Your and bCONtventures claim that Torches are cleanest burning is simply false. here is my response to a post on agoracom . I invited a response from the company . If you are legitimate investors you should be wanting it too.
Good Moning
You are assuming that the electricity to power the torches is green . Hydrocarbons are still used to generate aprox 60 % of the worlds electricity.
Examples
Hydrocarbon use for generation . Canada 18% Brazil 20% United States 60% Australia 80% China 70 % Germany 70% or more and coal climbing All the countries listed use coal which is double the emissions of natural gas
Until the countries run 100% renewable and have excess power it is a false economy to claim that the torches are green. They are as dirty as the dirtiest fuels burned in the generating stations supplyng the grid and may be worse with losses in generation and transmission.
Even if torches are directly tied to a hydro dam or solar the power taken to keep the lights on in the the rest of the country is shifted to the gas or coal fed portion of the grid . Brazil for example continues to build new gas plants and still burns coal.
Until a country is 100% clean energy in the grid the massive load of the torches is as dirty as the dirtiest coal or gas powering the grids. As plasma is 15% less efficient , not including additional line loss of aprox 5% then Natural gas the torches are dirtier and cause more CO2 emmisions than burning gas directly in the torches and if the grid still uses coal anywhere than the torches are dirtier than coal.
An even more shocking calculation may be that the newest Natural Gas power plants are under 60 % thermal efficiency while coal is 37 % thermal efficiency and this has to be a substantial factor when comparing the "whole picture"
In theory the burning of Natural gas directly in torches may be 50 % LESS CO2 than Plasma torches in a partially gas fired grid and since coal is double gas for CO2 the final answer could be shocking . In addition Plasma causes NOx which contributes to acid rain,
I of course would welcome a more accurate analysis by Pyrogenesis engineers as I may be missing factors and rounded . Again I would think they would have studied this and should be readily available.
IMHO this is Robbing Peter to pay Paul and might be paying with a " tax"
And again I am and have never directly or indirectly held a short position in HPQ or PYR