Member Info for julianb1234

One of these days you might say something new... but I doubt it. I cannot recall how many times I have read those same words from you... Personally i make it a habit NOT to repeat myself. If someone isn't clued up enough to get it the first time, I reckon there is no point.

Considering the company is, despite appearances, a lot further forward than it was 18 months ago, and the apparent timescale to proof of functionality is the same, it is surely worth what it was then, so could we be due a real rise as opposed to a dead cat bounce.?

As a retired professional engineer in the oil industry I would advise anyone who is a doubter to apply simple risk analysis tools to assess the risk of global warming. In risk analysis we assess the 'probability' of an event and the 'consequence' and put these into a matrix. If something is low probability and low consequence we can ignore it, if something is high probability low consequence we should at least do something, if something is high probability high consequence we need to do something right now, if something is very low probability but extreme consequence we can't just ignore it, we have to do something, etc etc.

Now for global warming the consequence would be extreme if it does actually happen, so to get the perceived risk to you personally you apply your own personal opinion of the probability that global warming is happening. Since the consequence is extreme, even if you think the probability is negligible you still need to do something, not just ignore it, because the risk is not nil. So if you have any logic left in your minds you really cannot ignore it.

Tesla's own recommendation is to let it burn out if you can, but if you can't then use lots of water. Problem either way is pollution. Air pollution from burning is probably less of a problem is it is not in an urban setting, water pollution containment from lots of contaminated firewater is more of a problem anywhere near to a river or where runoff can't be contained.

To quote your initial statement from Sunday "Friday's US close of $17.90 is eq to UK 649p, which is lower than Friday close of 660p.
Therefore, expect the UK to open lower. If the UK sp drops substantially the US will follow.
Vicious circle until the gap narrows closer to par"

In case you hadn't noticed the gap has 'narrowed to par' already.... and has actually been at par since Friday..

I think you actually meant a vicious spiral not a circle.. and I think you expected it to continue spiraling down for a long period, it must gall that it was at par already by the time you quoted that.

That 'vicious circle' we were promised... shouldn't we still be spiralling down out of control? Or was it an empty promise as ever.

Most AIM stocks are exempt from inheritance tax (IHT) if they've been held for more than two years.... I think that means have been held by the initial owner who has died, but am not certain.

Ammonia contains no Carbon (it is NH3), so still leaves the problem of how to get rid of the carbon. Creating a new plastic feedstock from the syngas would use carbon, so might be the best solution if it can be tuned to the syngas composition.

In respect of painting PHE truly green, there is one missing element, what happens to the Syngas. It doesn't just go away. If you burn it then you are not green because all the carbon that was in the plastics to start with is released as CO2. PHE needs to either develop or partner with a company that can take this Syngas and create something that locks up the carbon e.g. new raw plastic as a virgin feedstock. Then they really would have a world beater.

AJBell Youinvest seem to be behind the times, my latest offer dated today still quotes £7.80.... but the share price does indicate people are accepting £8.69. I hope it climbs over the offer price soon.

I hope you don't think bitcoin has a long term future. Have you checked the amount of energy it consumes with just the relatively small number of transactions it currently has. It already uses up the amount of energy of a smallish country. If it were to become widely adopted which it would need to be for the price to really multiply, then the energy crisis has only just begun.

Yes, a gas turbine such as that might be one option as a user for the syngas, it can also probably be used in a diesel engine for smaller flow rates. As for the energy required for the process, one of their papers talks of 300kw/hr electrical load, but what size of DMG that relates to is not obvious. But I guess if one took a generator capable of that (probably an industrial diesel) as a guide to the CO2 output then it might be a guide for the process itself, excluding what happens to the syngas afterwards.

The only way the process would not produce any CO2 is if the syngas part was used to create more plastic or other synthetic materials, which is complex but possible, but not likely to be an early link-up. A future development option though. The likely short term use for the syngas is to burn it in a traditional power or CHP station, all these options are mentioned in the PHE website.

There you have it, and the main constituent of syngas is methane, you burn methane (CH4) you get CO2 as a main byproduct.......QED.

And based on that fun fact do some maths.... the high calorific gas only produces 2 T of hydrogen, where does the rest go? It doesn't just magically disappear. Simples, it is the syngas that contains the carbon. Which is why they are supporting CCS as it would make the whole process green not just the hydrogen part.

Occy, the hydrogen it produces will of course be used in a fuel cell, but that is only part of what the DMG produces, it can't produce hydrogen only. The carbon in the plastics etc has to go somewhere, and it goes into the syngas, read the description of how the DMG works and what it produces. So either you don't use the syngas, in which case it itself is a greenhouse gas, or you burn it, and produce CO2.

I have said this before, a while back, the DMG process itself produces very little CO2, it produce syngas as well as hydrogen, but when the syngas part is used (burnt) to produce e.g. electricity, it produces CO2. There is carbon in plastic, it doesn't just disappear. The overall process is not necessarily CO2 free, it depends on how the syngas is subsequently used, and at present that is likely to generate CO2. Perhaps that is why PHE are mentioning CCS, to decarbonise that remaining product.

Your mate who recommended this share as a first investment to someone who is new to shares should have explained to you that you should never invest more than you can afford to lose in any one share, particularly a high risk one like this. High risk has the potential for high rewards, but risk is risk.
I operate a policy of never having less than 10 different shares (I actually have significantly more) and not more than 25% of the total value invested in any one of them. If you can only afford a smaller number of shares, and still want to go for high risk type shares, then still spread your money over two or three different ones. Look at their charts for the past week, month and 6 months and see what direction it is trending. Never buy into something that is 2 days into a sudden spike, it is probably about to hit a peak.
Finally, in respect of this particular share, accountancy always takes longer than expected to bottom out, so unless this is still offline in a month or twos time I personally won't be getting concerned. They have done this for a valid reason.

As well as the Biden effect, I think the success that the PI's had using Reddit over the shorters in GameStop etc means the hedge funds have some major holes in their books they need to paper over, and have had to sell the stocks that have given them the best profits recently, so this sector is suffering as a result of it's own success.

Just use Google, they give live prices albeit with less detail than a paid for account. So in Google just type in LON:ITM and it will give you a graph that is not delayed by 15Min.