RE:RE:RE:This can be life changing@marketsense Giving you my take from a chem eng background, I speculate that the reason why they have not named a prototype yet is because they have a working model from bench/lab test, but they just need to name one for pilot plant. Effectiveness of the tech was found to viable from the 10% silicon loading onto graphite anodes with third party validation, and it specifically mentions that the silicon loading will be increased.
Also you do not start a conceptual design for a pilot plant without a viable model, but the conceptual design for the pilot plant itself gives backing for the prototype. In other words, you need the working model to even think about the conceptual design. There are many firms that may name a prototype but not be able to start a pilot plant. Again this is what I speculate.
Today's NR was indeed dull but it was probably more clarification for the plant itself and how that backs the working model. I believe prototype does not equal working model (just semantics). But your healthy skepticism is good just providing you my insight.