PyroGenesis Inc T.PYR

RE:RE:Hydrogen likely better than electricity to produce iron ore

[Casavantsghost]

My recollection of this poster Tcheck or Tchick or Chuck steak is that it morffed from a positive poster accepting its initial risk with a small cap stock, to a quasi subliminal negative poster. 

It may have been that the individual was looking for a quick hit, who knows. 

I'm not even saying that this type of investment strategy isn't valid. Timing is everything right? Those who had the foresight to get out at the highs or sell some at the highs, kudos to them. 

Everyone's time horizon and risk aversion is different and that goes without saying.

Tcheck is exhibiting some sort of psychosis stress with his position and acceptance there of. I'm not making light of it but one should reconsider how they invest if they are unable to come to the table accepting the risk. 

 

MidtownGuy wrote: Incorrect.

Because you didn't bother to read any of the background information on this, here are the facts:

1/ Fortescue's ability to deliver "green iron", and "green iron ore" has nothing to do with pelletization or lack thereof. It is entirely about using green energy sources -- battery power, ammonia, and hydrogen -- to power the drill rigs, haul trucks, trains, and ship engines that dig and ship the ore. So in the absence of using carbon burning materials to get it out of the ground and delivered, the ore is considered "green".

In fact, here is the list of things and processes they did specifically:
https://www.miningmonthly.com/natural-resources/news/1413295/fmg%E2%80%99s-green-fuels-milestones

And here is the original release from the company:
https://www.fmgl.com.au/docs/default-source/announcements/ffi-delivers-on-ambitious-stretch-targets.pdf?sfvrsn=91341964_2

2/ Then, that "green ore" -- which again is just standard ore but dug and shipped using battery or gas powered equipment instead of diesel -- was turned into  iron, using a continuous flow process (simply a term that means when materials are being processedt by a system that never shuts down). A blast furnace for steel making is a continuous flow process, but in this case they've indicated some lower temperature approach, and since it's "green" it's either via direction reduction and electric arc furnace below melting point using a reducing gas mix like hydrogen and carbon monoxide, or via an alkaline-based collodial process -- such as this: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2015/ra/c4ra14576c/unauth --- that electrolyzes the ore.

Regardless, none of this has anything to do with PYR, as it's down stream from pelletization, and both blast furnaces and direct reduction processes can start with pellets as their feed stock.

3/ No mention whatsoever was made regarding the nature of the feed stock, nor the ore steps prior to delivery (such as pellet making), so no assumptions can be made about what process they did or didn't use to make pellets, or whether they used lump ore, pellets, or fines (powdered ore remnants), which are the feed options at all times.

 

Tcheck wrote: Fortescue Future Industries (FFI) successfully produced high-purity iron of 97% Fe from Fortescue’s iron ores without using coking coal and at low temperatures.

i wouldn t bet so much on plasmatechnology 
to revolutionise the iron pellet industry as of yet .hydrogen production soon will be affordable and is more appropriate .
luckily we have other irons in the fire :) 

Fortescue produces first green iron ore, part of carbon neutrality goal