Thanks MrG - another good link.PWN has the funding model based...

Thanks MrG - another good link.

PWN has the funding model based very much on how much extra profit can be obtained using BPaaS, but the focus elsewhere is often on water quality rather than economics. Without economic incentive, it could be tricky to convince companies to commit and a link contained in one of your documents pointed to this . . . https://www.waternewseurope.com/poland-pilot-plant-recovers-salt-and-clean-water-from-wastewater-coal-mine/ . . . where they note how difficult it would be to get a full scale plant constructed as the payback was 8 - 10 years.

This tech was able to extract and separate out salts, much like PWN is doing and is suggesting it as a source of potential income, though I think the salt recovery (82.8% in testing) was lower than aMES is managing - could be wrong, should look it up. The Polish installation was still producing a concentrated brine as well as clear water, so I believe there's advantage to PWN there. With reasonably quick payback, PWN should have an edge in mining applications. Possibly uses less energy as well. Here is a bit more info . . . https://zerobrine.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Factsheet-PL_EN.pdf . . . for anyone interested. Poland loves their coal, especially with Duda in charge.

Anyway, it could be that giving aMES a shove this year was not just because it's ready, but also because there's a race on against competing techs, especially if competitors are already building pilot plants on the back of EU funding etc.

Don't want to be the betamax of brine processing.

Cheers