RE:Just want to address the CO2 issueFully agreed with what you said below, Misbrandt. And please also note, a state like Virginia is the first in the South to target 100% clean energy, to push fossil fuels to zero and clean energy to 100%. Looking at Texas, share of wind and solar electricity rapidly growing (already exceeded % from coal last year) and most Texas electricity providers offer 100% renewable energy electricity plans. Similar things happening in many, many more US states and other countries, not just Sweden. Also look at the ambitions of Frans Timmermans (Executive Vice President of The European Commission for the European Green Deal).
In other words, this is just simply (and very rapidly) becoming an additional selling point for Pyrogenesis and only reinforces the (already very strong) case for Pyrogenesis'electricity based plasma torches to replace any fossil fuel based burners.
Misbrandt wrote:
I see comments along the lines of "replacing a fuel burning torch with an electricity using torch in a location where electricity is produced with fossil fuels is less efficient and causes more GHG", which, while true, makes the assumption that it is necessarily a problem for PYR. Guess what, Sweden is 55% renewables and 30% nuclear. Unless there is a dedicated grid PYR torches are pulling from that is guaranteed green, sure, the end result of using electricity will not be zero GHG emission; in Sweden it will be pretty close (and a lot better than fuel burners). Similar for regions like Quebec. Further, even if it doesn't make a ton of sense looking at the macro, the company switching to burners is no longer creating the GHGs, the electricity company is. Finacers will care about that distinction (look at electric cars right now, very few regions can provide zero GHG power production, but getting people to transition to EVs and building infrastructure to support EVs creates additional pressure on government to invest in green energy production). This isn't even taking into account avoiding the logistics of safely transporting and safely storing heavy fuel. Overall the argument fails especially given Sweden is where the contract will be coming from. Good argument though if an iron ore pelletization company in Virgina is looking for PYR torches.