notsosmartmart - the safety documents submitted to the numerous enquiry meetings clearly indicate that the Cleve Hill project is going to use Lithium-ion batteries - though they try and keep as quiet as possible in the public media because of the obvious safety concerns about Lithium-ion technology.
Both the Faversham residents and anyone looking in here is going to be disappointed if they think after all that battling the developers are suddenly going to change the technology that they have just spent the last 2 years telling everyone was safe. Unfortunately history shows that it may take a major disaster like Grenfell to teach that safety lesson. If they are smart they will only go for a smaller battery to keep their options open for the future.
Once the Oxford superhub project demonstrates to everyone that VRFB's can do all the heavy cycling whilst the poor delicate Lithium-ion sits at the back of the site only being able to charge less than once a day then the economic penny will drop - if the VRFB is the system that is earning all the money from providing FFR balancing services then why don't we simply expand the storage capacity of the VRFB by just building a bigger electrolyte tank and in one fell swoop completely eliminate the Lithium-ion and its safety challenges entirely. Once VRFB's prove themselves to be essential as part of a hybrid battery storage system it only then takes simple economic arguments for them to fully take over the entire job. The lithium is only included at this stage as it is a technology that battery project financiers are already comfortable with.
biganuf - zinc-air batteries have been around for decades but they have never really been considered for large scale grid applications because they rely upon one key ingredient - the air. This has to be let if from the outside and when you do so you let in other things such as water vapour and carbon dioxide, which produce side reactions that you have little control over and whose effects are location specific.
Having a guaranteed supply of Vanadium from Bushveld Minerals means that they can actually produce a price list for their products that doesn't need reprinting every 3 months. If you have ever tried to buy Vanadium electrolyte on the 'open' market you would discover that that is actually worth a huge amount.
I've had to break my social media distancing to bring you this very basic piece of information so please can you pay attention.
Macanman - that bit is actually from the previous year's report.
I am having a discussion with the Roskill researchers next week to give them a better idea of what is happening in the VRFB market. Toodle pip !
The new rules allow coal mines and open cast mines, also known as open pit mines, to resume full operations, while underground mines can only operate at 50% capacity to make it easier to maintain social distancing, the Minerals Council said.
yep VRFB is cheaper than Lithium-ion at anything greater than 4 hours duration, even on 2017 costings for VRFB's.
I predict that VRFB prices will drop more than Lithium-ion systems (the lithium-ion cells represent perhaps only 40% of the cost of an entire Lithium-ion system).
And then there's the issue of safety.
bassguy - indeed that may be the case - they cannot go after the leveraged spreadbet holdings like they did about 6 weeks ago, because they've all been taken out in the drop to 7p. Now we should have a base which is less easy to screw over with fake drops. Just remember to never use the so-called 'stop-loss' orders which should be taken to the advertising standards agency as they do not stop losses but actually guarantee them.
Ever think you've been promised something only to have it cruelly taken away from you ?
That's what's happened every day this week.
On Monday we finished at 13.65p, but Tuesday opened at 13.25p - apparently down 3%
On Tuesday we finished at 13.75p but Wednesday opened at 13.625 - apparently down 1%
On Wednesday we finished at 14.00p but Today opened at 13.25 - apparently down 5.4%
The reality, if you properly analyse the trades to establish the Accumulation-Distribution threshold (the price in the market that can be used to that draw the line between MM Buys and MM Sells) then on Monday it finished at 13.20p but started Tuesday at exactly the same point.
At the end of Tuesday the AD point finished at 13.65p and started Wednesday at 13.40p - so down 1.4%
On Wednesday the AD point finished at 13.275p - today it started at 13.20p - so down 0.6%
Apparent opening drops total 9.4%, actual drops total 2%.
So why is someone indulging in this rather pathetic attempt at end day gaslighting ? The MM nett trade position may have something to do with it.
Last Friday I counted 827K more Buys than Sells, on Monday this week it was 430K more Buys than Sells, on Tuesday it was 400K more Buys than Sells and yesterday it was 250K more Buys than Sells. All calculated ignoring the trades after the end of the day, which I am suggesting, if you hadn't spotted it, I think are highly suspicious.
Thus we have a situation where the Market Makers appear to have accumulated a lack of almost 2M shares within a week and every morning we are treated to yet more fake droppery. So if anyone offers you a happy ending today you know what to do.
I have to agree Pdub - we're not messing about with AIM or AIM-like exchanges any more. It has to be the London main market or the Dow Jones plus the JSE dual listing as far as I am concerned.
Snott - there are a number of different systems which use high temperature molten metal, most obviously the Sodium-Sulphur batteries from NGK in Japan. Actually whatever Mr Musk cultists tell you about his batteries being the biggest it is actually the 300mWh Sodium Sulphur battery in Buzen, Japan that is the world's largest battery .
The problem is that when the Sodium Sulphur batteries catch fire all the sodium burns and it takes a week to put out. There have been multiple disasters caused by Sodium-Sulphur batteries. Sadoway's battery is no different.