Member Info for Gitfinger

Hmmmmm......

Jim
You really are one bitter individual with an overactive vitriol gland…..

Hahahaha!
You said it kiddo!

Haggis.
For once I actually agree with an element of what you say. Nobody in their right minds would want to see Bond go. The knock that this would have to sentiment would be absolutely catastrophic, and could push the share price into freefall. The management know this, and that's why Bond isn't going anywhere, because they are well aware that the market has now factored in the "flexibility factor" in anything Bond says, This is why there will be no material share movement until such time as there is concrete evidence that the company has a saleable, cost effective product to put to market.

Low IQ.
Why low IQ? Surely not because their views are different to yours. but then again your interpretation of things is different from everyone else's (remember the "you bought in at 60p, they're now worth 18p, but you haven't made a loss because you haven't sold the shares" idiocy?)
Pots and black kettles, I say......

Agreed, car charging capability is good, only concern that it’s charging a previous with a 14KWH battery, what development will be required to make it viable for full EV charging, I wonder.

Jimmynaan
Why is it that, whenever doubt is cast on some dubious info coming out about a product, the immediate response is “DE RAMPER’” blah blah blah, but you provide no actual answers to the point posed, but simply go for the diversionary tactic of bringing in something that’s completely irrelevant to the conversation….we are all well aware of the other noxious emissions, but that’s not the point at issue, which is the implausibility of the 1800KG of CO2 statement when a modicum of common sense is applied….

Mr A
So where have you read that the thing works on an on demand basis, pushing out up to 10kw when required in real time?
No one has yet stated whether it’s working as a trickle charger or an on demand supply so we still don’t know how it actually delivers / delivered power in the trial, and until we do, supposition such as yours is just that, supposition and should be treated with caution

As the man said “there are none so blind as those who don’t want to see”
No matter which way you cut it, if the alleged saving in CO2 terms is 1800kg, then, by the process of deduction, each KWH generated will have required a burn of 1.7 litre. Check the consumption figures for any 16 KW genset and you’ll see that the burn rates are significantly less than that, otherwise they aren’t bloody cost effective, and no one would use them….
Answer the question, would you pay over £2.00 per kWh for power from a diesel genset? Cause that’s what you have if the CO2 savings are to be believed….

But of course, no one will, because it defies the company line…

Yup, you got me there! Best way to get a response s to spout some testicular dangler!
So 1 litre equals 2640 Grammes of CO2.
amount “saved” is 1800 kilograms or 1,800,000 grammes. Divide 1,800,000 by 2640 and you get the actual diesel burn of 681 litres to generate 400 KWH, or 1.7 litres of diesel per KWH.
The numbers don’t stack up!
Or, if they do, someone ease explain in simple terms, how the quoted saving can be reconciled to economic reality.

No matter which way you cut it, it’s nonsense. 1 litre of diesel weighs 1 kilogram (approx) so even if you assume that 100% of sails diesel is converted to CO2 (which in itself is nonsense) that means that the equivalent fuel usage would need to be 1800 litres…… to provide 400 KWH gives a fuel burn per KWH of 4.5 lites…..which is nonsense…..please prove me wrong, someone…..

“The power tower is being used for charging the cars on the keltbray m621 project”
The science says it isn’t…..nothing rated at 10kwh will be remotely capable of providing meaningful charging capability for automotive purposes….

“Maybe the FCA have intervened?”
Don’t think so cause you’re all ramping like good ‘uns!

So nobody really gives a fiddlers f*** about how the thing is actually performing then? Idiotic quote “AFC and Acciona know how it’s going” well jolly good for them, but I’d personally rather have some performance data than just assume that the magic beans are a growing well…..but then again, that just about sums up the “ I do believe in fairies, I do, I do” merchants here….
Jim, what’s the difference between a troll and a realist?

Not only Brian but his alter ego sidekick Pommygit……just waiting for the savant thongthing to join the party, then we have the unholy trinity fully engaged…

I would simply like to know whether the unit was able to meet its 10KW rated output requirement over a sustained period over the 300 hour test.
The fact that the thing has produced 400 KWH of power over a 300 hour period means absolutely nothing unless we know how that 400 KWH was delivered, and until proved, the jury must surely be out.

RNS is good news, as it proves that the thing can produce electricity. What we need to know is how the 400KWH was delivered, was it in short bursts at maximum capacity (akin to an on demand supply) or was it used in a steady state form trickle charging a storage medium? If it is the former, and it shows that the thing can indeed deliver 10KWH, then excellent, but if it is the latter, then it would be good to know exactly what the thing is capable of delivering in a steady state scenario, Any thoughts anyone?

M3
You keep up the good work, stoking up the “jam tomorrow” train…I’m sure all of the punters who have held on because of the unrelenting positive sentiment will thank you if this thing tanks.
Oh, any evidence of any positives over the last 6 months you can spit out to support your position? No? Thought not……

Or maybe the Uber Positive Awards

CEO of the year AB
CEO Trailblazer of the year AB
Lifetime Achievement AB
Rising Star AB
Deal of the Year - financial AB (Salary negotiation)
Deal of the year - Strategic AB (Salary negotiations)