PO3 0.00% 22.0¢ purifloh limited

Ann: R&D Heads of Agreement with Osmoflo, page-4

  1. 717 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 118
    Thanks for tagging me my friend - not only once, twice. Thanks again

    Water treatment with this type of technology is not cost effective

    First, machines must be reliable (I am talking from my experience treating water for consumptionusing high end tech), which means maintenance is a good source of income. After 2 years, owners will discover that this is easy to maintain and it will not be a regular income

    Second point: Treatment is limited to the capacify of the tank... when you have a room and you pretend to disinfect it using a gas, the room is the container. In this case, you need a contact tower (made of stainless steel, otherwise it will oxidise).
    - Do we have this kind of capacity?

    Third point: There are more traditionals alternatives which are cost effective. Only good point here is to sell this a a 'green-tech' which is not (we need a lot of energy)....
    - Do we have the alternative to source this machine using renewable energy?

    Kind regards
    Your friend, Maxlots
    'Tech expert' - based on Tukebay opinion
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add PO3 (ASX) to my watchlist
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.