who's on short list, page-37

Kranky,

a bit of an epic reply but without prejudice, please consider,,, with or without a degree in lit, earth sciences, fluid mechanics, accounting,law, or political sciences ( although why the pollies call an undefined art form a science, only they may know )

I will attempt to clarify on a number of levels.

Exergen are imo, a cash strapped private entity looking to publicly list. WHY ?

ECT are a cash strapped entity looking to increase equity and value for it's share holder base. WHY ?


I am not using opposite arguments imo,, They are parallel

WHY ?

I am suggesting, that Exergen's timing for the release of their intent to go public,( during the ALDP EOI ) suggests to me that they were not in a position to qualify for ALDP funding, and were not confident of receiving further cash from their CSI's. Hence the timing of the Exergen flyer to the public with very little ALDP or site information in the flyer as I read it, and many guilded lily type statements about commercial viability from my understanding of earth wind fire & $$$.

WRT my understanding of ''geodynamics'',,an above ground autoclave is not representative of a deep burial and recovery technology that wants to move to the next Derisk step by drilling at least 2 x 1 km shafts,per 50tpa plant,, fabricating a reactor vessel with at leasr one in (down), and at least one out (up) shaft, not proven at pilot plant level, that will never clog, and always pump at a 1km reactive positive feedback accuracy to produce reactive product consistency,, lining them with differing but yet to be pilot tested conductivity and insulating liners at differing depths that will ( yet to be defined at pilot plant level) not scour through (untested at pilot level) and split under pressure within a commercially viable durability life span,,, expecting to gain over 250 degrees C from the exothermic heat of reactivity ( untested at pilot level below ground) without using high grade heat from a lower shaft, or a high megajoule immersible retort heating element as per for example Bakkan projects, large concentrations of catalytic copper sulphate or similar per all heat and squeeze/ decarb tech methods, which will produce masses of taxable emissions ( acid rain from S02 and 23 bux+ a tonne CO2, plus extremely toxic oxides of copper in the end product, along with known mercury and known Sulphur problems with BM lignite ) or in other words,, lots of untested at pilot plant level, but needed to be quantified,,, data,,, for a design for tender.


Exergen's ''pilot'' plant as it has been called by them, and nobody else,,, is imo a scaled up lab test bench plant,,, NOT a scaled down accurate representation of a ''Demonstration '' plant.

Yes you will say,,, the Maddingley Coldry Pilot plant is not plumbed into a low grade waste heat source,,, however,,, of all the DFT tech variables incorporated into the COLDRY tech,, an above ground representation of known value waste heat sources as a Coldry commercial viability DERISK weighting perspective is LOW whereas a yet to be proven major parts of the heat and squeeze tech called CHTD,, has yet to be even PILOT tested?

It's heat,,,, AND squeeze,,,,,,using MEDIUM grade ( and you may find that it is the very upper definition of medium grade,,,( not cheap ) perhaps consistent with ''pilot definition'' ),,, HEAT energy,,,

Many here may have a concept of gaseous compression say 5 to 20 bar, T model ford to catapillar diesel fuel air ratio mixtures which create heat,,,but I guess many more would not have an understanding of any temp delta associated with a 65+% water/lignite slurry at 100 bar pressure.

For those not so fluid mechanics edified,,, tell me,,, does oceanic water at 1km depth ( 100 bar ) approach boiling point ? or freezing point ???

In other words,, ALL of the DFT stats for Coldry are known and calculable , but so far as the Heat,, squeeze,, and flash processes that combine to form CHTD are concerned,,, less than 50% of the process has been defined within the so called ''pilot plant'' phase.

Which means,, any DFT for such a process is impossible at this point in time using the imo up-scaled lab test bench 4t/h plant operating in Tazzy.

WRT representational,,,

Does this really sound like a ''pilot'' plant to you ?

Does this sound like a plant that fulfills ALDP criteria for EOI ?

Really ?

imo,, that is how the DPI would have to consider such a contrivance .

So if you are confused from a goose and gander gender logic conundrum perspective,,, I am confused wrt to your confusion from a perspective, that even a first year BSC earth science / physics student could make sense of.

Sorry Kranky,,, but until I am corrected or confirmed via ALDP short list intel,, I have to consider that the CHTD process has not fulfilled the ALDP criteria on more than 2 levels.

My opinion only based on my knowledge of such principals and physical laws.

As the Monashian orchestration is played out,,, I expect further 5%ers and 10%ers similar to K coal to be announced by MD and even an ARUP based anns, as NY plays the alleged hollow man game. Monash 3B's should not be discounted next week either.

As for who's on the ALDP short list,,,time will tell.