GREY:COSLF - Post by User
Comment by
Co2Harveston Jul 27, 2019 3:34pm
73 Views
Post# 29967373
RE:RE:RE:RE:Inventys plug
RE:RE:RE:RE:Inventys plugI should add that CST's answer to Investys's tech is their own second-generation Rotating Packed Bed (RPB) technology which reduces the size of the solution by 20-30x, which should also materially reduce capex. CST is way ahead from a product development standpoint, and have never stopped researching and improving. Their challenge is not their technology, it's about capital at this stage. Inventys is beating CST at the fundraising game.
Co2Harvest wrote: There are probably more reasons than this but here are three for now. 1) The enzyme can be largely be used as a drop in replacement for amines in an existing post combustion setup (Inventys uses a completely different architecture). 2) It's the least expensive tech available (Inventys hopes to approach $30-50 a tonne, whereas CST is already below that and continuing to reduce costs). And 3) CST is ahead of Inventys in terms of scale (though, maybe not for too long given that Inventys has lots of $$$ to scale up with).
JonSnow19 wrote: CO2 Harvest, why do you say that CST technology is better than the Inventys ?