Member Info for observer842

@mmm: Don't you think it is a good gamble that what was preventing the ore from being shipped is no longer preventing it? It wouldn't make any sense to bring the ship to port if not. Of course, it may have come to pick up some iron ore which has nothing to do with our project. That too is part of the gamble. Anyway, this is the bit which I think is likely to have happened now. Remember, not all of the court proceedings are made public:

"Agreement in Principle to Bank Creditor Settlement" (2nd Sep 2020)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KDNC/agreement-in-principle-to-bank-creditor-settlement-exahnnem98oaz0w.html
===[
In addition to the above, and while the settlement contract is finalised, DEV and Investors have requested that the Bank Creditors and DEV submit a joint petition to the higher court to remove the Bank Creditors appeal and the subsequent interim order. As a result, operations at Amapa, including the shipping of iron ore stockpiles will be temporarily suspended while the petition is agreed, filed and approved.
]===

I'm surprised that more aren't willing to take the gamble that it'll dock tonight (3am our time) and start loading "our" iron ore tomorrow. It's good odds it will IMHO. We should be approaching 20p in anticipation of an RNS first thing or throughout tomorrow... AIM is weird. And I wouldn't want it any other way ;-)

"Half-year Report" (30th Mar 2020)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/INSP/half-year-report-pqwjduey1e2vcwn.html
===[
We have had other interest from waste recycling companies to adapt our technology to capture redundant waste heat and generate electricity, we are working on a large standalone unit which will produce over 300 Kw.
]===

"Techno-Economic Assessment of CHP Systems in Wastewater Treatment Plants" (26 September 2020)
https://www.mdpi.com/2076-3298/7/10/74
===[
Abstract
Wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) utilization of combined heat and power (CHP) systems allows for the efficient use of on-site biogas production, as well as increased annual savings in utility costs. In this paper, a review of biogas energy recovery options, CHP prime mover technologies, and the costs associated with biogas cleaning give a broad summary of the current state of CHP technology in WWTPs. Even though there are six different prime mover technologies, the main ones currently being implemented in WWTPs are micro turbines, fuel cells and reciprocating engines. Different prime movers offer varying efficiencies, installation costs, and biogas impurity (H2S, siloxanes, HCl) tolerances. To evaluate the long-term savings capabilities, a techno-economic assessment of a CHP installation at a case study WWTP shows the payback, annual savings, and initial costs associated with the installation of a CHP system. In this case, a study a payback of 5.7 years and a net present value of USD 709,000 can be achieved when the WWTP generates over 2,000,000 m3 of biogas per year and utilizes over 36,000 GJ of natural gas per year.
]===

Lots of mention of Stirling engines - I wonder how our proposed 300kW model stacks up, e.g. in contaminant tolerances "Table 2. CHP prime mover tolerance to biogas contaminants." and NPV "Table 4. WWTP utility and operating characteristics used for the case study analysis.". Should be significantly less than their assumption of $2,500 per kWe capital cost.

Of course we have no idea what "will produce over 300 Kw." actually means. Heat? Electricity? Both? Sigh...

@oldblue: "why havnt we had a placing" I've told you how I think it will play out - I'm not going to repeat myself, it's not in my interests ;-)

I'm very nervous @Mr.lithium! I stand on the eve of potentially quadrupling or more my investment or perhaps losing half or more of it in a single day. Aren't you!? It's not stopping me from continuing to add at what I perceive to be very good odds though, as I did prior to every other leg up from the 3's... ;-) I tell myself I'm prepared to lose the lot, and I am, but it will be very painful if I do!

isn't isn't a different kettle of fish. Oh, OK then, is a different kettle of fish.

LoL @Bannor: "Yes obs I know there MAY have been a reason for blocking the redom." There was a reason for blocking the redom. We've been told it, you know it, they weren't answering our calls... Whether it was a good reason, or whether it was the only reason isn't a different kettle of fish. :-)

And if you missed it first time round: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4xlIX8GMmo8S5oJ9cfun-A

Indeed @Bannor - all manner of terrible things could be about to happen. That's why the share isn't 40-60p now... Some background on your beloved CLN ;-) https://riverfort.com/cadencecs/

@oldblue Please point me to this code of conduct. I'm not declaring that I own any shares or have any financial interest in Inspirit Energy, does this mean I shouldn't post on here? I *may* own shares, and I *may* have a short on. I've decided not to declare. Is my position different to someone who has claimed with certainty they don't own shares and don't have a financial interest?

Secretaria de Estado de Meio Ambiente : State Secretariat for the Environment. Environmental sign-off before shipping can commence from the pubic port is my understanding.

@Bannor. As far as I'm aware this is the only use of the word imminently that some are (incorrectly) referring back to:

"Placing to Raise £1.25 million" (21st Aug 2020)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KDNC/placing-to-raise-163125-million-tznq1rrur2rtp8r.html
===[
As announced on the 11 August, Companhia Docas de Santana ("CDSA"), a public (municipal) company and the port operator requested some additional non-statutory contractual requirements and undertakings. DEV has provided the requested documentation, and continues to liaise with the State of Amapa and SEMA (Secretaria de Estado de Meio Ambiente). Cadence understands that SEMA will provide the required documentation imminently. Cadence will provide an update once the first shipment is underway.
]===

My understanding is that the documentation will be required regardless of anything else that may be happening in the courts or with the JRP negotiations for the iron ore to ship from the public port. I'm of the opinion that SEMA have likely provided the documentation by now, but as you know there are new hurdles in place before we can ship. If they haven't provided the documentation then this is worrying...

@jimb2. Some decent commentary here:

https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-pms-statement-on-offshore-wind/

In terms of heating, I'm still of the opinion that the UK will move to greener gas which has been generated when electricity generation exceeds demand. Whether that is green hydrogen or green methane or some combination remains to be seen. As we've discussed on here over the past few months, if the latest incarnation of the inspirit charger does what it says on the tin effectively, efficiently and with reduced upfront costs, and importantly passes accreditation this time, there is a market for it today, starting with commercial before moving on to residential, and for the next few decades, perhaps longer.

News is surely imminent on various fronts now.

@Bannor. Probably best you don't listen - the many inaccuracies might make your blood boil! I lost count in fact...

Not sure if this has been posted before.

"Alan Green Research Talks with Erris Resources #ERIS & Cadence Minerals #KDNC" (16 Aug 2020)
https://youtu.be/Fovg2qk08l4?t=996

Hopefully @Barksy! Edge of seat moment on several shares for me, including this one! "Imminent" keeps getting bandied about on here, but what @Kiran's "imminent" actually referred to has very likely happened by now in my opinion, and if it hasn't happened by now we are likely in trouble as not being able to ship the ore from the public port is going to be problematic! Plan B if so - temporary barging solution from the private port I presume?

Assuming the negotiations aren't at a critical stage that misspeaking could upset the apple cart, I'm hoping we get an update this week or next. Ideally the news will be that all has gone well and we now own 20% of a project which has the potential to grow to a multi-billion pound venture in only a few short years.

Ob.

100% off-take agreed for 20 years. Going to need a bigger mine. But how much bigger? 50ktpa? 70ktpa? 100ktpa!?

100% off-take agreed for 20 years. Going to need a bigger mine. But how much bigger? 50ktpa? 70ktpa? 100ktpa!?

@r7632 Thu 22:31:
===[
A ton of lithium metal is enough to build about 90 electric cars.

When all is said and done, building a million cars requires about 60,000 tons of LCE.

Are these not contradictory. Second say 1 Car requires 0.06 Tons Lithium. Or 16.666 Cars per Tons. And the First statement says one ton is enough for 90 Cars?
]===

Just in case you are still scratching your head, the answer to this perceived contradiction is contained within the article: one statement is talking about lithium metal, the other is talking about lithium carbonate equivalent LCE.

"Why Lithium Could Be a New Risk for Tesla and Other Electric-Vehicle Makers" (Oct. 1, 2020)
https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/new-risk-tesla-other-electric-vehicle-makers-lithium-supply-batteries-51601498472?mod=mw_quote_news
===[
The industry counts lithium supply as lithium carbonate. Lithium carbonate is a salt that is stable. Lithium metal is refined from the salt and requires special handling because it is highly reactive. It takes about 5.3 tons of lithium carbonate to make a ton of lithium metal.
]===

I don't understand your reasoning @mr.james. The two trades reported by @Barksy from yesterday either look to be a rollover, or two buys made to look like a rollover to disguise two fairly large buys. What am I missing?