Member Info for iWantThatOne

Oops, I meant to say I asked that very question in advance of the AGM, DW, i.e. can they say any more about the alternative uses for AlkaMem and progress on those applications? They had already flagged alkaline water electrolysis. Also whether they had any thoughts about moving into electrolysis themselves, like Ceres hope to do. Hopefully such things will be addressed directly on 5th May.

I asked that very q

That “someone” was our old friend Notes, who hasn’t been on here for ages.

I'd be very surprised if the market "didn't understand porphyries", there are enough of them around in Oz and elsewhere. At the end of the day we don't know for sure yet what tonnage we have and at what grade, and therefore whether we even have a economic mine. IIs generally won't invest on a wing and a prayer, they'll need much more info IMHO. So I suspect we'll need all the assays followed by a pre-JORC company assessment of what we have here before we'll see a significant, permanent move upwards. (We will undoubtedly get fluctuations driven by retail investors and traders as the news dribbles out). I'm confidently holding and am quite relaxed about slow steady progress.

FTF - that's a completely over-simplistic comparison. If you're taking your figures from GT's March 2020 PEA, then a) only 3m tonnes is Indicated, the rest is lower-value inferred b) the higher gold content at GT has moved the wrong way in the last year, thus reducing GT's CU Eq. average, c) GT's mine is arguably in a less hospitable place for mining, hence lower value multiple and d) some of the value from GT's mine and in the CU Eq. is in other metals, all of which would add to the processing cost. I'm pretty sure a very significant additional value can be placed on Bushranger.

I think folk should stop the tiresome game of trying to guess the share price on Tuesday (maybe no increase at all) and instead focus on the real picture here - that millions have seen a renewable alternative to a diesel genset work perfectly in real world conditions. The PR is great, interest and orders will flow in good time. For now I’m just thankful to AFC’s scientists and engineers for having delivered the goods.

Just my luck. I waited to ensure there wasn’t an early RNS before selling £40k’s worth in a taxable account ready to reinvest into my and my wife’s ISAs next week. Who foresaw a mid-morning RNS?! Still, not complaining too much.

MoU-ntainous news, well done AFC. Sneaky AB, we knew he was up to something out there....

But AFC and ITM are in completely different markets. ITM produces hydrogen. AFC generates power using hydrogen. They’re not comparable.

Beach, you raise an interesting question about whether the S models are designed for non-constant power generation, eg Data Centre back-ups. That may be the case, I don’t remember seeing an explicit statement that the intention is to run them intermittently. Presumably they’d need to be run for a decent number of days/weeks when powering ships. If they can be used constantly and at a competitive price, why wouldn’t they be? They’ll have a much smaller footprint than, say, four or six L versions, and quite possibly a lower capex.

Beachandsurf, I pop up every now and then to bang on about AFC power stations. I don't see why 500x2MW 40ft containers carrying H-Power(S) systems couldn't be strung together in several years time to create a 1GW power station (for example). Of course it all depends how cheap it'd be to run, and we haven't had any update on electrode longevity for ages. Nor do I have a clue as to the cost of the ammonia or hydrogen fuel. A capex comparison would also be interesting - it's costing £7m per MW to build Hinckley Point C.

Good stuff from Colin, I especially liked the fact that the drill has hit the porphyry 100m earlier than expected, so all adding to the size. Good to hear he’s committed to a sale of 100% of BR, not a JV for a lesser amount.

It’s interesting that Ceres’ fundraising is to provide funds for the a serious move into electrolysis (SOFC in their case), which they see as potentially generating £600m+ pa eventually. In AFC’s case, Alkamem is seen as having uses in the alkaline electrolysis industry - perhaps the most important component? I wonder how different these two approaches will be in practice? It can’t be easy to break into the electrolysis business when competitors have been doing it for decades, but if AFC can produce a world-leading membrane to license to existing manufacturers - well, happy days.

Makes sense Steve, sorry should have done that calc myself but I suddenly got worried while walking the dog! If that lower half was uneconomic then of course that’d throw things up in the air.

Right, so am I being stupid here? If the upper half of Hole 1 is mostly 0.4-0.5%, and the average is 0.3%, then the lower half must be very low - perhaps 0.1%?

How do we interpret the fact that AA’s 71Mt JORC was at average grade c0.45%? Surely indicates that asssys from hole 2 and others lateral to Hole 1 will be at higher grades?

I like the way Colin said Racecourse is effectively pure copper (more or less, so far), and he compared that with Boda which “has to be supported by gold “ - or words to that effect. I guess pure copper is an advantage, or not?

What an interview from Colin. Don’t worry about Racecourse, it’s much bigger than that! “Will you know where you are in 2-3 months?”. “No!” Lots more geophysics and drilling to expand beyond Racecourse....this is one for the LTHs, GLA.

Well done Birdy!

That's a whole lot of development money! I was thinking how far AFC may be behind Ceres....I'm not invested there but I saw their order book and pipeline totalled c£100m. They had £100m cash before this new raise. Some big development partners, as have AFC. But it didn't look that big a gap when you consider we may have meaningful orders through ABB, Acciona and Mace by this time next year. And Ceres is valued 6x AFC. Any views?