TNG CONSIDERED COMMENTS, page-44

Due to the intermittent nature of solar and wind as a power generation source, a battery is needed or at least is a wiser option. Especially as green hydrogen production requires a lot of electricity. This wouldn't be unique to TNG, other than TNG demonstrating having climbed up the value chain as a battery player. The choice of an operating VRFB will be a showcase for TNG to support further VRFB sales. FFI and other green hydrogen players would also need a battery, VRFB or otherwise.

In my recollection, the TNG mine site hydrogen was earlier mooted as alternative to AGV in Darwin, most likely blue hydrogen produced with gas. But in one of the recent interviews, JF or PB mentioned, or at least indicated, AGV would also supply the green hydrogen generation capability at the mine site (one way or another, they have indicated wanting to use hydrogen as a fuel at Mt Peake). Transporting hydrogen from Darwin to Mt Peake might not be viable. If hydrogen production becomes real at Mt Peake, use of hydrogen-fueled trucks and other such vehicles might also become a reality in the near future (of course, we need to turn soil well before then) https://www.nproxx.com/case-study-hydrogen-powered-mine-truck-for-anglo-american-mine/ The last paragraphs support such a possibility and also contributing to further cost savings for TNG (relative to what it will cost first to install the green hydrogen + solar farm facility at Mt Peake).