RE:RE:RE:RE:Tata Steel Not sure it helps, but I will add the following. "Plasma torch" is mentioned in the article. The slide show presentation gives a timeline of industrial deployment not starting to take place before 2030 so there is a lot of testing to be done.
Another point for consideration is the naming of Tata Steel and SMS/Paul Worth. The stuff is patent pending and obviously neither of the parties want to be unnamed for competitive reasons. In fact, it seems like they want to be recognized for what they are doing. So, logically speaking, if Pyro was a part of this, wouldn't these two companies want it to be identified as part of this project? And if not, would they recognize a new technology by an unnamed partner since they provide such a detailed description of their solution? Form your own opinion.
As an investor, I am at a point where nothing cryptic will sway me to buy more. Transparency. Results. We can't even find out what is going on with a large accounts receivable sitting on the balance sheet at a point when the company needs cash. Fact, not speculation.