My Reply to NewEconomy:
If the Zcell, in its current design, was capable of operating for extended periods of time (i.e. days and/or weeks, not hours) when the air temp is below 15C, the company would simply say so (after all, this is critical information for potential customers). But the company can't say this because the current design of the CZell is not suitable for operating in climates that regularly fall below 15C. As the Zcell is not a commercially-ready product (is still very much in testing mode as per "soft roll out"), the best the company can say is this:
"we expect that outside ambient temperatures substantially below this level [i.e., 15C] will not be a factor unless they are sustained for long periods (long enough for the electrolyte temperature to reach this limit point). For most domestic locations in Australia we expect that no special actions will need to be taken with our battery in this regard. However some very cold areas, it might be necessary to place the battery indoors or in an otherwise warmer-than-ambient environment to avoid reaching the minimum operating temperature of the electrolyte." (ZCell FAQ on ZCell website)
This intentionally vague statement raises two obvious questions for shareholders and potential Zcell customers: (1) What is the company's definition of "long periods" below 15C? (2) What is the company's definition of "very cold areas."? The fact is, the company doesn't know the answer to these questions because this is not a market ready product. (If it did know the answers, it would simply say so). Potential customers will never get specific answers to these critical questions because the company doesn't know the specific answers. Without clear, unambiguous answers to these critical questions, the company is essentially asking potential customers to take a huge gamble on temperature. This is no way to conduct a viable business.
If you want to install a Zcell in southern Australia, and you want to be confident that it will work all year round, you will need to build a specially built insulated and ventilated enclosure with a heater to ensure that the electrolyte stays at its optimum temperature. This is what the company is alluding to when it says "it might be necessary to place the battery indoors or in an otherwise warmer-than-ambient environment to avoid reaching the minimum operating temperature of the electrolyte." And this special environment will likely add at least $2k to the cost of installation because it is dangerous to install a Zcell in your house (toxic gases). The Zcell is also noisy and has a large footprint.
IF the Zcell never vents toxic gases the company would simply say so. But the company can't say this because the company knows from testing that the rudimentary capture system isn't full proof; the Zcell will occasionally emit hydrogen and bromine gas under normal operation. There is no "safe" level of Bromine gas if you inhale it.
http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/10-health-dangers-of-bromine/
I agree with NewEconomy that the practical risks of Zcell toxic gas inhilation are roughly the same as chlorine gas inhalation for pool owners. However, the key difference between a pool and a Zcell is that no one is trying to sell a chlorinated pool as a safe, environmentally friendly product. But Redflow is trying to sell the Zcell as a safe, environmentally friendly product. This it most certainly is not. Indeed, under the right conditions, there is a small chance that Bromine gas emitted from a Zcell can combine with methane (in sunlight) to form a gas that destroys the Ozone layer. All this toxic gas stuff kind of detracts from the 'green' credentials of the Zcell. I don't see genuine environmentalists (who are the "early adopters" the company is counting on) wanting to go near a Zcell.
The Powerwall has recently fallen in price to $10k fully installed for at least one retailer. If the Zcell still had a warranted price/kwh that was cheaper than a Powerwall, the company and analysts would be saying so. But the company and analysts can't say this anymore because the Zcell is now 3c more expensive than a Powerwall on a warranted kwh basis. (I haven't done the calcs with other Li Ion products, but I suspect it is now more expensive than most of these also).
With respect to likely Zcell sales this financial year, punters should ask themsleves the following question: How many environmentally conscious early adoptors are going to pay $19,500 for a product that is (1) more expensive than the competition by every measure, (2), probably wont work (or only work intermittently) during the Southern Australian winter, and (3) will occasionally release small quanties of toxic gas??
In the absence of any hard data on Zcell sales (not expected now until next year), I think an 18c share price ($72mill market cap) accurately reflects the risks facing this company at present.
