Li-related News/Articles/Reports, page-7426

So, your best and only excuse for claiming any *demonstration* of technical progress at all since half a decade ago is that they made a plant four times larger than the original plant which failed to produce anywhere remotely near nameplate, and they then built one four times larger which also operates at the same miniscule percentage of nameplate.

Seriously, that's the best you can do? How many years did that take?

By your standard, if they get the permit to build the 10,000TPA plant and abandon the 2,000TPA plant 'to focus on the industrial size plant' and in another five years they finish the 10,000TPA plant and it performs no better than a scaled up version of the abandoned 2,000TPA plant, you would claim in 2029 that we've seen even more tangible technical progress!

Seriously. That is the best you could do! You wrote that giant essay and among your usual str@w m@n arguments etc, that's the best matierial in it?

Whatever the problems were with the 500TPA plant which could not be solved, we have no definitive demonstration that they have been solved or progressed at all. This is not to say I claim zero progress has occurred behind the scenes, I have always said I assume some progress has occurred, no need for more of your ridiculous str@w m@n arguments, but scaling up a failed plant and getting no results beyond a scaled up version does not definitively demonstrate progress in terms of technical capability development. Even if you want to claim that it does, that would be your literal only example. Your position is literally that weak.