Member Info for Piltick

I'm not saying 70% hydrogen purity, it's 70% of the syngas that would consist of hydrogen, and that the hydrogen would then be separated from the rest of the syngas at 5 nines purity.
So there will still be the other gases remaining such as CO etc.
Well that's my understanding anyway.

I think the 70% hydrogen figure was after processing the syngas through the PSA equipment. But the problem with that is that the PSA equipment costs about £5M so there would need to be a huge additional return to cover that extra Capex.

That additional return can be achieved by selling the purified hydrogen for use in EVs, but probably not by using it to generate electricity.

I think we can forget about AFC providing a fuel cell to connect to a PHE DMG unit. PHE (or rather the "developer") will likely be able to sell their hydrogen for EV use at a higher revenue/profit than they would be able to do by buying a fuel cell and using the hydrogen to produce electricity.

I actually thought it was closer to 50% hydrogen that was produced during the first stage i.e. the gasification process. Then they will need to employ PSA equipment (Pressure Swing Adsorption) to increase the % of hydrogen produced and of course to bring the hydrogen to the required level of purification for vehicles.

I believe that the PSA equipment could cost about £5 million, but happy to be corrected on that.

Perhaps they need to build a separate nuclear power station purely to produce hydrogen!

Actually I would expect that most of them would cash in 40% of the shares to cover the cost of buying them, and then keep the remaining 60% for a bigger profit when the SP rises. It's also possible that the 40% was cashed in a few days ago in advance of getting the new ones.

It's not a placing, it's the exercise of warrants.

I would like interest on bank deposit accounts to go up to 4%.

Some posters are looking for signed orders to be produced immediately if not sooner.

A lot of work will need to be done before getting to the stage of committing to signed orders. There will need to be detailed discussions between AFC and the customer regarding the precise requirements, the location, cost and delivery. AFC will very possibly need to do a site visit.

The customer may need to consider making some preparations at the site, they will need to carry out costings and financial projections, and no doubt in many cases the management will need to put a proposal to higher authority for approval before they can sign off the order.

All of these things take time, so patience is required. More patience. Of course some of these steps may have been covered already with some of the potential customers during the past several months.

sharesport, would FCEVs not have the same problem if they break down as they are in reality electric cars?

I'm surprise that we haven't heard from stokey since early yesterday morning. I thought with the confirmation that the planning application is up next Tuesday that he would be on here. I hope he's OK.

I suspect the thing about an ammonia cracker is down to viability. I don't know how much a cracker costs, but I suspect it will be significant. It may not be viable to invest in one for the smaller charge units, but will only be viable for the bigger ones. Just a thought.

http://cmttpublic.cheshirewestandchester.gov.uk/documents/s68228/Ince%20Recovery%20Park.pdf

I see that there is a proposed condition at the end of the document that says "No site clearance shall be carried out during bird breeding season (1st March to 31st August inclusive)."
Will that delay the start of construction?

" ...to consolidate system deployment opportunities..."
Well spotted haggis. That certainly sounds as if they want to establish a system for delivery to several customers rather than doing it piecemeal. That would seem likely to involve sub-contracting or outsourcing, so perhaps we'll hear more about this in the near future.

https://www.afcenergy.com/successful-national-roadshow-ev-charger-validates-strong-market-interest/

Thanks haggis. I get it!

So if that is the case in the future, why are they saying that hydrogen fuel cell cars will produce almost three times the amount of CO2 than EVs? If the EVs can be charged from the grid using renewable power, then surely the hydrogen can be produced using renewable power from the grid as well. Where is this vast amount of CO2 coming from?

I'm just trying to understand how they are coming to this conclusion in their report.

Certainly AFC won't be taking hydrogen from ITM. ITM are using renewable electricity from the grid to produce hydrogen at service stations to deliver straight to the vehicles. That isn't cheap to produce, so I suspect they are being subsidised. I believe there are some places where they are using solar power or windmill power, off-grid. And of course they are building a huge factory to produce hydrogen, but I'm not sure exactly where their power is coming from for that project.

My last post should have been under this thread and not the one about the "Wireless"

haggis, the article says "... and won’t make much environmental sense until the Australian grid is largely decarbonised." Which suggest to me that they are saying that at the moment their grid has some way to go before it is decarbonised, and that they are not using renewable electricity to produce hydrogen.

They are also assuming that the power being used to compress the hydrogen, and the fuel being used in the vehicles to deliver the hydrogen, is causing further CO2 emissions.

All that I am saying is that this will not necessarily be the situation here, or elsewhere, when hydrogen is produced using renewable energy, or by other "green" methods.