Afc Energy Share Discussion Threads

[manxcat2] 29/3/2011 18:22

Jamonit, I imagine you can view KWC site without logging in, don't have to be a friend. Keep the faith.

[new tech] 29/3/2011 10:33

I also run the San Leon Energy (SLE) thread.



An update today confirms they expect to drill ten conventional wells this year and receive results from a pilot plant to extract oil from oil shale in Morocco next month.


Current share price 35.75p and some suggest the upside potential could be tens of pounds.

DYOR. No advice intended.

[apeman2] 28/3/2011 18:09

its more than we are getting from AFC.
Theres only B9 giving AFC any mention that i can see.
Expected news that beta was up and running End of March and Linc said they would be announcing something re AFC before Xmas or early in the new year.
Absolutely nothing from anywhere, very frustrating.

[smith99] 25/3/2011 15:36

I have a wife that fits that statement too ccr19958 :-)

[ccr1958] 25/3/2011 14:44

One day this will blow I have been in and out since last year . It is quite eratic I have to agree . C

[al h] 25/3/2011 14:01

Just the regular blip up .... unless there's news .... it'll slide further

[jonno1] 25/3/2011 13:49

...somethings happened by the look of it.

[beeezzz] 24/3/2011 16:44

I don't expect much action next week, unless AGM comes out with an announcement, probably all resolutions past as usual.

Edit: I meant the week after 6th april, april already and no news.

[dia43] 23/3/2011 00:16

no mention of AFC but of some onterest.

[realism] 21/3/2011 19:10

AFC is taking orders, no time for PR! LOL

[beeezzz] 21/3/2011 16:46

Acal - fuel cell mentioned in Telegraph - saying Alcal's Platinum free cathode technology, which removes the need for 90% of the Platinum used in conventional fuel cells and simplifies the overall system, should cut unit costs by 40%. The holy grail is getting fuel cells in cars. ie. ITM, cella and many more

It also says there are 100's of companies developing fuel cell technology.

No mention of AFC, they seem to be off the radar with all green energy articles, nothing, still going on the benefits of Wind power, simply because that's the only thing that politicians can understand. "A simple explanation minister, that large white thing going round generates electricity, marvellous, let's subsidise them with tax payers money."

[simon_64] 18/3/2011 08:18

Thanks Realism.

[realism] 17/3/2011 20:57

Japan's nuclear crisis blows open debate on future energy
by ClickGreen staff. Published Thu 17 Mar 2011 17:29
Opening up the wider energy debate

In the aftermath of the Japanese earthquake and resulting tsunami, amid fears of a radiological disaster, commentators worldwide are postulating one question: is this the end of nuclear power? Alisa Murphy, CEO of B9 Coal, argues here that they ought to be discussing the wider energy mix.

"The scale of the human tragedy and economic cost of the explosions at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant are undoubtedly tremendous. As analysts attempt to assess the long-term fallout, one resounding fact is clear: it is time to take new safe, clean, sustainable energy solutions seriously. With non-polluting options (i.e. nuclear) called into question, we cannot afford to be complacent about energy issues any longer.

Global governments' response to Japan's crisis have been markedly tempered. Concerned by global energy shortages and climate change they are acting cautiously; too readily accepting that nuclear is necessarily part of a credible energy mix.

With an existing £40 billion invested in eight sites in England and Wales, British Energy Secretary Chris Huhne was careful to note that 'It's far too early to tell at this stage whether there will be any impact on the investment climate'.

Keen to appease both left and right, US President Barack Obama quickly defended the technology. And German Chancellor Angela Merkel's ostensibly hard-line response may have been more of a political strategy in the wake of upcoming state elections. But China's u-turn decision to freeze approvals for new nuclear reactors will demand an adequate response from the West.

The Financial Times notes that the cost of gas and coal – the two main alternative commodities for power generation – has risen sharply since Friday, as has the price for trading carbon emissions. It is pertinent that Japan's crisis does not become an excuse to return to the dirty technologies of yesterday.

With renewables currently too unreliable to support a sustained energy solution, and oil prices rising as supplies diminish, it would be all too easy to rely on today's fickle media to sweep Fukushima under the table rather than opening up the wider energy debate.

Until renewable technologies reach the required stage of development to meet growing demand reliably and affordably, a transitional solution that efficiently and cleanly uses the world's remaining fuel resources is essential.

Well-meaning talk from politicians is not enough: we need serious investment in a low-carbon future and real commitment to transitional technologies. B9 Coal, a pioneering British company based in London, is doing just that.

Earlier this week, at the Advanced Power Generation Technology Forum (APGTF) in DECC's offices, it was widely recognised that carbon capture and storage (CCS) needs to be accelerated and extended in light of events in Japan.

There is growing agreement that long-term CCS could be a logical beneficiary of fuel switching from nuclear to fossil fuels. B9 Coal's fuel cell power stations offer the most commercially attractive CCS model proposed to date.

B9 Coal has created a world first template for commercially attractive, flexible, clean energy projects with the ambition of revolutionising the way we produce electricity. By combining revolutionary alkaline fuel cells with fossil fuels in a carbon capture–ready model, B9 Coal provides an essential step in the move to a low carbon future.

These power stations offer the benefits of highly efficient power generation and the ability to load-follow to meet peak demand. The company is stimulating a reassessment in attitudes towards fossil fuel power generation and the possibility of decoupling coal use and the adverse environmental impacts traditionally associated with it.

The alkaline fuel cells developed by AFC Energy are the most efficient method of converting hydrogen to electricity. AFC Energy's system is low-cost, low-pressure and developed for large scale deployment.

The company has been making significant developments across a range of industries including chlorine production and electricity from waste. Integrated with the B9 Coal model, the fuel cells offer a pull through solution for CCS and will provide a fundamental building block in the development of a hydrogen economy.

Investing in this British technology would not only combat reliance on foreign reserves, but position the UK as a global leader on CCS and low-carbon energy solutions.

Despite Mr Huhne's concerns over existing investments, CCS actually has considerable technical, economic and safety advantages over new-build nuclear.

In particular, pre-combustion technologies with fuel cells have a highly flexible output, and can back-up a greater capacity of intermittent renewable technologies like offshore wind. In contrast, nuclear stations are far less flexible in output and therefore less able to support the development of the UK's marine renewable resources.

Under current nuclear roll-out plans, it would take billions of pounds of investment to produce a relatively small percentage of the UK's electricity needs each year. Re-directing this enormous cost towards CCS has potentially huge advantages for national energy security.

The UK Government has formalised its commitment to investing in CCS demonstration projects, but development is hugely stalled; something which is not only frustrating for the energy industry but also detrimental to our emissions targets.

Coal and gas will inevitably be a substantial part of the future energy mix, therefore the only viable answer is to reassess the ways in which we use them developing efficient and responsible solutions. This is all the more clear in the wake of the horrific tragedy unfolding in Japan. The decision whether new nuclear should be included in the UK energy mix can wait until 2020, acting to preserve our current energy reserves by investing in CCS cannot."

[apeman2] 17/3/2011 18:34

If you go to this new website you will see B9 flying the flag for AFC/LINC and the potential future of Power Generation.

[simon_64] 17/3/2011 16:30

Agree apeman

Think we have seen the low should see a steady increase over the next week or two if test results don't come sooner and then a rapid increase.

[apeman2] 17/3/2011 14:45

As I read it, they state that funds will be likely to come in from advance deposits for orders, where is the dilution in that?

[davidosh] 17/3/2011 06:03

Whether Jak is a shorter or not it does not automatically mean it is not worth debating any issues raised. A company can be very overvalued in the eyes of some investors whilst undervalued in the eyes of others. The discussion may help to find the price somewhere in the middle ! A quick look at the chart suggests there is a lot of ground for amicable discussion. Even the brokers seem to conclude that funds will be required so further dilution is on the way.

[apeman2] 16/3/2011 20:45

Lorgibil, jak is a self proclaimed shorter of AFC. He is not gonna say anything good about AFC because he wants the share price to go down. No use debating things with him its not on his agenda.

[lordgibil] 16/3/2011 20:22

Evening Jaknife. Actually I don't see anything wrong with my post above, AFC have plenty of cash to get them past the point of commercialisation and at that point they expect that, after selling the first few megawatts, they will use an Esco model to obtain financing. This I understand to be a bit like a lease agreement where an order is placed and an outside financier gives AFC the funds required to fulfil the order and then they share the return from the energy produced.

Also they say that they have already taken advance orders and from your above quote from the Allenby report they expect to receive funds up front. Given this it looks unlikely that they will need to go to shareholders and, as you point out, they have plenty of funds until 2013.

On to your second comment that "AFC have consistently failed to meet their business plan in every year since they came to market", which is news to me!
I have been a shareholder of AFC for over a year now and I am quite confused by your statement. Certainly the 2 independent CPI reports have given them glowing praise on their progress over that year and the market evidently agrees.

You really can't expect a company to develop groundbreaking and world beating technology easily and without encountering some difficulties along the way but it appears from a number of sources that they are just on the verge of achieving that target. I certainly wouldnt want to be short on this when the successful trial of the Beta system is announced