Member Info for toneman

I don't think that's the same company as the new joint venture Clean Logistics GmbH.

I like your choice Seaangler with VESTAS although I went with ORSTED in the end. That's a toss up between wind turbine manufacturer or windfarm installer/owner. I assumed there would be more of a recurring revenue model with the energy owner...but who knows?

You're right Jeevescat, my comment was UK-focussed. I really hope that ITMs relationship with Sumitomo pays off because Japan is way ahead of us.

I think it's really interesting how we are globally ahead in the UK with offshore wind generation, but we're not really joined up about what the power demands and spread will be in 10 years time. I think ITM have got their eyes in exactly the right places...Japan (because they're ahead in the game), Australia (because they really will be dominant hydrogen exporters once hydrogen demand kicks off), and Germany (because they are also ahead of the UK in H2 terms and central to EU future demand). When the UK is finally ready to follow on, I believe ITM will be well positioned.

I agree that fuel station rollout is painfully slow, but as an event a new station only provides a modest RNS entry...and is not even newsworthy any more. In fact you could consider fuel station rollouts to have a negative effect as there is not sufficient traffic to generate H2 demand or sales. There's enough demand for BEV to keep car manufacturers happy with batteries for the time being, and as they're electric drive-trains it makes them future-proof for adopting hydrogen in the future for better range and faster refueling.

Hydrogen transportation in the UK is likely to be Buses, Trains, Trucks, Vans then Cars (in that order) so there's no point in car manufacturer's trying to push cars first. I'd love one, but it looks like I'm going to have to wait.

I think it's right for ITM to invest for bigger power demands and ensure their designs are solid as that is what the future demands will be. It goes hand in hand with the success in off-shore wind generation we have in the UK. If only the Government would stop paying the windfarms for curtailment they would quickly realise they should be utilising the excess generation, rather than wasting it, and set up hydrogen generation to meet the future needs.

It's easy to see why some reading today's half-year report would only see the negative, but to me it reads like building a solid foundation, it's expensive but I'm really looking forward to what's built on it in the years to come. The demand for hydrogen is going to be massive.

DNV GL suggest "Decarbonization could drive an estimated 100,000-fold rise in demand for hydrogen for energy by 2050".https://www.dnvgl.com/news/new-dnv-gl-research-sees-long-term-expansion-of-hydrogen-use-for-energy-134934

I understood the problem leading to curtailment was more to do with the carrying capacity of the main interconnectors. For example, the amount of wind power able to be generated in Scotland is way more than can be consumed in Scotland alone, but the interconnector(s) that connect Scotland to England currently can't carry enough to take the excess either, so no option but to stop the turbines. This is why they still get paid when they're not generating. I'd have thought that if the problem was a limitation of the turbines themselves then there would not be a justification for being paid for not generating.