Co2 Solutions Inc COSLF

Does anyone know how much power CST's solution takes?

[Co2Harvest]

Some interesting numbers from SaskPower's Boundary Dam in the link below. From this, the BD3 capture unit was sapping 15% of the power from the system before this summer's temporary shut down. I imagine it's better with the upgrades but wonder how it will compare to CST when they are able to scale up to that size. My understanding from everything I've read is that CST's solution places a  "reduced parasitic load" on the system relative to conventional carbon capture means. It would be great if CST published numbers about that for the world to see, or maybe they have and I just haven't seen them. 

https://www.estevanmercury.ca/news/business-energy/bd3-carbon-capture-up-and-running-after-three-months-down-1.22737268

[M101]

Shouldn't there be zero parasitic load attributable to tapping off steam, so then it's all for electrical demand which will differ between rpb and tower?  I haven't stayed up to date on this. That was an odd article, who itemizes a plumbing suspension as a reason for project delay?

[Co2Harvest]

Thanks, that's what I was thinking as well. So I wonder why the words "zero parasitic load" are not prominent anywhere on their site? This is a big deal for a potential client unless the electrical needs offset the savings when they scale up?

[M101]

If you go back to the breakthrough announcement of APR 23 2015  (restated 6 days later because the market didn't understand) you get to the relevant ambiguity: "Modelling of CO2 Solutions’ technology indicates that by using this low-grade heat, the effective parasitic load on the emitting power plant can be reduced to only 0.2 GJ/tonne of CO2 captured. Parasitic load is a measure

[Co2Harvest]

Thanks M101, I just took a look at that Apr 23 2015 release, and that result is impressive. Thank you for sharing.