Member Info for observer842

@tomcat "they�ve only drilled out 7km... of the 160km visible strike length... <5%". What did you actually mean?

Even with the most optimistic improvements to the regenerator tech, I can't see how we could have brought the @ volume production costs down from �2,692 to less than $1,000 a unit @oneandonly1!, but we don't need to have reduced it at all to make the Inspirit Charger a game changer, for it's easy to see with back of the envelope calculations that if we can manufacture @ say �2,500, and sell at say �4,000 to commercial properties - that's �1,500 a year profit. At scale we are talking 10's of thousands a year, perhaps even 100,000pa. @100,000 that's a revenue stream of �150m gross profit. The potential here is mind boggling! And the all important question of why would anyone buy one? @�4,000 it's around �3,000 pounds more expensive than a boiler of equivalent spec which doesn't produce electricity. So over the lifetime of the boiler, the prospective buyer has to expect a saving of �3,000 in electricity costs - the sooner the better! ;-) If the boiler runs 24x365@3.2kW that is 28MWh of electricity generated a year. 28MWh of electricity from the grid at around @10p/kWh would cost �2,800 - we can generate it from gas at say 3p/kWh = �840, i.e. a saving per year of around �2,000. So under those metrics that �3,000 you needed to save is saved within 1.5 years of purchase (�3,000 / �2,000). i.e. a parity time of 1.5 years. Perhaps the boiler is only on half the time (remember we are talking commercial buildings not residential where it will be much less), the parity time would then be 3 years (�3,000 / �1,000), and 4 years for pay back (�4,000 / �1,000). Perhaps it's on even less leading to longer parity/payback times. The point being so long as there is expected payback over the lifetime of the boiler (10-15 years), it should make economic sense to buy one, and obviously the more you generate and usefully use/store/sell in a year, the better! As I have shown above it's *very* attractive at volume production and, as Align demonstrated, it's quite attractive at low production even when the expected price per unit is around the �10,000 mark (although it could be significantly less than this after the recent news!) - with payback times of around 5 years when on 80% of the time in a year. If anyone spots any oversimplifications or errors in any of the above, please shout! ;-) I believe as John Gunn does, that this tech is game changing. Hiccups happen. Now let's get a move on to production already. Ob.

�4,400 has been going round my head since the last post. And now I know why, that's the estimated volume *sale* price - cost is estimated to be �2,692 at volume - which is more in line with what I had in mind. Assuming the technology works (!), then it's all about getting the cost down so that over the 10-15 year "sealed for life" lifespan of the kit, significant savings can be had each year to reduce the payback time, making it an attractive proposition. As a reminder, according to Align if the 3kW version is sold for �11,500 (before production is scaled to volume), then first year savings in a commercial environment are estimated to be around �2,082 leading to a payback time of 4.9 years. Of course at volume production, the payback time is a couple of years in certain environments where the boiler is running near constantly... ;-)

Exponential growth is happening all around us @tomcat! "EV Company News For The Month Of March 2018" (Apr. 2, 2018) https://seekingalpha.com/article/4160572-ev-company-news-month-march-2018 === Summary Global electric car sales - February sales were up 43% on February 2017. EV market news - Norway embraces electric ferries. Electric planes to race from London to Darwin in 2019. China driving the whole car supply chain, EVs are in full swing. Beijing forecasts that China will be able to produce two million electric and hybrid vehicles annually by 2020. EV company news - "VW secures $25 billion battery supplies in electric-car surge." ... China electric car sales were 34,000 in February 2018, up 88% on February 2017. Electric car market share in China for February 2018 was 1.3% market share. === Pretty sure 43% > 42%, oh, and that China growth...! Exciting times on many fronts, particularly the San Luis adventure eh @Bannor? ;-) Ob.

How kind of you @Fallingknife. What do you know about regenerator technology? From what I've researched I suspect it's a bigger deal that we can now manufacture ours from "commodity grade stainless steel deriviative", than the market is realising... ;-) From the interims: https://www.inspirit-energy.com/investors/financial-information === The engineering department has throughout the last period made significant developments in our regenerator technology. The increased efficiency in the regenerator will allow the Stirling engine to be manufactured from a commodity grade stainless steel derivative, which is both stronger and cheaper to manufacture than the previous proprietary "Inconel" materials. === I'm sure you know all this (since you were invested here at some point!), but as a refresher if you have forgotten take a read of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_heat_exchanger and of particular note: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirling_engine === Stirling engine designs require heat exchangers for heat input and for heat output, and these must contain the pressure of the working fluid, where the pressure is proportional to the engine power output. In addition, the expansion-side heat exchanger is often at very high temperature, so the materials must resist the corrosive effects of the heat source, and have low creep. Typically these material requirements substantially increase the cost of the engine. The materials and assembly costs for a high temperature heat exchanger typically accounts for 40% of the total engine cost. === With this new development we may have significantly reduced the volume production cost of �4,400 mentioned here: "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 If there wasn't so much negativity on this board and our BoD communicated more proactively I'd be piling in round about now - so I'll either be thanking you guys or cussing you at some point! ;-) Instead I'll continue to dribble in for the moment... We only need a couple of mill to get this show on the road. Peanuts on the grand scheme of things - of course it might be some time before it all comes together. Or tomorrow, or never - is it the new financial year yet? ;-) Ob.

It's worth reminding yourself why we are all invested here by taking a listen to this inspiring 16 minute talk from 2014: "UK Investor Show 2014 video - Inspirit Energy" (18 Apr 2014) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1Ys0ulUyi4 === ... but the key thing about this technology is the current model that we are commercialising for the large residential and small SME market produces 15kW of thermal energy...and amazingly 3.1kW of electricity while that boiler is running. That is without doubt the industry leader with respect to efficiency for size, thermal output, and electrical output. ... because the technology here is 92% efficient. === 92% efficient when we were at 3.1kW - means that we are now likely above that! We only ever mention the potential energy input (20kW) and thermal energy produced (15kWt) to two significant figures. Modifying the thermal upwards to 15.3kW gives (15.3kWt + 3.1kWe) / 20kW = 92% and with the recently announced increase in electrical generation to 3.2kW gives a current efficiency of: (15.3kWt + 3.2kWe) / 20kW = 92.5% Modifying the input energy instead to 19.7kW: (15kWt + 3.1kWe) / 19.7kW = 91.9% and with the recently announced increase in electrical generation to 3.2kW gives a current efficiency of: (15kWt + 3.2kWe) / 19.7kW = 92.4% Either way, it seems likely that the efficiency is greater than the 92% which is mandated by the government for new boilers from 6th April 2018. Now why would our BoD not bother to mention that? They could easily have mentioned it in the July RNS... And why has progress been apparently so slow? Well, take a look at this paragraph in the interims: === The DFM process continues to yield several engineering improvements and manufacturing cost reductions whilst others are still expected. Whilst this DFM process remains ongoing, the Group is now looking to proceed to the certification process whereby the Inspirit Charger will be subjected to testing by a competent authority. Once this has been achieved, we can then look towards commencing field trails with commercial partners. The Company will update investors as these milestones are met over the forthcoming year. === My (optimistic!) take on events subsequent to the 2014 investor show presentation is that the boiler in its then form failed the certification step, meaning it was back to the drawing board for us. Question is, have we done a sufficiently good job this time? Will we pass the certification process. Game changer if we do (and it is announced ffs!) ;-) Ob.

In the interests of shareholder engagement, how about adding another video to our channel? We currently have just the one, with 255 views. It's a good 3 minute watch, but I want an update. "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. === I wonder if Nick still works for us? His various social media pages suggests not: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/nick-stevenson-4a609b28 https://holaconnect.com/profile/nick-stevenson-5da8445c === Director at Thermoconcept Systems === but perhaps they haven't been updated recently? Apparently Paddy Thompson still does though: https://uk.linkedin.com/in/paddythompson2015 === Consultant Finance Director; CFO at Origen Power; Sales Director at Inspirit Energy ===

Here is an interesting recent summary paper: "Micro-combined heat and power systems (micro-CHP) based on renewable energy sources" (December 2017) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321051016_Micro-combined_heat_and_power_systems_micro-CHP_based_on_renewable_energy_sources === 2.3.1. Basics According to Harrison and On [52], SE have been considered for many years as the most promising technology for micro-CHP applications. SE are external combustion engines which enable a close control of the combustion process, and a high fuel adaptability. The latter makes them suitable for renewable resource integration. Additionally, due to a noise level lower than ICE, SE seem particularly adapted for residential applications [53]. ... Fig. 15 presents, in terms of heat and electricity generation, main commercialized Stirling units. Values are coming from manufacturer websites. Whispergen, Sernertec, Sunmachine (not commercialized anymore) and Okofen are the main Stirling micro-CHP system manufacturers. One can note that most of the commercialized units have a low electricity to heat ratio (C is below 0.3). === Most of our peers are producing around 1kWe, with the best @3kWe, 10kWt. As a reminder we are currently @3.2kWe 15kWt off 20kW in = 91% efficiency ;-) I'm getting the impression the long term holders here might have to up our game re shareholder engagement as our BoD are currently (intentionally?) failing terribly on this front. Come on John Gunn: engage! Another video interview could do wonders for morale around here, after all, it's us investors who control the share price, not you - though what the company does and how you report on it influences our decisions... ;-) Convince the market this is really happening. I know a low share price allows you to increase your percentage holding quicker - but come on, below par (via a consolidation) is just greedy. It would be acceptable to me if you placed @0.1p for �250,000 upping the number of shares in issue from 1,420,806,857 to 1,670,806,857 and your holding from 439,696,246 to 689,696,246 (from 30.9% to potentially 41.3%). Or alternatively if you wanted more of the company for you to fully underwrite a placing @0.1p for �500,000 to potentially take your holding to 48.9%. Or even more, �1,000,000@0.1p to potentially take your holding to 59.5%. So long as I get the opportunity to join in I'll be happy. And before anyone says, "why would anyone want to join in with a placing @0.1p when they can buy at 0.04p", ask yourself the question, do you really think the share price would remain low with that demonstration of confidence in the future of the company? It wouldn't surprise me if I took it to 0.1p on my own... Now where might JG get �250,000 from I wonder? ;-) Ob.

Looks like progress is being made to me! === The engineering department has throughout the last period made significant developments in our regenerator technology. The increased efficiency in the regenerator will allow the Stirling engine to be manufactured from a commodity grade stainless steel derivative, which is both stronger and cheaper to manufacture than the previous proprietary �Inconel" materials. === It's once again a weak buy from me at these prices, but I have to admit the rate of progress and hush hush is beginning to test even my patience! Now where is that CIBSE report? ;-) "Collaboration Agreement with the CIBSE" (16 August 2016) https://www.inspirit-energy.com/investors/rns-news-detail?id=6xl7o7r === The CIBSE will commence the project immediately, providing project management, execution and implementation in order to gather the data necessary to produce a report. Inspirit will provide access to its field trial data as well as offering technical and commercial guidance. It is expected that the final report will be published by the end of 2017. === Ob

Here is some analysis I posted on the KDNC board a while back estimating lithium demand from heavy vehicles likely being similar to that of light vehicles. However since then I've come to realise that unlike when EV's are fully autonomous their global production rate might drop as more people will choose not to own a car (ala Tony Seba), this will unlikely be the case for commercial vehicles as their utilisation is already high compared to domestic vehicles. Going to need a lot of lithium! Keep an eye on the Tesla semi ;-) Ob@14 Aug '17 === @jimb2 Take a read of: https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/GlobalEVOutlook2017.pdf Most of the forecasts are relating to cars. Buses are often mentioned as China is aggressively switching its fleet, but heavy trucks and light commercial vehicles in general are not. From: http://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads//Buses-2016.pdf http://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads//HCV-2016.pdf It looks like there are 10 times as many heavy trucks (3.5m) as heavy buses (340,000) produced per year. From: http://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads//Cars-2016.pdf http://www.oica.net/wp-content/uploads//LCV-2016.pdf there are 72m cars and 19m light commercial vehicles = 91m produced per year. In terms of thinking about how much lithium might be required to electrify the trucks, I started to look at how much fuel was used each year by each category of vehicle, but then decided that a better comparison is probably to compare the size of their fuel tanks. According to brief research: https://www.quora.com/How-much-fuel-capacity-is-on-semi-trailers https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-average-size-of-a-car-gas-tank a typical car has a 17 gallon capacity, and a large truck perhaps somewhere between 200-400 gallons. i.e. around 10 to 25 the capacity, let's go with 20 times the capacity. Sanity checks are always good, and this figure sounds about right, as according to: https://evannex.com/blogs/news/tesla-s-electric-semi-truck-will-need-one-big-ass-battery the Tesla-semi may have a 1,200 kWh battery. i.e 20 times that of a 60kWh Tesla Car. So in terms of kWh battery and hence lithium demand per year: 3.5m * 20 = 70m i.e. a good first guesstimate, assuming all else being equal, is that when production is fully electric, a similar amount of lithium will be required per year for heavy trucks as for cars. I did not know that! And of course the quite interesting follow on is that as soon as it is commercially more attractive to switch from ICE trucks to EV trucks it'll happen practically overnight (within a few years) - that's how business works, for profit, not like lazy consumers... ;-) Now where is that Tesla Semi? I rushed the above analysis so it might contain glaring errors... if so, please ignore the post @19:51 ;-) Ob ===

This might be relevant: "Non-domestic smart metering: policy proposals and draft legal text" (27 March 2018) https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/non-domestic-smart-metering-policy-proposals-and-draft-legal-text === As a result of this consultation and responses received we are making changes to the energy supply licence conditions, Data Communications Company (DCC) licence and Smart Energy Code to implement the following measures:energy suppliers to non-domestic premises will be required to use the DCC for the operation of SMETS2 meters. Most non-domestic energy suppliers will therefore be required to become DCC Users by 31 August 2018. === The way I see it: smart meters + mCHP + batteries = distributed electricity generation, storage and resilience. What are we waiting for - surely the time is now? That last point (resilience) is starting to turn heads - especially after the recent power outages...

Presumably we'll get the to the end of 2017 interim's tomorrow. The last we heard on funding was: "Audited results for the year ended 30 June 2017 and Notice of AGM" (28 December 2017) https://www.inspirit-energy.com/investors/rns-news-detail?id=rypk8kr === The operating board and I believe that the progress over the last year has been positive. Whilst we remain well positioned in the microCHP boiler technology market, on going funding for the development and commercialisation of our product remains a challenge. Accordingly, we continue to manage our resources whilst pushing forward with the product and expect this to continue in 2018. At the same time, the Board continues to consider its options for the future strategy and funding of its operating subsidiary and will provide investors with an update when this review is complete. === We all know just how bad the situation may be, but what's the point on dwelling on the no news is bad news scenario, instead, for those looking for a gamble, it might be worth looking back through the RNS's to see that on a few occasions we've had news early April - perhaps the review is complete? Perhaps we have found a funding vehicle? (an EV not an ICE!) News of funding and this share could fly. Remember we were seeking around �2m in funding around this time last year: "Statement re share price movement" (3 May 2017) https://www.inspirit-energy.com/investors/rns-news-detail?id=ry6jg8x === Further to the share price movement today, Inspirit confirms that it is in discussions with Argentarius ETI Management Ltd about structuring a fixed interest bond instrument for the Company of up to �2 million. No money has so far been raised in relation to this instrument and the Company expects to make further announcements in due course. === We know that fell through (although I don't think we were ever told...), but presumably JG (John Gunn) has been busy organising an alternative, perhaps for more than �2m due to the improvement to the electrical generation efficiencies, and perhaps the CIBSE report which we may be keeping close to our chest for the moment? Just one sniff of good news... but unfortunately my opinion is still a hold until we have concrete *believable* news, and if all other long term holders are thinking the same, it's no wonder the share price has waned the past few years as sells continue to outweigh the buys. But who gains from a low share price I wonder? Certainly not the PI's who hold and need to sell for whatever reason: but it sure does make it easier to take back control of the company after the dilutions the past few years! Don't be too greedy now JG... I wouldn't mind seeing another video interview - it's been a while now, coming up to 2 years since the last. Even if it is to tell us the game is up, the dream is over, time to move on ;-) Ob.

I'm probably horribly wrong. However I'd be buying in for a bit of a gamble if I didn't already hold sufficient - it's nearly the new tax year... ;-)

Indeed @jimb2. Lots of interesting articles if you google for '"energy poverty" solar'. And as we know solar solutions (mostly!) requires storage, which (mostly!) means batteries, which (mostly!) means lithium. I will be absolutely astounded if there aren't currently high level talks to get Cinovec on the road to production as we speak, the battery producers need to get their lithium supplies secured pronto! ;-)

I completely agree @jimb2 - many analysts appear not yet to have cottoned on to the impact the solar + battery energy disruption is going to have on lifting vast areas of the world's impoverished out of energy poverty: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_poverty In terms of standard of living, access to energy is vital, always has been, always will be - and guess what, most parts of the world are fortunate enough to be able to harvest the energy shining down from that nuclear power station that passes overhead once a day ;-)

I hear (and see!) what you are saying @antelope. The angle I am coming from on this is that these cities are currently importing fuel into them to power (as in energy divided by time) their buildings and run their vehicles. At some point in time it'll be more cost effective to "grow" their own energy in the form of Solar and store it in batteries, rather than import it - it'll be an economic imperative that they do so. A cottage industry will be born if the multinationals don't take advantage of this market. And once the electrification of their power infrastructure takes hold (even if this is moving batteries around rather than transmitting the energy on wires), it'll be even more economically attractive for electric vehicles (perhaps second-hand ones from elsewhere with their AI upgraded) to take hold. Human drivers will be relegated to the confines of history at some point in the 30's word-wide. Of course there will be a few places where humans can drive old fashioned cars with steering wheels should they want to as a hobby. Think horses. I know it might sound like fantasy, but by the 30's it's highly probably that solar and battery costs will be floored, with the solar power generation efficiencies perhaps twice as high as today's (approaching 50%), and battery energy (and power?) densities perhaps an order of magnitude higher on these timescales as we move to solid state (lithium!) batteries. And as for AI improvements? Best not to think about those if you want to be able to sleep at night. :-) Ob.

@antelope - thanks for the link! At risk of getting way off topic, it will be an economic and health imperative in these cities that they go near fully electric (solar + battery) for not only their transportation energy, but practically all forms. On the decade timescales we are talking about, solar + battery will be significantly more attractive than the ICE vehicles responsible for air pollution, perhaps leading to ICE vehicles being mandated off the roads into the 30's - assuming fully autonomous electric shared (taxi) vehicles are cost competitive (and safer!) on those timescales: which they should be. ;-) I guess the main takeaway point from Tony Seba is that where today the vast majority of road miles travelled are in owner occupied ICE vehicles, tomorrow the vast majority of road miles travelled will be in fully autonomous and shared electric vehicles. I'm convinced of his reasoning following on from his learning curve forecasts and economic arguments. Summary and a few blogs answering common questions here: "ReThinking Transportation: Summary COSTS AND SPEED OF ADOPTION Transport as a Service (TaaS)" https://www.rethinkx.com/fullsummary "RethinkX Blog" https://www.rethinkx.com/theblog/

Of course there will always be exceptions, but overall we are talking around 95% of miles travelled each year will be in fully autonomous shared electric vehicles by around 2030.

Please excuse my shorthand - I'll try again: According to Tony Seba, the total cost of owning and running internal combustion vehicles that you already own, will be greater than hailing a fully autonomous electric taxi for every journey by around 2030, meaning there will be a strong economic incentive to scrap it. Of course the timescales will vary country by country, but it will happen.

@antelope. According to Tony Seba, the total cost of owning and running existing ICE vehicles will be greater than using shared uber taxis by around 2030.