Member Info for bonxie

I've not seen it either pdub, but it'll be whatever it takes to yield equivalent income to selling it now, factoring in discount rate. I did some calcs around leasing at 5% per year and it didn't have much effect on project NPV. I'm going to have a think about this though, and try to figure out the lease rate.

To be clear, VFB are great for solar applications, and that alone is a vast market. My comment was in reply to marc001 implying that there is no point in developing new flow chemistries. You would want something else for, say, providing firm wind power (hydrogen, novel flow battery, compressed air etc).

Thing is, VFB are never going to be an option for proper long duration storage, say >12h, vanadium is just too expensive (whether you lease it or not). So there is plenty of potential demand for a flow battery with a very cheap electrolyte to fill this future role.

What exactly is going on on days like these where the SP sits completely still? Do the MMs put the bid/offer on autopilot because they are off looking at more interesting things?

Thanks for your reply pdub, I hadn't realised the projections were produced in 2021. It does make me laugh that Roskill are prepared to use 3 significant figures on a growth projection. Someone needs a lecture in false precision!

In fairness, Invinity's near term pipeline of 957 MWh alone would eat up all of the 2024 and 2025 deficit (using the 5mtV/MWh rule of thumb).

Https://www.bushveldminerals.com/vanadium/market/

There's a graph on here showing a forecast supply surplus from 2024-2028. Is this consistent with what Bushveld have been saying in interviews etc?

"I like the div this Co pays but jeezo share price at this point has effectively gone nowhere in many many years"

Well that's what happens when you pay a big div and don't expand right?

What risks are you suggesting they should take ARCM101? Much of the past criticism of Fortune was around his neglect of the basics of the mining operations leading to the poor production rates. Fix that and we should be laughing no?

"long duration" covers a massive range of durations, from 4h upwards, and the LCOS makes an assumption about how many cycles the battery will be doing. IMO VFB are most likely to be the cheapest storage solution at the 4-8h duration associated with daily cycling around solar power. Iron flow batteries have a higher cost per unit power (due to low achievable current density), but a far lower cost per unit energy, with iron being far cheaper than vanadium. Hence at some duration the iron battery will become cheaper. There's an interesting interview with a guy from Form Energy who says they are targeting 40% round trip efficiency, and 100h duration IIRC.

https://platform.modo.energy/phase/article/8514/podcast-iron-air-technology-david-hill

Ultimately iron flow batteries will be competing with hydrogen, not VFB.

Working with large companies is a mixed blessing. At least this doesn't stop them progressing with their own smaller-scale pipeline.

What's with these trades at 10p over the ask?

"Use one tenth of the amount of vanadium than VRFB use for an equivalent charge."

This sounds like nonsense. To be fair, that claim doesn't appear on the MK Plus website https://mkpl.co.jp/en/n20230531/. The cycle life has also been upgraded in the research note to 100000 cycles, where it is 15000 cycles on the MK Plus website.

Proceed with scepticism

What's the Wogan commission for?

$10k for a 10 kW / 40 kWh VFB would be incredible value if you could buy it for that.

I'm sceptical about the "Takes up less space for comparable storage" claim.

Toneman I don't think Synchroster are being sneaky. Duration is defined as energy capacity / peak power output. So Invinity is 30MWh/7MW = 4ish h. Any storage technology could extend it's duration by operating at reduced power output, but that's not the way duration is defined.

Ah, it has disappeared for me because Halifax wanted a decision by the 8th.

The open offer has disappeared from the corporate actions list on my share dealing platform - does that mean the offer is over and the price should be free to float upward?

Good comments, thanks. I guess subsidise is the right word rather than trial.

Blending seems pointless to me - the volumetric energy density of hydrogen is roughly a third that of methane, so the 20% by volume becomes just 7% of the joules being decarbonised (assuming it's green hydrogen). Probably better to spend the money on trialing 100% hydrogen clusters.

It's not all guesswork though Lawrence, if you want $5/L profit you are going to add $250/kWh on top of your materials and manufacture. That can't be a realistic goal.

Can't wait Lindon!