RE: ANDREW FORREST21 Jul 2024 22:44
Scooby
In my defence I didn't claim that Forrest's green hydrogen plans were exactly in line with PHE and that he was going down the same route as Powerhouse's pyrolosis.
I cited it as an example of how things do not necessarily go according to plan in these new and emerging markets that aim to get us to net zero.
Whilst Fortesque has seen a downturn in the price of iron ore, I feel you are off the mark attributing this for the reason regarding his scaling down of Fortesque's green hydrogen transition. Forrest is as committed to getting his company producing using hydrogen as much as he ever was, but it's the unexpected cost of that hydrogen production that has caused him to scale back.
I'm sorry you feel it was just an attempt to deramp.
As on previous occasions when I've first mentioned Air Products foray into pyrolosis, United Hydrogen's supposed conglomeration, Patriot Energy utilising pyrolosis etc, it was merely an attempt to widen the narrative here and to try to open up a discussion. With it being a topic about green hydrogen, and in Australia, and with Forrest's decision having sent shockwaves through the Australian government (not my words) I thought it relevant to the debate here.
The lesson to be learnt here I feel is a relevant and prescient one for Powerhouse: as the deadline for the test centre to be operational nears, prepare for setbacks and delays.
Because that is what you are most likely going to get.