up to the end of October, so no itawani, no linde, no hydeploy in the numbers. Not that the first has done anything yet based on RNS output.

We knew it'd not be too exciting, if you expected more that's your expectations that are causing the problem.

Well that's better than i feared it might be.

Daniel, is there a question in there?

slowroll the current top research establishment in the UK is a testing ground for ITER in france, they know that they have only just got the geometry and the materials correct to make it work, and they can create fusion, but not for long enough. They need to be >10x bigger for it to be viable. So those guys, it's like woodford funding cold fusion, lets put it that way.

colinh100, as far as I am aware (been following it for a while), no one is close to viable fusion, they can manage a few seconds here and there maybe even 30s but not sustainable, i.e. generating it's own tritium etc.

Interesting fact and reason for it taking so long, helium behaves like tritium but is cheaper and creates much less energy (10x) however you can trial with helium then move to tritium. However following a helium test the machine is safe to work on in days/weeks, following a tritium test it takes months/years for the machine's radiation levels to drop enough to enter the same room as it. So you need to be really really sure that the tritium tests will work, and you need the radiation to make more tritium, it's fairly rare and really expensive, so you need to breed tritium from lithium.

Fusion is at least a decade (probably 2) away from producing meaningful power to the grid, we've got loads or room to play in, and with a large installed base of storage, fewer fusion reactors are needed, which will effect the economics as you'll reuse the design less.

Was the RNS leaky? 400k sale delivered between May and December

So sub 75% theoretically allows for greater degrees of challenge, which might make them more interesting to risk averse institutional investors?

Oneandonly1, honest question, why would we want him to get below 75%?

I think that the rolls / mini analogy doesn't work, fiesta / mondeo works better, it's just a question of scale rather than better and worse. Although even then would you build the higher end before the cheaper version, quite possibly (tesla), or most tech products, create the halo product and then the entry level models. But that's an argument that involves consumers rather than corporate buyers, they'll behave very differently to each other in reality.

Is that the cause of the rise?

I'm not convinced it's a great news for us, I'm not sue that we'll ever be in a position to create car class FC's, do we have the power density, i.e. size of unit to power output? For static applications where cost is more important than size we're great, where you need a smaller size but still high power output i'm less certain that we even view it as being a target market.

Southern, that's starting to sound like free energy or perpetual motion, there are violations of the laws of thermodynamics, so no it will take more energy to create the h2 than you get from the h2.

Hellie price per unit at volume production in the 2000's vs the millions is what stated and its true. However I think the difference is that great as its only a portion of the car and you could outsource that anyway so the fc arrives like any other component. Is a fuel cell inherently cheaper than all of the machining in an engine block, maybe, maybe not, its possible though, and an engine line is phenomenally expensive to spec, buy and install.

Ionity are changing their pricing structure, and I think they will price themselves out of the market.
E0.79 / KWH
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/ionity-charging-a-nissan-leaf-to-cost-50-euros-in-europe-140394.html

Rob, I don't see that in the graphs, last week it started thursday, the week before that thursday (friday flat), the weeks before that nothing.

2 to 3 months for negotiations and contact signing is not that unreasonable, yes you'd hope that some work was done ahead of time, but could they have done that without RNSs for what was being disclosed to the customer that wasn't public knowledge? So starting fr m a blank slate and just some interest in not perturbed by where we are now. But I will be in another 4-6 weeks.

Musk has nothing to do with amazon.

Athanasius, absolutely this is all about potential, it's got a product that seems to fit into a need that has a large niche. It's not a bargain, but it could be if that niche can be exploited.