Member Info for Alfacomp

of 21,551 of £4,550 of £1,990 and of £2,100

fool nobody. This is clearly an algorithm trading to capture the real Buy and Sell positions.

Oooooh I wonder why on earth they might be doing that.

Answer is that it is nothing to do with the price of eggs, or Vanadium, or batteries - it's obviously a shorter's trading algorithm desperately trying to figure out how to get out of their position.

I wonder how much surplus MVO there is at Vametco

exactly SoTRR

enough with the nonsense trades of 290 shares - please could you try 29,000 there's a good algorithm

please increase the size of their trades. The poor market makers have to find more than 400,000 shares from somewhere and they are relying upon you to hand them some easy profit. Thanks, GLA

... and everyone else as well - cripes we don't need this forum descending into bitter rancour as well.

drax - this is a brexit free zone, please can you keep it that way.

. The development and deployment of energy storage technologies will be critical
to the UK’s transition towards a flexible, low-carbon energy system. It is disappointing
that the Government has not made the Parliamentary time available to define energy
storage in primary legislation. The Government must ensure sufficient support for
the development and deployment of energy storage technologies. Large-scale, interseasonal storage currently appears to pose the greatest technical challenges, and should
be supported through demonstration projects, including in future large-scale trials of
low-carbon heating. The Government should provide a dedicated legal definition of
Clean Growth: Technologies for meeting the UK’s emissions reduction targets 93
energy storage in primary legislation as soon as possible. Such a commitment should
be included in the next Queen’s Speech, if Parliamentary time is not found for such
legislation before then.

655 Dr Jonathan Radcliffe (CGE0041), para 17
656 Dr Jonathan Radcliffe (CGE0041), para 24–see also: ARPA-E, ‘GRIDS Program Overview’
657 Q310
658 Dr Jonathan Radcliffe (CGE0041), para 2
659 Eaton (CGE0052)
660 Highview Power (CGE0050), section 4 and Solar Trade Association (CGE0053), para 14
661 ‘Brexit to blame for slow energy storage progress admits BEIS’, Current +/-, 24 May 2018—see also: Qq322–323
662 HM Government and Ofgem, ‘Upgrading Our Energy System: Smart Systems and Flexibility Plan’ (2017), p21
663 Q496

pb940 - it's the only way they can possibly make out it can compete with current renewables costs

that's a good article but I bet they don't realise that the batteries could be the making of South Africa

cut its holdings in Largo and every other holding it has in its REMX ETF by another 1% - thats -5.7% in less than 3 weeks. Yet its BMN holding remains unchanged from the 4.064M it managed to get its holding down to on the 2nd August. There is clearly something preventing them from selling their holding - does anyone else have any other ideas apart from the shares currently being lent to someone, like TPEP, who is currently shorting BMN ?

The efficiency of a solar panel or of a wind farm is kinda irrelevant if you pay zero for the fuel. Double the fuel cost - no problem it makes zero difference.

When comparing the amount of 'energy' in a car fuel tank and in an eV battery though you do need to take into account the difference in the sorts of energy you are talking about and their efficiency at conversion to what you want a car to do, namely move from A to B. If all you wanted to do was to use the car to heat your garage then I agree the petrol car gets you more heat than an eV battery shorted through a resistor, but that is a kettle, not a car.

faramog - typically 85% of primary energy in internal combustion engines is not converted to useful mechanical work. This compares with a loss of only 20% in electrical vehicles. There is a clear technical distinction between primary energy (the chemical energy eg contained in hydrocarbon bonds) and electrical energy, which is the highest quality form of energy - this technical distinction is lost in most media discussions of the subject but it is important to understand.

Pat48 - as you point out VRFB's are a proven technology so it is to prove nothing but it is an excellent high profile site that can be used to impress the established nature of the technology on other customers.

Remember that it was less than 7 months ago that I visited the research centre in Johannesburg to see the initial commissioning tests - I would hope that we get at least 3 years to have the battery on site there as shop window to the world.

the Eskom turnaround plan now getting dealt with seriously

https://www.ee.co.za/article/the-next-steps-of-the-eskom-restructuring-and-turnaround-plan-revealed.html

Tapman, you imply that there will be a greater tax levy per unit of energy. This is of course incorrect as electrification of the transportation sector will lead to a replacement of inefficient primary energy sources with much more efficient electrical energy modes. Total (primary) energy use will decrease but the effective energy use will increase due to these efficiencies. The total tax take in the economy will need to stay roughly constant per individual in order to pay for necessary functions such as education, health and defence.

mywineman - time dependent charging will inevitably come. It is not in principle different to economy 7 - the tariff will change according to the availability of cheap electricity on the grid and overall national demand at the time. If you want to have a fixed charge per kWh regardless of these constraints them I am sure you can opt to have, but you will end up paying more.

the faraquip was of course "Why, sir, there is every probability that you will soon be able to tax it."

faramog - the point about the government balancing the books is indeed a pertinent one long term. If they're not making the money out of consumers by taxing hydrocarbons that get burnt then they will of course have to tax the electricity that replaces it. This of course makes good on the (apparently now disputed) assertion by Michael Faraday to the Chancellor of the exchequer, William Gladstone, who questioned what was the practical use of electricity.

There is of course no fundamental reason that all electricity cannot be taxed - the only political argument that makes such a simple system unattractive is that it penalises all electricity users for the growth in the electrical system that is being driven by only the subset who have bought electric vehicles. It may be that home-electricity demand ends up being subsidised at the low consumption end of things, so that those without eVs end up paying around the same, those who's consumption has increased a lot increases significantly and those who allow their eVs to be used by the grid when they need it to pay only slightly more. This of course encourages people to reduce their electrical consumption, eg by using more efficient devices, which is not something that the electricity supply companies have ever previously had any interest in encouraging. In fact they prefer the latter. Still they shouldn't be whining too much if they are taking market share from oil companies.

RK - with respect to your point about V2G - National Grid have in their FES assumed that almost 40% of the storage that they are going to require is going to be provided by (suitably incentivised one would hope) eV owners who have their cars connected to the grid.

This requires a number of things to fall into place
1) there will be enough eVs - I think quite possible
2) there will be enough eVs that support V2G - this is more questionable as it requires:-
a) enough eV manufacturers that are prepared to allow their batteries to be used like this - as I mentioned only Nissan has this operating as yet.
b) an economically attractive level of remuneration - here there has been very little work as far as I can see. With already incredibly low running costs will eV owners be incentivisable enough ? They may simply say, if it is the difference between running costs of $600 per 26,000 miles or only $300 per 26,000 miles then is is really worth it to me to save $300 by allowing the grid to use the battery lifetime on my $60,000 car up ? Put simply even if you made the electricity free to those providing V2G services it may still not be compelling enough.
3) the final point is political - given the fall out from the power cut of 2 weeks ago is National Grid ever going to risk relying upon V2G balancing capacity if there is any doubt about whether sufficient capacity exists at the right time or at the right place. I cannot see them being permitted to plead to Ofgem that the reason the lights went out was because people didn't have their cars plugged in at the right time.