Member Info for Noob34

Sound piece Dusty, as always. I’m finding it very difficult not to get over excited at the moment, one day at a time…

I think for number 6, we are only loading MSAR in May (hopefully) the bio will be loaded 6 weeks later for the bio POC, which also counts towards the LONO hours. If I’ve understood the response to question 18.

We might still be working out how to raise an invoice ;o)

Am I misinterpreting page 16 of the sustainability report which states one MMU can generate 250,000 tonnes annually grossing $16m, equates to north of the the $50 per tonne earned by QED quoted in a proactive investor article, which at the lower figure, the 15,000 tonnes per annum for Leandra is $750,000 to QED. If you can point me to where Jason said two MMU’s required to reach cash neutral, that would be appreciated as I must have missed this.

All genuine holders here are deserving of respect and I’ve no idea why there is so much school yard bickering going on, is it really absence of news flow?

We are all hopefully on the cusp of something momentous and this in fighting is tedious. Vince we all acknowledged your apology and moved on. Whiskeyman, one of your recent posts suggests we only get £133k per ship which appears a miscalculation (or based on smaller ships than Leandra) from the published releases we have so perhaps you should stop throwing mud. I’m basing that comment on 15000 tonnes Pa and $50 per tonne to QED. A fully operational MMU can generate $16m (sustainability report) apparently this can support 11-15 ships. I do doubt that 24/7 is realistic at least initially, so I’m assuming £10m per MMU for my own workings. If anyone has a better understanding of the numbers we’ve seen I’d love to see them. Do we know if the $50 per tonne suggested is based on MSAR or BIOMSAR or both? Thanks! GLA

For me, it’s a matter of opinion following trend, whether it’s chartist sites, Zak Mir or Myles McNulty, they can impact the share price because of the sheep that follow them.

That was my takeaway too Dusty. Get the POC done and it’s full steam ahead to install at CEPSA with two clients ready to be serviced 🤞

The only way I can imagine the retail offer not being over subscribed is if lots of holders (myself included) decided to buy in the open market on offer day at 3.2p with their available funds to guarantee getting the shares they wanted at near to the offer price. Potentially leaving no funds for the retail offer. GLA

Dusty, same thing happened to me while using HL on google chrome. I tried again in Microsoft Edge browser and it worked fine. Hope this helps.

Thanks Dusty, I’ve been hunting to see if there was any output statistics but expect these are not public. My take was that all the reservoirs are above the minimum for generation, (some seem to have narrow min/max levels). Barro Blanco has a ‘max’ of 103 above sea level but 103 is the normal operating level according to the builders: https://www.grupocobra.com/en/proyecto/barro-blanco-hydroelectric-power-plant/

In any case, just something to keep me occupied whilst we wait!

Is everyone dismissing Panama? Their energy needs seem significant, with public unrest at the failings of the hydroelectric power supply leading to localised energy blackouts (see social media commentaries). I’ve found little in relation to Sparkle power, but now that the rainy season is in full force , I hope this could take a step forward.

Thanks guys, I was thinking our £350m mcap was sufficiently higher than the lowest listed in the 250.

Does anyone know if there is any reason why we wouldn’t be admitted to the 250 in March?

Fantastic news, thanks for the updates!

Really happy they are looking at alternative solutions to OEM testing as I was concerned this was a blocker for the MSC project. Excited for the ‘other things under wraps’! A little surprised Panama has overtaken Mexico as I thought it was gaining momentum but lots to be positive about!

Absolutely, but I was thinking more about if Wartsilla are focused on LNG solutions, the limited testing slots available will go to this, explaining why we aren’t getting a look in even with MSC behind us.

https://fathom.world/wartsila-technologies-for-12-lng-fuelled-container-ships-support-cma-cgm/

Found this and am wondering if this is why we can’t get any testing done for our non-LNG solution and if we are likely to at all? Thoughts appreciated.

Håkan Agnevall, President and CEO, Wärtsilä Corporation, commented: “This large repeat order for a broad scope of Wärtsilä solutions from a valued customer marks the value of quality, reliability and sharp customer focus. It also highlights our wide range of competences across marine technologies. Both CMA CGM and Wärtsilä have a common strategy in applying LNG solutions to prepare the way towards carbon free shipping.”

Barclays are the biggest joke for target prices, they just pick the current price!

I’m in. Similarly I’ve started small but this looks overdone considering the fundamentals.