Hydrogen News, page-105

Hey inductor,

My thoughts on a small plant would be that the efficiencies would be reduced.

Anyone I have spoken to about FBR’s say that they ‘love to be scaled up’. I.e efficiency increases. On top of that my understanding of the financial situation in regards to plant size might be say 15mil for a small plant, and 30mil for a larger plant with 3 or 4 times the capacity. Obviously very simplistic, but You get the idea..

Now as ohrweh pointed out, capacities have increased with newer reactor modifications and from memory the last real announcement in regards to the FBR it increased 300% in its capacity... so in essence they have a small plant in operation now, that I thought they were going to use for a demo plant. But it is probably lacking the facility of a Pressure Swing Absorber for H2 purification and the necessary hardware for the allowance for the ‘eco methane’ path.

And from previous announcements also, they are still using the Pilot to test variations of catalyst and temp and pressure settings. Andrew Harris said that the number of variations of settings for the possibilities of the reactions numbered in the tens of thousands, and if each run reaction took a day and then analysis of the samples etc etc...

Now considering all that, they would have to have ‘sweet spots’ that the reaction works well and causes the best levels of graphite and hydrogen etc. And with any system there are always new efficiencies discovered down the track that can be ‘patched’ into existing systems if they were sold now.

So if they are in discussions with so many massive companies, what’s the hold up? It seems I have been hearing that line since Michael Wills was doing investor relations, and Geoff Pocock was CEO.

GLTAH