Member Info for observer842

The tinge is growing! "The simultaneous nominal output of the appliance is 15kW thermal energy and 3kW electrical energy from approximately 20kW input of either natural gas or LPG.".

Align must be in on it too. LoL. If this is the case it's great news. It'll be interesting to see how those system efficiencies shift as the balance between thermal and electricity is altered. Perhaps 3.2kWe + 15kWt is the optimal balance?

Though I'm feeling a tinge of excitement that it might be as simple as you suggest! :-)

I've gone over the various documentation regarding the 6.4kWe and whether we've always been able to produce this, and overwhelmingly 3kWe is mentioned. However, as you pointed out yesterday there was talk of developing a larger 6kW version many years ago, and it's unclear what is meant by this:

"Select Committee on Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Written Evidence - Submission from Disenco Energy plc (January 2008)
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmselect/cmdius/216/216we88.htm
===[
The appliance modulates and produces between 12kW to 18 kW thermal (heat) and up to 3kW electrical energy
]===

Presumably the 18kWt is achieved by turning the 3kWe into 3kWt and adding it to the 15kWt generated - but I don't understand what the 12kW is. I'm guessing this is what you are getting at? That this statement is implying that "up to 3kW electrical energy" is a lie, and it was "up to 6kW electrical energy". Seems very unlikely to me! But I do see your reasoning.

On balance I find it very hard to believe that we might always have been able to produce 6kW. Very hard.

Ob.

Good find @Phimx. It could indeed be recycled news included to summarise the current state of play as of April 2019, or they may have made progress since 2015 on this front, perhaps this time producing schematics? "and have developed schematics for the following projects". May be a bit of both? Who knows?

I see! I've never seen any evidence for this - in any literature, or patents, etc. Seems quite unlikely, but I'm going to take another look!

By the way, the heating element has nothing to do with this - there is a modulator which allows them to change the electric to thermal ratio (as you kindly provided evidence for yesterday). We don't know how this effects the system efficiencies. Early models couldn't go as high as 6.4kWe. Looks like we've cracked that. How? Don't know! LoL!

That's interesting that you think greater than 90% system efficiency is likely possible in the 6.4kWe version. I didn't have you down as an optimist. LoL ;-)

I see what you are getting at @Phimx, but we simply have not been told anywhere (and I certainly don't trust the sloppiness that is our website!) what the new input power is in the improved 6.4kWe model. I think between us we've settled on a scenario which is reasonably likely, but not nailed on: up to 20kW in (probably a minimum of around 5kW - but we are only talking about maximum flow of gas input), 22mm connection allows much greater than this.

3.2kWe + 15kWt
6.4kWe + 12kWt
0kWe (or close to it) + 18kWt

or somewhere between these configurations which I'm sure the modulation allows. And as I said, other ranges of power output if the 20kW in is turned down to some minimum - likely around 5kW or so.

@Phmix: "Not sure why you are pushing the efficiency angle." Until we know the full facts I'm fairly suspicious that in order to get to the 6.4kWe the system efficiency has been sacrificed. i.e. reduced below the ~92% in the 15kWt + 3.2kWe configuration. Aren't you? I suppose someone who isn't as sceptical as I am (not saying you!) would assume it had increased from ~92%, or in the least stayed the same! LoL.

@Phimx: "Motor Generator - I thought all the conversion of the electrical output to the grid was sorted a long time ago.".

Not that I know of. The plan was to store it in a battery - hence the name of the product: the Inspirit Charger ;-)

@Phimx. I'm mostly in agreement with your 13:57 post. I think we are near to being on the same page! :-)

single digit...

By the way - I have to emphasise I'm talking single percentage changes in my holding from the de-risk and buy back in on placing! I strongly believe this could multibag on Amapa shipping and 20% news. No way I'm missing out on that!

LoL @Frankie. Pre-placing and pre-iron ore jump in prices my first de-risk point was around 15p-16p (pre Amapa news). After iron ore price increases early last week this shifted into the 20's, post placing this shifted into the 19-20's range. Since 13 is sufficiently below 19-20's I deemed it a good gamble to top up yesterday using proceeds from my earlier de-risking since news on shipments is now imminent. That could be the wrong decision as on AIM the share price tends to drop below the placing price given enough time. I'm hopeful that there won't be enough time this time for it to do this, as news on shipping could come as early as next week. And of course news from the banks too! Seems the market agrees with my analysis. So far... ;-)

As I said @Phimx, the Align calculations are not straight forward. The simplest calculation (and I'm not sure it's worth doing the others until we've got more news! or unless someone asks) is the 92% efficiency one, as this is also typically the efficiency of combi boilers so easy to see exactly how much you are "saving".

Using Align's prices of 2.25p and 12p.

Inspirit Charger: 6.4kW version, estimated to generate up to 12kW simultaneously at 92% efficiency:
------------
Value of electricity generated: 12p * 6.4kW = 76.8p
Value of thermal generated: 2.25p * 12kW = 27p
Cost of input gas: 2.25p * 20kW = 45p

Therefore you are making 76.8p + 27p - 45p = 58.8p

Combi boiler: 18.4kW (to make the comparison easy), 92% efficiency:
Value of electricity generated: 0
Value of thermal generated: 2.25p * 18.4kW = 41.4p
Cost of input gas: 2.25p * 20kW = 45p

Therefore you are "losing" 45p - 41.4p = 3.6p

Which means that if you were to buy an Inspirit Charger instead of a combi, the value under the above circumstances, assuming all of the electricity and thermal could be used, stored or exported at cost would be 58.8p + 3.6p = 62.4p an hour

Quite impressive!

Ob.

@Phmix. On the gas input @20kW. What makes you think the property can't supply more than this? You even linked to boilers that have nameplates greater than this yesterday... Larger properties are able to supply much more! ;-)

@Phimix, the pivotal factor is going to be cost. Cost to get it off the ground (£10,000 is too much IMHO), and although at scale cost (£4,400) is better, it's not great. We've clearly made improvements on this front. By how much we don't know, but for the commercial sector I'd be extremely surprised that combined with the improved operating capabilities (up to 6.4kWe) the proposition weren't a VERY attractive one. We could see pre-orders in the thousands, 10's even, especially if the name of our partner is such to give confidence in the product. ;-) Alternatively we could sell out to an internationally recognised brand for 10's of millions! Personally I think JG want's to see this through to fruition, to leave home and get a job on its own two legs, so to speak. LoL.

Ob.

Good post @jimb! "will those who breakeven really sell and move on or will the gamble continue?"

I'll almost certainly be derisking as our share price improves, as I'm sure most invested in the lower single digits will be. I'd have to be mad not to take some off the table if Amapa starts to come good given how much I've put in: a bit of an over stretch for me - and I'm normally reasonably balanced in my investing! For sure, I intend to continue to hold a very decent stake, primarily for the Sonora JV, but also for Yangibana and EMH, and potentially even our Argentinian and Australian Lithium plays if the demand is strong!

Perhaps that isn't great to hear, but I'm only talking relatively small de-risking percentages, and currently nothing until late teens, early 20's all else being equal: on news I'll reconsider my position! ;-)

Ob.

@Phimx -"Even then I think to maximise its potential it has to be married with a storage system". Are you talking electrical or heat (water storage)? The rise of EV's is an obvious electrical storage system, and some properties (residential and commercial) are including storage batteries for solar panels. Additionally we are working on feeding back to the grid as was announced in the April 2019 RNS:

"Product Update" (26th Apr 2019)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/INSP/product-update-wokuuge4igv0i2t.html
===[
Inspirit Motor/ Generator - designed in line with the Inspirit Charger to start the unit & convert electrical output to the grid.
]===

As to storing hot water. Many properties, residential and commercial, have hot water stores. If the boiler happens to be electricity led at that moment in time, the thermal could be stored there, or as we've come to realise, modulated towards electricity generation.

Ob.

I'm not sure what you are getting at @Phimx regarding the 20kW in flow. I don't see a reason why the maximum intake gas flow of the system could not have been increased from 20kW in the redesign to produce up to 6.4kWe?

Also I think you might have misunderstood where the heating element fits into this. It's not related to the 3.2kWe to 6.4kWe, it's primarily related to when the thermal demand goes over what the device can deliver in the dark winter months for larger properties - and of course for the other 2 reasons (when electricity is cheaper than gas and resiliency)

But I'm happy to have a go at reproducing the Align calculations assuming the 20kW is fixed. Do you agree that for a 20kW maximum input flow (which could have been slightly increased in the redesign as stated above) there are a range of possible scenarios: same overall system efficiency as before ~92%, slightly higher, slightly lower, a lot lower? e.g.:

6.4kWe + 0kWt ( 32% system efficiency)
6.4kWe + 5kWt ( 47% system efficiency)
6.4kWe + 10kWt ( 82% system efficiency)
6.4kWe + 12kWt ( 92% system efficiency)
6.4kWe + 12.6kWt ( 95% system efficiency - unlikely!)

Ob.