Member Info for Bananaman2

20 bags from here. Wow, that would be something. Not an impossibility either. May take a bit of time but I think EQT have a perfect storm brewing here.

Just reading between the lines of some LinkedIn posts exchanged between Solivus and AFC employees.

However, Solivus is thin film and not efficient in comparison the SPVs. With the limited container roof top space SPVs would produce more power possibly by as much as 50%

And that's an educated guess.

Solivus

You have not picked up on the technical review of the gasification equipment being completed by wood plc. This may lead to a collaboration with wood as EPC targeting the Asian Market which is massive. This review is also expected to be complete in Q4 2020.

More appropriate for a solar PV board but I will say it just goes to show how we (global) are moving towards a micro generation society and reliant less and less on the macro distribution and that is good for AFC.

Sensibles. I think you need to do some research on AFC and understand the news flow. Same with EQT. Stop asking posters to give you the answers and convince you to invest. The information is there you just need to get reading. Nobody can tell you if its going to go through 40p soon. If we could we would be predicting the future.

Bandicoot. EQT do not need grants and subsidies to be cost effective. Obviously anything offered to the sector is a huge incentive but the gasification process is hugely efficient in comparison to incineration and as far as I am aware the returns for municipal EfW gasification is greater than wind energy.

Not sure of what your post is suggesting ? if you are simply asking if EQT will issue shares to fund Billingham the answer is no, because they will achieve financial close and finance will be provided. This may be 100% or it may be a lesser percentage with an equity stake of the SPV to the financier.

How about your opinion for the 18th December ? is that a question ? Opinion on what exactly ?

Agree FCI, its a very relevant comparison regardless of what ITM have in the pipeline. Even with pipeline of business they still fail to generate a profit. Something I feel they will be beaten to once AFC start to generate 'multi system orders' in the 'coming months'.

Now I am not saying that they will hit £2bn MCap but they should start to close that gap considering they are now in a position to start delivering 100 plus systems per year.

ITM's value is based upon said pipeline and sentiment. AFC would appear at this level to be a better value investment considering the fact that they will be demonstrating a pipeline over the coming months and good sentiment is returning. Why would I want to sell AFC and invest in ITM when its all about the upside ?

I would advise newbies to go back to the August Post history and read everything that was posted regarding prior art gasifiers and invalidation of patents in respect of Aries and stop ****ting it everytime the SP moves down a tick. Thats investing. Nothing goes up in a straight line.

What ? In the middle of the night ? Get a fooking grip.

Its not worth discussing. It has to be sorted out and we spent ages on here back in August. There is a long thread about the claim with links.

Link to the patent dated 2012

https://worldwide.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?DB=EPODOC&II=3&ND=3&adjacent=true&locale=en_EP&FT=D&date=20200507&CC=US&NR=2020140768A1&KC=A1#

bandicoot, we do know what date both the Aries patents and the EQT patents were filed. It can be found online. The Aries patents were filed after the images of the Moviasla equipment were taken.

Ok. Yes. I have read that too.

No ExE will utilise the 20kw system. I was talking hypothetically.

A 40ft container is not too large to transport ? Its a shipping container. Its designed to be transported.

Why wouldn't a 160kw fuelcell running on cracked ammonia be able to power the whole site ? The power would be enough for 320 homes. Is the race paddocks, accommodation and canteens etc really going to require much more ?

If the fuel cell is running 24/7 and at low demand times charges a battery which discharges at peak times perhaps this is enough power for the race teams and organisers. Maybe not and we may see an order for a second or third system.

Why are they not charging a battery directly with solar ? I expect because a battery has limited storage capacity and would require a very large battery in comparison to the amount of hydrogen which can be generated to provide the fuel for the cell. Solar energy has to be captured and stored and hydrogen has been chosen as the store on this occasion.

Absolutely Anne but I don't think the point is to simultaneously generate hydrogen whilst using it for fuel in the fuelcell. Its more a case of demonstrating what can be achieved.

I try to look at this solar solution as a way to generate hydrogen anywhere balancing the use of ammonia or hydrogen and reducing these costs.

It would also be perhaps a great solution for very remote offgrid back up power where hydrogen can be generated using solar and water but the fuel cell may only be needed for a few hours per week or for limited periods.

Taskmaster. Some Solar PVs work just fine in shaded conditions, even when covered by snow.

https://verditek.com/transforming-solar