Member Info for Piltick

Got it - thanks Klunk.

What link are you looking at chippyjo, is it this one?
https://www.fch.europa.eu/sites/default/files/3%20%28ID%204907118%29.pdf
because I can't see 25 months mentioned anywhere, nor 85% efficiency, so I think we must be talking about different things.

Notes: Are you looking at a document with a large heading saying "ALKOMMONIA"? This document is several pages long about various projects. It's the first project on page 1 that relates to Alkommonia and AFC.

Interesting comment on the poster:

"After our literature survey, the only competing alkaline fuel cell manufacturer for this success criterion to AFC Energy are GENCELL, who have made no relevant information public, with inferences of perhaps 500h, not explicitly stated."

The spread showing on here is pretty dire at 21.8%, but when I do dummy buys & sells on-line I get 4.96/4.75 giving a spread of only 4.4% which is reasonable.

https://www.investegate.co.uk/mercia-technologies--merc-/rns/portfolio-company-announces-six-licensing-deals/201902280700293420R/

Thanks for the link Southerhay.

That's a good point Ed. So you've just denied them the only possible plausible excuse they may have had!

It's not so much a question of the paperwork or profits, or invoicing for that matter, it's a question of physical transport of the goods from one country to another. In the case of a "no deal" brexit, if there isn't an import tariff agreement between the two countries, then the border officials won't know how to deal with the goods going out or coming in, so the goods will lie in a warehouse somewhere until the arrangements are sorted.

Rotting meat, fruit and veg. At least the fuel cells won't rot while they wait to be delivered!

https://news.sky.com/story/surrey-hit-by-fourth-earthquake-in-two-weeks-11649532

" ...and at a distance of approximately 8km from the Brockham oil field."
The article goes on to say:
"There was no fluid injection into that well during 2018, which appears to rule out any causation."
So I don't think the article is suggesting that Brockham oil production is the cause of the earthquake. In fact, this occurrence is more likely to prove that these earthquakes are natural events, and nothing to do with the oil extraction.

I don't understand why this is being regarded so negatively by so many. I thought it was a rather informative and positive RNS. Well at least we now know what they are doing and what they are planning to do, which is more than we knew this morning, and indeed more than we have known for a long time.

I don't think so Gadams, I don't think that's what they were depicting. More likely that they were suggesting that the cars' batteries will be charged from renewable energy sources, but not individually. There certainly wouldn't be enough power generated by a solar panel on the roof of a car, well not in Scotland during the winter!

I thought there were other flaws in the article as well. the solar panel attached to the electric car, for example, suggesting that all EVs will be charged from renewables. So how does that work when you plug it into the grid? Do you tell it only to suck in renewal electricity, not electricity generated by diesel power stations?

"...the easiest and cheapest way to do so is to make it [hydrogen] from natural gas – and that’s music to the ears of the fossil fuel industry."

Really? I'm not so sue that that's the case. If they are talking about methane steam reformation (from natural gas) then my understanding is that it is horrendously expensive, which is really the main reason why hydrogen has not been accepted as a fuel for vehicles in the past.

https://www.openaccessgovernment.org/hydrogen-energy-powerhouse/59506/

"In the U.S., millions of metric tons of hydrogen are produced annually, predominantly from natural gas in a process known as steam methane reforming."

Trouble is, steam methane reforming is a very expensive way to produce hydrogen, and is not competitive with diesel and petrol, which is one of the reasons (probably the main reason) why it has not been widely used as a fuel for vehicles in the past.

Also, Gadams, it is my understanding that the PHE system does operate at 1200 C for processing tyre crumb, and probably the same for processing plastic, although I believe it can operate at higher temperatures if necessary.

I think the dam, or the no-dam, was a very important issue.

Of course I meant £10M, not £10k.

So it seems that the capital cost will be greater than we previously believed. Previous estimates, as far as I am aware, was about £6M - £8M for the first unit on a greenfield site, but less per unit if multiple units were deployed on one site. Plus about £5M for the additional hydrogen purifier part. This now seems to have up to about £10k although DR is now expecting to be able to produce more hydrogen per unit than previously stated. So hopefully that should mean that the ultimate profit from a hydrogen producing unit should stay about the same as previously expected.

I wonder if they would be able to hire a hydrogen purifier rather than spend £10k to buy one?

I recall KA saying that the negotiations could take months, because that is the way that the Japanese negotiate.