Member Info for Alfacomp

bigsmoke, yes you are mistaken to think that BMN needs yet another greenfield ore prospect. Try persuading Glencore to invest 200 million quid to build a new processing plant and you'll discover that they are not going to do that and buy Iron and give you anything like a reasonable price. In fact given the current problems at Tando they are more than likely to go for them. But Bushveld, no way.

no sharesaplenty - the trading patterns this morning are quite clear - first a series of quick 30K sells to get the price moving down. Then a brief recovery so those trying to move the price down have now had to resort to 50-60K sells for the last 40 minutes. The buying money is simply sitting around waiting for the best prices. When they decide enough is enough and the buy-in target has been reach the behaviour will flip.

Thanks LIION - I make it now more Buys than Sells today. If this carries on then the Market Makers will try and move it lower to try again to pick up cheap shares from the scared or impatient

Personally I am happy with glass based PV panels as glass is a well understood and well characterised rigid and non-degrading encapsulation medium. I accept that there are some roofs which are perhaps designed to only take the weight of some thin metal sheets, in which case the additional loading of PV panels may seem significant. However those rooves will almost inevitably have been designed to take a degree of snow loading and if not if all they can support is a metal sheet will already be horrendously thermally inefficient, so should be replaced.

RichK - the question of battery degradation is somewhat obfuscated by algorithms in the Tesla (and maybe all electric vehicles) - the basic idea is that they have extra cells that they can switch in as time goes on to make up for the intrinsic (physics determined) degradation of the cells. This allows the manufacturer to cover up the true cell degradation, at least until the warranty is over, then it is rapidly downhill.

Tricks like that are not going to work for long in large scale stationary energy storage which is why it is so nice to see page 7 of the Avalon presentation mentioned earlier - http://vanitec.org/images/uploads/Avalon_Battery_-_Company_and_Products_Overview_for_Chengdu_Vanadium_Symposium.pdf - that shows VRFBs side by side with Lithium-ion and demonstrates why it is possible to rely upon an expected VRFB life of 25 years plus.

no you prat everyone who is a real investor in Bushveld Minerals also has a stake in Afritin Mining dontcha know.

that is an a very interesting presentation is it not ?

1) The leasing scheme means that customers would still have not even paid off the original cost of the electrolyte after 10 years. The interest rate has clearly been selected so that it would take 12 years approximately, so that it is a no-brainer option to opt for a 10 year lease.

2) For the worked Sandbar Solar example the cost of c. $32,000 for the electrolyte (containing) 1550 pounds of Vanadium pentoxide now gives us a very good handle on the cost of V electrolyte versus the cost of the Vanadium in the first place.

Following the sums through 1550 lbs is 704Kg of V2O5, but V2O5 is only 56% V by mass so the contained mass of V works out at 394 Kg. This is for 90kWh of energy storage - this gives approx 0.44 Tonnes V per 100kWh of storage, or 4,400 Tonnes V for 1GWh storage. This number is in line with the 5,000 Tonnes V per GWh we have previously been guided to use.

Now to the costs - $32,000 divided by approximately 400 Kg works out at a round $80 per Kg of V in the electrolyte. So it is twice the cost of the raw Vanadium if you are paying $40/Kg for your Vanadium. We are paying about $18/Kg to dig it out of the ground, so if we are going to be selling electrolyte at $80/Kg we are going to be having something like a 300% gross profit margin.

Well Loudspeaker is an ex-firefighter and he has been more than forthcoming on the subject so I have to disagree there.

Bill - I am afraid that I am not interested in any private, secret or inside information.

Bill with the greatest of respect any information that I can let you have can be discussed in public here.

yes it is expensive, which is why I am instead going to dusseldorf in march - that's only 30 euros for the exhibition

https://www.eseexpo.com/vis/v1/en/search

If you really want to go to a UK event then there is the UK battery tech expo at silverstone on march 26th which is free:-

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/battery-tech-expo-uk-2020-silverstone-tickets-61861829397?aff=eemailordconf&utm_campaign=order_confirm&utm_medium=email&ref=eemailordconf&utm_source=eventbrite&utm_term=viewevent

The best commercial UK event I have been to is https://www.auroraer.com/events/battery-conference-2019/ - this is usually in London in the autumn - I recall that this was low cost also.

why our newfound 'serious' investor has been so desperate to push the discussion of safety issues off the front page here is a brief summary of the links originally referred to:-

From myself ---------------------

concerns now starting to be appreciated here in the UK

https://www.favershameye.co.uk/post/a-battery-of-scientific-evidence

From Ninvestor ----------------------

Despite living in the SE I had to google Cleve Hill, worrying stuff indeed.

It appears Kent Fire And Rescue think so too:

https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010085/EN010085-001751-GREAT%20-%20D7%20-%20Battery%20Storage.pdf

From myself ---------------------

If you want to see how far a cloud of toxic HF gas would spread look at the last image here:- https://www.favershameye.co.uk/post/cleve-hill-batteries-included

If you want to see how far a cloud of toxic HF gas would spread look at the last image here:- https://www.favershameye.co.uk/post/cleve-hill-batteries-included

cont...

So the amount of HF gas produced by a single car fire, whilst clearly deadly in an enclosed space and also potentially deadly in a not so enclosed space such as a breezy above-ground car park, is perhaps something that can be dealt with. However put the equivalent of 13,000 electric cars in the same system (100MWh) and you have a potential cloud of deadly gas that would rival the Bhopal disaster in which 20,000 people died (https://www.bhopal.net/what-happened/that-night-december-3-1984/the-death-toll/)

Bella the car comparison is not applicable in the case of stationary energy storage for the following reasons

1) The energy density in a stationary energy storage system is typically 10-20 times higher than in a car park full of electric vehicles. If we assume an eV contains 75kWh in a footprint of 3m x 6m you get an energy density of 4.2 kWh/m2. In a stationary energy storage system that energy density could be as much as 1.5MWh in a 40foot container (12mx 2.5m) leading to an energy density of 50 kWh/m2. In fact inside a real shipping container the lithium-ion batteries are concentrated much more densely than this as much of the container is for access and cooling systems.

2) Stationary energy storage systems are cycled much more aggressively than electric vehicles. A stationary energy storage system coupled to a PV array will likely be expected to be cycled fully 300 times per year. Again if we consider a typical eV having a full charge range of 250miles this would be the equivalent of doing 75,000 miles per year. Possibly some occasional motorway salesmen might achieve this mileage but the UK average car owner does around 8,000 miles ( https://www.thinkmoney.co.uk/news-advice/what-is-the-average-miles-driven-per-year-in-the-uk-0-8581-0.htm ) There are some in the eV community who scoff about batteries that don't have tyres and a steering wheel but they quieten down when presented with these facts.

3) The amount of HF gas produced from an eV fire might be as much as 15 Kg (0.2g per Wh as mentioned here:- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-09784-z ) At room temperature and pressure this amount of HF gas would completely occupy 16.8m3 (RMM 20g per mole = 750 moles, 1 mole of 22.4 dm3 = 0.0224m3 ) . A typical garage has a total volume of 3mx6m x3m = 54m3 - so pure HF gas would occupy 30% of the total volume of a single garage.

HF gas is so dangerous that the Lethal 10-minute exposure level is 170 parts per million ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK207733/table/ttt00047/?report=objectonly ). The HF evoluted inside a single garage would be at levels of 300,000 ppm or 1760 times the 10-minute lethal exposure level.

Loudspeaker - as you are ex firefighter what do you think of the idea of potentially the world's largest battery being built but the local fire brigade not being informed ?

The letter that Ninvestor has uncovered should register as a national scandal.

https://infrastructure.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/wp-content/ipc/uploads/projects/EN010085/EN010085-001751-GREAT%20-%20D7%20-%20Battery%20Storage.pdf

"It is evident that the applicant had not engaged KFR at any time during the consultation period
and, instead, left it to KF&R to learn about the application themselves and reach out
to the applicant. "

Truly astonishing !

I think the introductory paragraph gives you an idea of what it is about but nothing can prepare you for the videos that are embedded.

Cleve Hill has the potential to be one of the greatest environmental disasters ever. Lithium ion battery technology has never been tested on this scale. No one can say, for certain, that it is safe. All anyone knows for sure is that li-ion batteries spontaneously burst into flames and when they do, they produce copious volumes of one of the world’s most toxic gases, hydrogen fluoride as well as tiny amounts of an even more lethal gas, phosphoryl fluoride.

Every year, these batteries are being used to store ever increasing amounts of energy. The technology is relatively cheap, which is why manufacturers love it, but the science is undeniable. The greater the number of batteries, the greater the risk of fire and explosion.

The track record of lithium ion batteries is not good.

concerns now starting to be appreciated here in the UK

https://www.favershameye.co.uk/post/a-battery-of-scientific-evidence

nice one Larky

Bella the 6th month limit it would seem is only applicable to companies that have been turned into cash shells, as handled by rule 15 ( https://www.lseg.com/sites/default/files/content/documents/aim/2018/January/AIM_Rules_for_Companies_January_2018.pdf )

Where, within six months, an AIM Rule 15 cash shell does not complete a reverse takeover as
set out in rule 15, the Exchange will suspend trading in the AIM securities pursuant to rule 40.