Member Info for observer842

according to HL on no obvious news. That's almost a fifth of the shares in issue. Interesting. Don't forget to declare if you've got more than 42,624,205 shares... :-)

Great IEA report:

"Best practise report on decentralized biomass fired CHP plants and status of biomass fired small- and micro scale CHP technologies" (February 2019)
http://task32.ieabioenergy.com/publications/best-practise-report-on-decentralized-biomass-fired-chp-plants-and-status-of-biomass-fired-small-and-micro-scale-chp-technologies/
http://task32.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/T32_CHP_Report_01_2019.pdf
===[
In this report the most relevant technologies, as they are steam engines, ORC applications, Stirling engines and thermoelectric generators, the most important technical parameters together with operational results and experiences as well as boundary conditions for application are described and presented in fact sheets. Technology developments in the last 10 years are summarized and further R&D needs are specified. For each technology also selected monitoring data is presented and discussed. Best practise reports on small-scale CHP plants including 5 case studies with twin-screw steam-expander technology, as well as further 3 case studies with micro-expander technology are presented. Possible optimization measures and recommendations for further applications have been derived. In the outlook section, recent experiences with hot air turbines as a possible relevant small-scale CHP technology in the near future are described and a contribution on the optimization of combustion plants with the focus on small-scale CHPs has been included.
]===

Stirling Engines are well covered and we even get a mention. It's a bit of a shame we entered stealth mode a few years back and are no longer keeping our website current: Estimated Delivery Begins: 2017...

Certification related news imminent?

Ob

lol. I was pointing out that at least some of the outcome of the investments made in our intangible assets (development costs of ~£2.4m) are undeniably physical in nature. ;-)

In terms of Inspirit failing to ever produce a saleable product, that's certainly a possibility, though I believe the risk of this outcome at this share price is far outweighed by the benefits should John Gunn manage to arrange funding to commercialisation.

This from the Align report:

"Inspirit Energy: 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
===[
Discount to reverse takeover price

In June 2013 Kleenair Systems purchased the 82.95% of Inspirit Energy that it did not own at the time for a deemed consideration of £3.5 million, thus implying a take-out price of £4.22 million. Inspirit’s current market capitalisation of £3.89 million is 8% below this level despite it having invested a further c.£4.5 million into business development since then.
]===

~5-6? million pounds has been invested in product development since coming to market in 2013, resulting in "physical assets" which can be seen in the video below, unless we employed a decent special effects team! ;-)

"Inspirit Energy - Product Overview" (21 Jun 2016)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZerJ7BsIFI
===[
Nick Stevenson of Inspirit Energy presents a 3 minute overview of the Inspirit Charger a new generation heat and power boiler designed for an energy efficient future.
]===

@news. KDNC effectively offered £1 for BCN shares as part of the merger proposals:

"Rebuttal of Proposed Merger" (30 September 2016)
https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/bacanora_lithium/news/rns/story/xpyndjx
===[
The midpoint of the Proposed Offer range represents a premium of only 13.1% to the Bacanora closing share price of 88.50 pence per share on 29 September 2016 (being the last trading date prior to this announcement);
]===

88.5 * 113.1 = 100.09p

If you want to give a range, it can be calculated from this paragraph of the announcement:

===[
The merger exchange ratio proposed by REM is between 135 and 141 REM shares for each outstanding Bacanora share ('the Proposed Offer')
]===

i.e. The 100.09p corresponds to ((135 + 141) / 2) = 138 REM shares, meaning that the offer range was:

Low: 135/138 * 100.09 = 97.91p
High: 141/138 * 100.09 = 102.27p

i.e. 98p to 102p, not the "88.5p - £1" you are currently stating. I'd just stick to quoting £1 if I were you. ;-)

Apologies if I have misunderstood the meaning behind your quote, as I've just realised you might be trying to say REM offered (approximately) £1 when the BCN share price was 88.5p? Which is true!

Ob.

As we transform to near 100% renewable energy generation, my money is on gas for seasonal energy shifting/storage in Northern European countries. This from page 217 of the recent Navigant report (which is worth a general skim!):

"GAS FOR CLIMATE. The optimal role for gas in a net-zero emissions energy system" (March 2019")
https://www.gasforclimate2050.eu/files/files/Navigant_Gas_for_Climate_The_optimal_role_for_gas_in_a_net_zero_emissions_energy_system_March_2019.pdf
===[
J.2 Energy storage
The European gas and electricity systems are among the most stable and reliable in the world. Even in very hot summers or very cold winters the energy system provides the required energy. In the electricity grid, this stability is currently guaranteed by large dispatchable generation capacity. Gas infrastructure has been dimensioned to deliver sufficient energy during cold spells. The stability of the current system relies heavily on gas-fired generation and underground storage for large volumes of gas. In future low-carbon energy systems, one of the main challenges will be to store large volumes of renewable energy.

With increased electrification, this will change. With increased wind and solar generation capacity it is expected that storage of electricity - in some form of energy carrier - will become necessary in large volumes. It is, however, expensive to store large volumes of electricity. Battery systems’ efficiencies are improving and large technology companies have invested in scaling up battery production facilities, leading to rapid cost declines.

However, costs are not likely to reach less than €60,000/MWh of storage capacity within the next 35 years. These high costs per unit of volume makes batteries unsuitable for long-term storage.

Another possibility is (pumped) hydro storage. However, a GIS559-based study by JRC found EU-28 countries to have a limited realisable pumped hydropower storage (PHS) potential of 37 TWh. This is approximately 4 days of the current EU power consumption. Gas can provide the remaining storage requirements. Gas is routinely and cheaply stored in large volumes. Investment costs for creating underground gas storage are around €25/MWh. This makes gas suitable for storing large volumes of energy over longer periods, for example, for seasonal storage.
]===

Because of this I see a future for micro combined heat and power in countries with existing gas networks.

@smrrty. As we transform to near 100% renewable energy generation, my money is on gas for seasonal energy shifting/storage in Northern European countries. This from page 217 of the recent Navigant report (which is worth a general skim!):

"GAS FOR CLIMATE. The optimal role for gas in a net-zero emissions energy system" (March 2019")
https://www.gasforclimate2050.eu/files/files/Navigant_Gas_for_Climate_The_optimal_role_for_gas_in_a_net_zero_emissions_energy_system_March_2019.pdf
===[
J.2 Energy storage
The European gas and electricity systems are among the most stable and reliable in the world. Even in very hot summers or very cold winters the energy system provides the required energy. In the electricity grid, this stability is currently guaranteed by large dispatchable generation capacity. Gas infrastructure has been dimensioned to deliver sufficient energy during cold spells. The stability of the current system relies heavily on gas-fired generation and underground storage for large volumes of gas. In future low-carbon energy systems, one of the main challenges will be to store large volumes of renewable energy.

With increased electrification, this will change. With increased wind and solar generation capacity it is expected that storage of electricity - in some form of energy carrier - will become necessary in large volumes. It is, however, expensive to store large volumes of electricity. Battery systems’ efficiencies are improving and large technology companies have invested in scaling up battery production facilities, leading to rapid cost declines.

However, costs are not likely to reach less than €60,000/MWh of storage capacity within the next 35 years. These high costs per unit of volume makes batteries unsuitable for long-term storage.

Another possibility is (pumped) hydro storage. However, a GIS559-based study by JRC found EU-28 countries to have a limited realisable pumped hydropower storage (PHS) potential of 37 TWh. This is approximately 4 days of the current EU power consumption. Gas can provide the remaining storage requirements. Gas is routinely and cheaply stored in large volumes. Investment costs for creating underground gas storage are around €25/MWh. This makes gas suitable for storing large volumes of energy over longer periods, for example, for seasonal storage.
]===

Because of this I see a future for micro combined heat and power in countries with existing gas networks. I've explored this topic on the INSP board, from the beginning of 2017.

Ob.

And not forgetting from the end of year results:
===[
The Group has excess management expenses of approximately £4,800,000 (2017: £4,500,000), capital losses of £150,000 (2017: £150,000) and non-trade financial losses of approximately £119,000 (2017: £119,000) to carry forward against future suitable taxable profits.
]===

Sometimes there are just more sellers than buyers, and the share price goes down regardless of the future potential of a company... JG does this company no favours with his silence. Question is, will those buying in now be eventually slapping him on the back for the opportunity this afforded them!?

Ob

What a coincidence. See below, or if you'd rather go to the source which is slightly dated now:

https://www.inspirit-energy.com/story/the-inspirit-charger

This was in the news over the weekend.

https://www.enviropowertec.com/

Some brief comparisons:

SmartWatt (various sources)

Weight: 136kg
Dimensions: 710x?x?mm ("small enough to easily fit through 28” doorways" - looks quite long and tall.)
Power in: 59kWt (calculated from 2.2 gallons of propane per hour * 91,502 BTU@60ºF)
Power out: 6kWe; 51kWt (ratio: 1:8.5)
Power out: 5kWe; 44kWt (ratio: 1:8.8)
Efficiency: 95%
Noise level: ? (It sounds quite loud from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5GxtGss_2E)
Cost: "Similar price to other boilers" (quote from podcast below)

From: http://www.alignresearch.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Inspirit-Energy-Align-Research-13th-June-2016-Final.pdf

Inspirit Charger
Weight: 120kg
Dimensions: 650x650x900mm
Power in: 20kW
Power out: 3.2kWe; 15kWt (ratio: 1:4.7)
Efficiency: 92%
Noise level: 50dBA at a distance of 1m. (50 dBA: Refrigerator at 1m distance, bird twitter outside at 15m distance: https://www.justgenerators.co.uk/noise-level-information.html)
Cost of sales per unit at scale £2,692 (but material costs have reduced in the last few years)
Sales price per unit at scale: £4,400 (target likely less now)

Worth a listen to the recent podcast the CEO appeared in:

"The Power of Micro Co-Generation - A Conversation with Dan Nadav" (February 24, 2019)
https://dev.enviropowertec.com/the-power-of-micro-co-generation-a-conversation-with-dan-nadav/

He seems to be on the ball. Very enthusiastic. Space in the market for more than one product I'd say! ;-)

In summary: their product looks more suitable if you have the space and can stand the noise and need 3 times the thermal output as the Inspirit Charger - assuming it is cheap! It also appears more efficient (but I remain sceptical of such a high % efficiency). The Inspirit Charger has the edge in terms of the electricity to thermal power ratio (1:4.7) being almost double theirs (1:8.5) and appears to run quietly.

Come on John Gunn. Get a move on...

Ob.

time. And a lot of patience! News, be it good or bad, almost certainly coming in the next 3 months by company year end...

Implications for the SynerGIS bonds?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47773404

One less competitor = More potential customers?

Though better make sure the product is squeaky clean before launching! But when...?

https://www.synergisbonds.com/

Ob

This might give clay's a good name if true and scalable. And cheap!

"Lithium Brine Investors, You’re About to Miss the Boat" (February 6, 2019)
https://www.americanlithiumcorp.com/2019/02/07/lithium-brine-investors-youre-about-to-miss-the-boat/
===[
Of note, American Lithium is developing its own approach to a hydrometallurgical process that involves straightforward extraction of the clays, moving it to a containment area and treating it with a formula to leach and extract the minerals in as little as 72 hours without the expense or time spent roasting the clay. The company can deliver higher concentrations of lithium than brines, and do it faster simply by varying the separation formulation and duration of the process. According to the Company website they have been able to achieve 81.5% extraction rates under controlled conditions.
]===

I wonder how the upfront CapEx and continuing OpEx compare's with BCN's? Could BCN licence this approach if significant benefit were to be had in avoiding the roasting step? Though it would mean alterations to the BFS and likely more delays...

Ob.

None of this is straightforward @Bannor (and I'm going to continue to digest those links I shared!). The Edison document shows that iron ore is (or was, when the document was published) very unloved, with huge discounts on pre-production projects, even at BFS (pre funding). It does however suggest that if Iron ore was more loved, then upon completion of the BFS, but pre-construction, pre-funding, etc, the value of the project reflected in the market cap might be around 10-20% of the NPV of the project as determined in the BFS, but this percentage could be way out. I did some ball park figures which assumed no dilution (fully debt funded) yesterday which equated to around £100m to KDNC on the back of our 10%. So post BFS, but pre-funding, that might be £10-20m to KDNC's market cap based on these estimates. It's worth looking through the Edison document. I can supply a list of page number you might find interesting if you like?

Get yourself 3% of an unloved company for just £9,296

That's 42,624,205 shares @0.0218p, less than a third of the *minimum* share price (0.07p) the convertible loan can be converted into shares at.

If this share rockets on good news like it should, someone re-post this post will they? ;-)

Ob.

Some background reading for anyone wanting to explore M&A possibilities and help answer the question at the bottom of this post:

"Copper M&A: The Cupboard is Nearly Bare" (November 2018)
https://www.kincoracopper.com/media/downloads/media/RFC_Ambrian_Copper_MandA_November_2018_web.pdf

"Gold stars and black holes" (January 2019)
https://www.edisoninvestmentresearch.com/?ACT=19&ID=23211&dir=sectorreports&field=19

"How to value junior mining stocks" (07 September 2015)
https://masterinvestor.co.uk/latest/how-to-value-junior-mining-stocks/

"Net Asset Value In Mining" (July 20, 2017)
http://sellsidehandbook.com/2017/07/20/net-asset-value-mining/

"Equity Value and Enterprise Value: The Complete Guide" (June 2017)
https://www.mergersandinquisitions.com/equity-value-enterprise-value/

Question to be answered: why does Flinders Mines (ASX: FMS) have a market cap of A167.29M=US$119m yet Macarthur Minerals (TSX: MMS) only C26.64M=US$20m

That should just about cover buying us out @jimb2 = £13.3m. LoL. Unlikely IMHO.

When you can't find the sunshine, be the sunshine ;-)

It's a waiting game for me now. No more buying until solid news, no matter how far the share price falls - I have enough. Could be a great scoop for some lucky punter, but no-one is having my shares at these crazy prices!

@Bannor, for what it is worth, I did some research on this last week (I was interested to see why some sections were missing), by searching for key phrases on the web (it's easy to find them, and they likely weren't relevant which is why they were omitted). In the end I decided that for whatever reason, probably in the interests of transparency, WH Ireland, now seem to include the terms of the placing invitation in the closing announcement. i.e. My conclusion is that the placing closed for £1.3m @0.15p, which is now not subject to change. I didn't post this at the time, as I could be wrong, very wrong. But since you asked for thoughts...