Member Info for observer842

Very good spot @Ivy! Certainly corresponds to the use of the word imminently in my opinion!

(there might be a better link, but I'm going with this one)

"See the latest news about the new coronavirus in Amapá"
https://g1.globo.com/ap/amapa/ao-vivo/veja-as-ultimas-noticias-sobre-o-coronavirus-no-amapa.ghtml
===[
Public agencies of the State resume services
The public is served through scheduling, made through the website of each agency. The resumption takes place in 4 stages: it started with administrative services in public health and safety agencies, and infrastructure on the 10th; and now with sustainable development agencies. Are they:

State Agricultural Defense and Inspection Agency (Diagro);
State Secretariat for the Environment (Sema);
Commercial Board of Amapá (Jucap);
Amapá Land Institute - Amapá Terras;
Economic Development Agency (Amapá Agency);
Secretariat for Rural Development (SDR);
Institute of Extension, Assistance and Rural Development of the State of Amapá (Rurap).

On the 24th the management bodies return and on the 31st of August the institutions linked to culture, leisure, sport and tourism.
]===

Sema is the one we are interested in because of:

"Placing to Raise £1.25 million" (21st Aug 2020)
https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/KDNC/placing-to-raise-163125-million-tznq1rrur2rtp8r.html
===[
Operational Update

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.
]===

So it might start as early as MONDAY! :-)))

Thanks for sharing.

Ob.

I can already see the advertising campaign accompanying this:

"And for your peace of mind we've included a 10/20kW heating element for those cold winter nights, and cheap showers when the sun is shining." Starts with an old couple in a large house in the depths of winter, transitioning to a young couple in summer, one taking a shower, panning out to the garden where the other is mowing the lawn - solar panels clearly visible on the roof.

LoL. Have it on me. ;-)

Ob.

Maybe even a few 100k on the back of iron ore strength! ;-)

@tomcat - given how much rejigging we've seen of the port line up since we've been watching, I'm of the opinion that the Santana commercial port line-up is mostly provisional in nature. I'm reasonably certain since it is important to us that we get going as soon as we get the go ahead, that it'll be reorganised to slot us in. Perhaps we'll have to pay for priority, or to someone to give us their slot? I don't know, but if money is involved, we'll probably be happy to pay a few 10k's to get the show on the road ASAP, rather than wait out another few weeks. Just my opinion of course!

Anyone got any other advantages to add to the list? Also, I've not been able to find any other boilers on the market that supplement their gas heating with electrical heating to meet winter peaks - doesn't mean there aren't any though! Most likely because they are cheap in comparison to mCHP. Might be worth focusing the search on other mCHP companies?

1. Allows electricity to be used when it is cheaper than gas (e.g. self-generated from solar).
2. Allows the heating power from the gas to be boosted to meet winter peaks of thermal demand. The alternative of a larger gas boiler specced for winter demand would result in greater upfront cost and floor space.
3. Resiliency: if designed with this in mind heating and hot water could continue to be provided in a gas or electricity outage.

Ob.

Indeed @oldblue, and with the revelation of the possibility to include a heating element for when electricity is cheaper than gas (e.g. self-generation from solar), and to meet the (mostly winter) peaks for larger premises, this becomes a very decent residential proposition in my mind, so long as the up front costs aren't too prohibitive, or if they are we have finance available to customers.

Someone get that message across to the BoD! @Jimb? I've never heard them mention heating elements (which are dirt cheap) for the above purposes.

But what if the system efficiencies aren't so high?

Using the Align methodology:

@80%:
"Assuming a gas price of 2.25p/kWh and electricity price of 12p/kWh that means 77p (6.4kW x 12p) of electricity has been self-generated and 42p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/80%) of heat, totaling 119p, on a total input bill of 60.2p (26.75kW x 2.25p), assuming the electricity and heat are consumed on site, so providing a saving of 119p – 60.2p = 58.8p"

A reduction of the saving per hour rate from 61.5p@92% efficiency to 58.8p@80% efficient isn't bad!

@65%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 52p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/65%) of heat, totaling 129p, on a total input bill of 74p (32.9kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 129p – 74p = 55p"

That's higher than I expected.

@50%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 67.5p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/50%) of heat, totaling 144.5p, on a total input bill of 96.3p (42.8kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 144.5p – 96.3p = 48p"

So is that!

@33%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 102p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/33%) of heat, totaling 179p, on a total input bill of 145.9p (64.8kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 179p – 145.9p = 33p"

That can't be right... In fact it's likely that the Align methodology isn't valid for lower efficiencies. In fact the more closely I look at the formula, the more I question the use of the system efficiency in the heat component of the thermal energy produced. I think it might be reasonable for comparison purposes to include the efficiency of none electricity producing boilers, in which case 92% should have been used in all of the above calculations:

With it completely removed:

@92%
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 33.8p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh) of heat, totaling 110.8p, on a total input bill of 52.5p (23.3kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 110.8p – 52.5p = 58.3p."

@80%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 33.8p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh) of heat, totaling 110.8p, on a total input bill of 60.2p (26.75kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 110.8p – 60.2p = 50.6p"

@65%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 33.8p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh) of heat, totaling 110.8p, on a total input bill of 74p (32.9kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 110.8p – 74p = 36.8p"

@50%:
"... 77p (6.4kW x 12p) ... 33.8p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh) of heat, totaling 110.8p, on a total input bill of 96.3p (42.8kW x 2.25p) ... so providing a saving of 110.8p – 96.3p = 14.5p"

The total savings per hour are increased by around 3p if "33.8p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh)" is changed to "36.7p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/92%) ".

In summary even if the system efficiencies are in the 65-80% range the savings per hour are sufficiently high to result in attractive payback times all else being equal. And @>90% efficiency the payback times are remarkable! I'll be impressed if the 6.4kWe model has a system efficiency greater than 80%, and very impressed if greater than 90%. And if >95% !!!!? ;-)

Ob.

I thought I'd run through some what if's based on the most recent news release.

What would it mean if the Inspirit Charger were capable of producing 15kW of useful thermal energy whilst at the same time producing 6.4kW of useful electrical energy? There are lots of unknowns. For example we have yet to be told the system efficiency of this improved output. For simplicity I'm going to assume 92%. This means that in order to produce that 15kWt and 6.4kWe, on a GCV (gross calorific value) basis 23.3kW of input gas is required.

We also don't know the overall dimensions of the Charger. For the 3kWe model it was initially:

Height 1000mm
Width 630mm
Depth 650mm

and we have been told for the 6.4kWe model the height is below 800mm. The costs have supposedly been reduced significantly since 2016 through reductions in material costs.

Our initial target audience is the commercial sector where it is expected to be the lead boiler, resulting in longer running hours and consequently reduced payback times when compared to the residential sector.

With the help of the Align report it's possible to get a feel for just how important the 6.4kWe is

"On the cusp of cogeneration commercialisation & trading at a fraction of replacement IP cost" (13th June 2016)
http://www.alignresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Inspirit-Energy-Align-Research-13th-June-2016-Final.pdf
===[
Assuming a gas price of 2.25p/kWh and electricity price of 12p/kWh that means 36p (3kW x 12p) of electricity has been self-generated and 37p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/92%) of heat, totaling 73p, on a total input bill of 45p (20kW x 2.25p), assuming the electricity and heat are consumed on site, so providing a saving of 73p – 45p = 28p. This compares to no savings at all from a nonmCHP boiler, which only generates heat.
]===

(it's worth reading the paragraphs around that text!)

For the new model that paragraph becomes:

"Assuming a gas price of 2.25p/kWh and electricity price of 12p/kWh that means 77p (6.4kW x 12p) of electricity has been self-generated and 37p (15kW x 2.25p/kWh x1/92%) of heat, totaling 114p, on a total input bill of 52.5p (23.3kW x 2.25p), assuming the electricity and heat are consumed on site, so providing a saving of 114p – 52.5p = 61.5p."

The follow on paragraph then becomes:

"The payback period for the Charger 6.4 (with no tariffs) based on 7,000 hours of use per annum (only likely to be achieved in a commercial setting) is estimated ... to be 2.7 years - also assuming a purchase price of £10,000, installation cost of £1,500, maintenance at £100 per annum, a gas price of 2.25p/kWh and electricity price of 12p/kWh."

Quite remarkable especially since we were previously estimating the sales price to reduce to £4,400 within a few years of production from economies of scale, and in the light of recent cost improvements...?

Come on JG - time to deliver the mother of all RNS's ;-)

Ob.

@Phimx, once you have read the Align report you might be interested in these two posts from 18 May '19 relating to the economics, and I'll be interested if you spot any flaws! I'm glad I remembered I'd done these calculations as I was thinking of doing something similar this weekend and they look challenging! ;-)

Not you @oldblue! Perhaps I was too cryptic. LoL! ;-)

Update port satellite date. Correct what 3 words link.

============
Satellite links:
----------------
Pier 1 empty on 21st August:
https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/eo-browser/?zoom=18&lat=-0.06071&lng=-51.16732&time=2020-08-21&preset=1_TRUE_COLOR&datasource=Sentinel-2%20L2A

High resolution, but unknown date:
https://satellites.pro/Brazil_map#-0.061670,-51.167402,19
https://what3words.com/lobster.supposed.rider?maptype=satellite

Port links:
-----------
https://serveporto.com.br/macapa/
https://www.myshiptracking.com/ports/port-of-santana-in-br-brazil-id-6679
https://www.vesselfinder.com/ports/SANTANA-BRAZIL-3030
https://www.marinetraffic.com/en/data/?recognized_next_port_in|begins|SANTANA|recognized_next_port_in=2476
https://www.fleetmon.com/ports/santana_brsan_2955/
http://www.docasdesantana.com.br/index.php/component/content/article/13-informacoes-operacionais/programacao-de-navios/308-ano-2020

If you've never taken a look at Inspirit's and haven't realised why I call it JG's baby, then you might want to take a read of:

"KLEENAIR SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL PLC: Proposed acquisition of Inspirit Energy Limited" (28 June 2013)
https://www.investegate.co.uk/kleenair-systems-int--insp-/rns/proposed-acquisition-of-inspirit-energy-limited/201306281630041925I/

But presumably everyone invested here has done that already? LoL. :-)

After going down the partner root and diversifying it feels like we might be *VERY* close this year to finally birthing a product or two - triplets even! ;-)

LoL @TheFoocare. Let me get this straight, you want someone knowledgeable to respond to someone in the filter bin that is re-posting something from an idiot* that every shareholder invested here should know???

The history is there for all to see, and I'm very comfortable with it:

https://www.inspirit-energy.com/our-history/

* Idiot: has repeatedly demonstrated they don't know the difference between energy and power, and despite this has a strong opinion on the subject. They'd be straight in the filter bin if they hadn't been banned.

Trust me everyone, take a leaf out of @Jimb's book and filter liberally. It doesn't mean you can't see the posts if you really want to see them, but it does mean when you are scanning back through posts or replying it's so much easier and a pleasant experience to distinguish the signal from the noise, not having to see the disruptive nonsense! :-)))

Ob.

Thanks @Phimx - I decided on shares I'm not declaring an interest in (may or may not hold) it's simpler to talk from the perspective of someone who does.

You know what else your comment made me realise: with this set up your smart device can decide to use the heating element instead of gas for those times your electricity is cheaper than gas - e.g. electricity you have generated from your solar panels! Wowzers. Someone patent this idea. LoL.

First guess *additional* cost over using gas - all the 10's! Say there are 10 days a year where you need an additional 10kW for 10 hours costing 10p (marginal over gas) per kWhr over 10 years.

10d * 10kW * 10hr * £0.1 * 10yr = £1,000

Seems about right to me, and especially so if it can be demonstrated the pay back from the boiler over that period is significantly greater than this - which it should be!

Do you think we've had this option up our sleeves all along, and we've just stumbled upon it?

Ob.

The more I think about my "Eureka" the more it makes sense from a total cost of ownership perspective. I bet the number of days you need to supply that peak for is quite small. i.e. better to pay the small additional OpEx per year for those days than stump up the additional CapEx and space for a larger unit capable of running solely on gas. John! :-))

@Phimx: "The line about insufficient electric for a power shower was intended to be slightly flippant." LoL! What's the emoji for that? ;-)

Here's something that has never crossed my mind before! thinking about the 15kWt + 3.2kWe version for a moment as that is simpler. Imagine that in the depths of winter the property has a thermal load greater than 15kWt. Previously I've wondered how simple it would be to shunt the 3.2kWe through a heating element to boost this to 18.2kWt, fairly simple I would have thought.

Get ready for the new bit!

Well why not allow that 18.2kWt to be boosted further up to whatever peak you want to cater for from the electricity supply? i.e. you could have 2 or 3 variants, each increasingly more expensive: a 15kWt version (no electrical heating element), a 18.2kWt version (heating element capable of converting the 3.2kWe, but no additional electricity from the grid), and then variants that supplement the gas heating with electricity from the grid (for the peaks). i.e. a 25kWt peak and a 30kWt peak?

Quick - someone call JG: large residential is back on the menu! LoL ;-)

The reason being, if it's going to be floor standing then it really needs to be closer to 25-30kWt IMHO to be attractive to larger households. But perhaps I'm wrong, perhaps the lure of "free" electricity will be sufficient to accept a less powerful offering? And perhaps households are happier to make more use of electricity nowadays, e.g. from their solar panels and cheap off-peak tariffs?

@Phimx, I've always felt it doesn't quite feel right for residential in its 3.2kWe + 15kWt form, and why I think the commercial multi-boiler setting is the sector to focus on, especially for businesses that are already used to the idea of multiple boilers: if an Inspirit Boiler can save you a lot of money, potentially even make you money, then ears should certainly pick up! :-)