We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
And in fact the pumped hydro systems can only be built in very limited locations. This means that the battery storage is not where you would ideally want or need it. One of the benefits of using battery storage is that you can store the energy closer to where it will be used, easing what is called congestion on the grid. Congestion occurs when too much energy is trying to flow down the wires to meet demand. Pumped Hydro will not help with this, in fact it will make it worse. You have to send the energy on a round trip, out of your way, to where it is sited and back again, loosing a few % of energy due to heat loss in transmission. All of these costs are generally handed over to the consumer.
At 4.4 kgV / KWh (which is the amount quoted on the BE webinar), 11,000 kg of V2O5 would be:
11,000 x 0.56 = 6160 kgV (V2O5 has a vanadium content of 56%)
6160 / 4.4 = 1,400 KWh.
So 11,000 kg of V2O5 would get you a capacity of around 1.4 MWh.
As if on que, a new vanadium producer, using vanadium **** that is currently not being processed, has just received environmental approval in China. Capable of producing 6000 mtv per year:
https://twitter.com/VanadiumWorld/status/1278300016046563328?s=19
I posted this over on BMN but will share it here too, as its actually a bit more relevant to investors in this company (who were actually part of the call, so you'd imagine some from would have been listening in):
I managed to watch the morning session yesterday, but missed the afternoon one with Mikhail. The focus of the first one was surrounding national policies, hurdles and future outlook regarding battery storage.
A few interesting figures:
- €200 - €300m investment for battery storage from from EU Battery Alliance in 2020
- €1 billion from EU Investment Bank in 2020
- IPCEI vehicle allows state funding of up to €3.2 billion from seven EU member states.
- 1 million jobs to be created by 2022 in the industry
- Industry value of €200 billion by 2022 for the EU alone.
Challenges for flow batteries to overcome:
- scale of component manufacturing (ie membranes)
- power density (not so much of an issue in large scale applications)
They expect a weekly flexibilty need of 200 TWh by 2030, and 600 TWh by 2050 for the grid.
They also expressed a desire to shift battery use away from those that rely on child slave labour, like the production of cobalt in the Congo.
I managed to watch the morning session yesterday, but missed the afternoon one with Mikhail. The focus of the first one was surrounding national policies, hurdles and future outlook regarding battery storage.
A few interesting figures:
- €200 - €300m investment for battery storage from from EU Battery Alliance in 2020
- €1 billion from EU Investment Bank in 2020
- IPCEI vehicle allows state funding of up to €3.2 billion from seven EU member states.
- 1 million jobs to be created by 2022 in the industry
- Industry value of €200 billion by 2022 for the EU alone.
Challenges for flow batteries to overcome:
- scale of component manufacturing (ie membranes)
- power density (not so much of an issue in large scale applications)
They expect a weekly flexibilty need of 200 TWh by 2030, and 600 TWh by 2050 for the grid.
They also expressed a desire to shift battery use away from those that rely on child slave labour, like the production of cobalt in the Congo.
There are so many things wrong with this post I dont even know where to start.
Abingdon have been part of a consortium who are developing and manufacturing an antibody LFD, of which ODX is a part, for months now. There has never been any tie in with Avacta and they havent "gone with" the ODX. They have been a part of that test development since its beginning.
That is an antibody test, so not really competition, aside from possibly competition in regards to the percentage of their production capacity each one takes up.
Regarding antibody tests in general there is a growing view among scientists that they are currently of very limited value, certainly in a diagnostic sense and in making future decisions on care. The fact is that nobody knows what having antibodies against covid19 means. Do they provide immunity? If so, how long for? Until this is known an antibody test is near worthless, aside from letting you know you once had the virus. It wont confirm whether or not you are now immune, as the science does not yet know that. Scientists are saying that it currently cannot make a difference, if the test is positive or negative the outcome is the same, you can still have a possibility of getting infected. No why bother having the test? They are urging the tests to be used for data collection and study, rather than in diagnostic settings for now. That's not to say that they will always be redundant, once data has confirmed the context of the antibodies, and how they work, that is when its time will come.
How this will affect policy within the UK government, and how much capacity Abingdon dedicate to their test, who knows. I anticipate that demand for rapid antigen tests will outstrip that for antibody tests. And if there is more demand it would make business sense to dedicate more production to it.
On the topic of manufacturers, people here might be interested in the rate at which automatic machines can produce LFD's.
Abingdon use a machine from this company: https://ginolis.com/products/lateral-flow-device-assembly/
You can verify this as the pictures and videos of Abingdon's equipment is identical: https://www.abingdonhealth.com/contract-services/lateral-flow-manufacturing/
The specs for that machine state that it is capable of producing 30 tests per minute, and it takes up roughly the same size footprint as a large desktop PC.
You can do your own calculations regarding how many hours per day it might be active, and how many days per week. But as an example:
12 hours / day = 21,600
6 days / week = 129,600
48 weeks per year = 6,220,800
This would be only one, fairly small machine. Now obviously we have no idea if Abingdon would be manufacturing tests for Avacta, but they did recently increase their production capacity: https://www.the-scientist.com/the-marketplace/abingdon-health-announces-its-latest-expansion-and-additional-manufacturing-capacity-67656
It should give some idea of what these companies are capable of, even if we don't know quite how much of their capacity would be given over to producing a test for Avacta.
Zoom0001 - I stopped being so active on LSE once it started to become like whack a mole with trolls. I used to post a lot more but emigrated to twitter along with quite a few others. I am less concerned with how what is posted here affects the share price at all nowadays, but dont enjoy seeing posters whom I know to be genuine and true getting a hard time from trolls. I hope that one day LSE will introduce some form of two step verification, or something of the sort, in order to prevent the constant, rampant trolling. They likely dont wish to due to the cost, but they could end up having the only troll free share chat website! That would be quite something. I'd imagine they would get more people signing up for premium memberships if they did.
Not posted here before as I generally avoid LSE nowadays. I put a small amount in at around 34p, and haven’t averaged up, so sitting comfortably at the moment.
The reason I am posting now is that is seems that there is an attempt to dominate this board by PL75 and Rorkesdrift.
PL75 created an account on 29 April, and has racked up over 1000 posts in under two months on the Avacta board.
Rorkesdrift joined on 8th May 2020, and has made over 700 posts on the Avacta board.
Between them that is 1700 posts in under two months which makes around 28 posts a day, though of course PL75 would take a larger chunk of that posting history on average.
Now, for those who say that anyone suggesting that they are not who they appear to be is a “conspiracy theorist” ask yourselves, why would two people, entirely new to LSE, suddenly enter into a posting rampage on a board? One that dominates every conversation, attempts to undermine the most valuable contributors with *actual* insight and knowledge on this industry, and constantly turn the narrative of the board onto one of negativity and doubt.
Both of them attack the most valuable contributors here whenever they post. Surely if they are invested here they should be thanking these posters for sharing their insights completely freely! As many of the others here do.
Their engagement style is a classic Piers Morgan approach. Accusing others of getting annoyed and aggressive, even when they aren’t, so that when they try to respond to it they are accused of being defensive. It undermines the other person and ensures that they are constantly being forced to react to them, rather than inciting a reaction from them, and allows them to control the conversation.
Is it any coincidence that Rorkesdrift and PL75 both attack Ophidian, Richken and Myles? All of whom are highly respected posters and researchers. Not only are they looking to distract people from genuine information, they don’t want anyone else being able to dominate the board or choose the direction of conversation.
One little sign of their own true immaturity is the fact that they constantly replace the V in Avacta with a W. It is designed to intentionally annoy others, and subtly undermine the company.
To round up an admittedly long winded post - Yes, there are certain people who work together in order to attempt to influence or measure PI sentiment. Sometimes they post inflammatory content to simply see how much backlash they get, that way they can gauge where PI sentiment is. They usually have multiple accounts. This was proven on another share board in the past, and said users were banned, so this isn’t a wild fabrication.
The most effective method for dealing with them is to starve them of attention. Start a new thread. If they attempt to derail it, ignore it and start another. Anyone here that is out to belittle and attack contributors like Richken, Ophidian and Myles, have a glaring neon sign above their heads sa
Yes, it is happening. It was pushed back in order to complete the Vanchem acquisition and publish their 2019 FY report (which they just did today). Now that is done they will be looking to complete the listing within the next financial year. This would likely have been achievable in a shorter time frame were it not for Covid19.
I hope everyone noticed the numbers surrounding the Vanchem deal! BMN received an absolute bargain for what they paid.