Member Info for Bananaman2

1) the solar panels will provide enough power to electrolyse enough hydrogen over a 1 week period to power the fuel to provide enough power to charge the vehicles on race day.

It is a showcase piece of equipment allowing ExE to demonstrate full green credentials.

Solar panels at best are 25% efficient meaning that for every 1m2 of PVs 250w of energy can be generated. That is why the production of hydrogen will be over a longer period of time than instantaneous whilst during the race.

It does show what is possible and what AFC can design.

2 and 3 I cannot comment.

MPO818. Each to their own. I have my views on where this is heading. If you don't agree, I won't take it personally. Certainly not a ramping post as I clearly state that AFC have more to prove yet. What I do believe is that they will given the partnerships they have set up for manufacturing and the assembly facility.

If you think that CWRs licencing strategy is better than full benefit achieved from a manufacturing and sales strategy then thats up to you. If you think that ITM are 10 x more valuable than AFC but yet to make a profit then that is also up to you. Perhaps its you that will be taken away.

If you're short your short. If you're a trader good luck.

With EQT having the right to acquire 25% of the project.

Carbon sole is joint development of 3 x 25Mw CHP projects. Looking to develop a further portfolio of projects. Again, massive deal for EQT

Carbon Sole reads Q1 2021. This is also a very good opportunity for EQT

VDTK will be a good one. Just need to ride out the painfully slow period.

Mikey279. I think you mean a unicorn company with a £1bn valuation. That would not perhaps put them in the FTSE 100 or doesn't necessarily mean they would have to remove themselves from the AIM market. I think you intention was to highlight a significant rise in valuation over a period.

Bio-Char. Can be used on the garden

Please, lets not pre-empt an RNS tomorrow. We will only be disappointed if one doesn't appear. Let the SP do its thing and AB will update us when he has something of worth to say. The rise is based upon achieving fair value and closing the disparity gap. AFC have achieved a lot this year. Next year will be transformational. I am not against and RNS tomorrow but I am not counting on anything. This to me is one of the best value opportunities in the sector and also in my opinion will achieve parity with CWR and ITM in respect of MCap. AFC have a little more to prove and deliver on yet but it certainly looks like it will happen.

Hydrogen boilers infers combustion which is a lot less efficient than using hydrogen in a fuel cell. Or alternatively use a SOFC and natural gas rather than combusting natural gas.

I get the point of your post though. It demonstrates a strong focus on moving to renewable/sustainable energy.

Well now you have a 5% profit on your purchase. Better than you would get from a bank in 2 years.

Its a lot quicker than incinerators as far as I am aware it can be or will be modular construction meaning built off site and brought in like a big meccano set.

Forgot to add that the site revenues will be for the SPV which would pay the finance and operating expenses. EQT as owner would be paid a dividend front the profit after taxation for the site I assume.

Also would receive annual ops and maintenance for the sites which would be an expense for the SPV but a direct revenue for EQT.

So one site like Deeside could be worth something like €40m construction revenue, €20m per annum energy and gate fee revenue or €400-€500m over the lifetime plus €1m plus per annum for ops and maintenance.

Mind blowing

Anyone have any comments on my post. I just can't help thinking that project ownership like this is massive for EQT. What a business strategy and model

Revenue would be €40m to EQT for construction with a CAPEX cost of around €150m for a 20Mw plant. What the Arden report does not show is any revenue from energy sales. This would be considerable based upon 1 x 20Mw plant which as I understand EQT are now purchasing the project and become owner through the SPV.

Even at a whole sale price of 5p per kWh a plant generating 20Mw every hour 365 days per year would generate €9m per annum in electric sales via a PPA and I expect my 5p per kwh is very conservative.

Gate fees for waste destined for landfill is around £100 per tonne and the plant requires 200k tonnes per annum. Even using a figure of £60 per tonne the gate fees per annum are £12m. Then you have operations and maintenance contracts. The revenue could be in excess of £20m per annum with gate fees and thats over a 20-25 year design life and does not consider the €40m revenue from construction.

If I am wrong then I am interested to hear why but as I understand EQT have taken the option to acquire the site and will effectively own the plant. This could be compared to Simec and the Uskmouth project and Simec/N+P partnership for subcoal pellets which will receive the gate fees.

EQT getting a number of these under their belt, financed and built with revenues paying the finance and you start to see why this is a massive deal

Depends on your definition of soon. Certainly has the potential to get there.

Icelord. Billingham is not as advanced as Deeside. EQT are only at the option not obligation to acquire stage. The Billingham news we await is the contractual agreement giving EQT that detail.

Deeside on the other hand has exercised that right to acquire the project. However I expect the market will like to see Billingham taken to the next stage and EQT have that right. Looking at Deeside I think EQT 100% will take full ownership of Billingham. That may be co-ownerhip with Cobra. Perhaps someone can clarify ?

Billingham is marginally larger at 25Mw where Deeside is 20Mw. Then there is Southport and Carbonsole x 2 to look forward to.

Aries and Wood PLC review. Strong news flow to finish the year. Just one of the three would be good for EQT. Today was unexpected and a bonus.

Well done DP and the team.

Massively. Won't sleep tonight

Yes, a dual listing. Trading the same number of shares but across two markets. They would quickly become scarce and the SP and MCap would re-rate very quickly. ARB is one of the most profitable miners on the market and growing at an incredible rate. Business model is working unlike some of the others with much higher valuations. A dual listing will sort that out.

Rusty. That is correct on both fronts.