or
Remember me
Back
BCONTVentures wrote: And some great posts on Rio Tinto/IOC (Client B). Some great pics at the bottom of the post from @Namazon. BCONTVentures wrote: And from @ToolmanTim: @ToolmanTim Great find @cusam. Torches have been there for sometime and continue to be tested, but there were problems over the spring. Rio selected some of their oldest furnaces to try these torches in... not ideal condition. Existing power to the site was minimal and putting Capex into old furnaces was an internal hurdle. Early tests made it clear that the technology works but upgrades were needed to the power to properly facilitate the torches and their cooling units. Last I heard (July) they were waiting on finalizing a power for cooling strategy and have pushed a conclusion of testing report on all of it to: "by year end". Another interesting page (# 89) of that report you shared is headed: "Significant progress on decarbonisation applying renewables and technology" On the right is the statement: "Decarbonisation through renewable energy and pyrogenic options up to 2030, and technology breakthrough afterward" "pyrogenic options" = plasma... and not just for induration heat. "Pyrogenic" could mean plasma being used for: Gasification: Converting biomass, waste, or fossil fuels into synthesis gas (syngas), which can be used to produce electricity, hydrogen, or biofuels. Pyrolysis: Thermal decomposition of biomass or organic materials to produce bio-oil, syngas, or biochar, which can be used as energy sources or feedstocks. Torrefaction: A mild pyrolysis process to convert biomass into a coal-like material, making it easier to store and transport. Plasma gasification: Using plasma arcs to break down waste materials into syngas. Carbon-neutral pyrolytic fuels: Producing fuels from biomass or waste, which can be used in industrial processes or transportation. Pyrogenesis (PyroGreenGas) is the likely choice (seeing as they are already testing induration plasma torches) for any of these types of plasma uses. BCONTVentures wrote: And a great post from @cusam (on ceo) regarding Client B (Rio Tinto/IOC)'s plasma burner trials: @cusam Mention of IOC plasma trials in a presentation from a few days ago: https://lnkd.in/gJ54YVyp And from PyroGenesis' Q2 Business Update: Iron Ore Pelletization Torch Trials: As mentioned in previous Outlooks, the commissioning of the plasma torch systems – for use in the pelletization furnaces of a client previously identified as Client B – was underway, with the Company’s engineers onsite at Client B’s iron ore facility. The commissioning process includes installation, start-up, and site acceptance testing (SAT). The Company previously announced that it had shipped four 1 MW plasma torch systems for use in Client B’s iron ore pelletization furnaces, for trials toward potentially replacing fossil-fuel burners with plasma torches in Client B’s furnaces. As mentioned in previous Outlooks, this project continues to move forward, however the commissioning suffered a series of unforeseeable delays caused by, among other things, damaging regional torrential rainstorms that flooded and damaged the facility’s electrical system and furnace components, and intermittent power outages that led to damage of the plasma burners cooling system. Client B remains committed to the trials and additional process steps are being designed to account for the client’s particular mechanical and environmental risk variables. BCONTVentures wrote: Worth a repost: BCONTVentures wrote: Great comment from ceo: @ordos As usual those looking from outside think that they know better how the company should be run, having minimal knowledge about all the work behind the scenes. The recently posted Rio presentation demonstrated just how much is involved just to test the torches. A lot of supporting equipment, such as torch handling rails, power supplies, cooling systems, staff training, etc, etc. It can take months and months. Do we know how much is involved in powder qualification, locking down a process for production, etc? Rhetoric question. @Namazon It's nice to finally see a different picture of the induration torch in context and to see the actual size of it in comparison to the guy putting it in... Quite the flamethrower. BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
BCONTVentures wrote: And from @ToolmanTim: @ToolmanTim Great find @cusam. Torches have been there for sometime and continue to be tested, but there were problems over the spring. Rio selected some of their oldest furnaces to try these torches in... not ideal condition. Existing power to the site was minimal and putting Capex into old furnaces was an internal hurdle. Early tests made it clear that the technology works but upgrades were needed to the power to properly facilitate the torches and their cooling units. Last I heard (July) they were waiting on finalizing a power for cooling strategy and have pushed a conclusion of testing report on all of it to: "by year end". Another interesting page (# 89) of that report you shared is headed: "Significant progress on decarbonisation applying renewables and technology" On the right is the statement: "Decarbonisation through renewable energy and pyrogenic options up to 2030, and technology breakthrough afterward" "pyrogenic options" = plasma... and not just for induration heat. "Pyrogenic" could mean plasma being used for: Gasification: Converting biomass, waste, or fossil fuels into synthesis gas (syngas), which can be used to produce electricity, hydrogen, or biofuels. Pyrolysis: Thermal decomposition of biomass or organic materials to produce bio-oil, syngas, or biochar, which can be used as energy sources or feedstocks. Torrefaction: A mild pyrolysis process to convert biomass into a coal-like material, making it easier to store and transport. Plasma gasification: Using plasma arcs to break down waste materials into syngas. Carbon-neutral pyrolytic fuels: Producing fuels from biomass or waste, which can be used in industrial processes or transportation. Pyrogenesis (PyroGreenGas) is the likely choice (seeing as they are already testing induration plasma torches) for any of these types of plasma uses. BCONTVentures wrote: And a great post from @cusam (on ceo) regarding Client B (Rio Tinto/IOC)'s plasma burner trials: @cusam Mention of IOC plasma trials in a presentation from a few days ago: https://lnkd.in/gJ54YVyp And from PyroGenesis' Q2 Business Update: Iron Ore Pelletization Torch Trials: As mentioned in previous Outlooks, the commissioning of the plasma torch systems – for use in the pelletization furnaces of a client previously identified as Client B – was underway, with the Company’s engineers onsite at Client B’s iron ore facility. The commissioning process includes installation, start-up, and site acceptance testing (SAT). The Company previously announced that it had shipped four 1 MW plasma torch systems for use in Client B’s iron ore pelletization furnaces, for trials toward potentially replacing fossil-fuel burners with plasma torches in Client B’s furnaces. As mentioned in previous Outlooks, this project continues to move forward, however the commissioning suffered a series of unforeseeable delays caused by, among other things, damaging regional torrential rainstorms that flooded and damaged the facility’s electrical system and furnace components, and intermittent power outages that led to damage of the plasma burners cooling system. Client B remains committed to the trials and additional process steps are being designed to account for the client’s particular mechanical and environmental risk variables. BCONTVentures wrote: Worth a repost: BCONTVentures wrote: Great comment from ceo: @ordos As usual those looking from outside think that they know better how the company should be run, having minimal knowledge about all the work behind the scenes. The recently posted Rio presentation demonstrated just how much is involved just to test the torches. A lot of supporting equipment, such as torch handling rails, power supplies, cooling systems, staff training, etc, etc. It can take months and months. Do we know how much is involved in powder qualification, locking down a process for production, etc? Rhetoric question. @Namazon It's nice to finally see a different picture of the induration torch in context and to see the actual size of it in comparison to the guy putting it in... Quite the flamethrower. BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
BCONTVentures wrote: And a great post from @cusam (on ceo) regarding Client B (Rio Tinto/IOC)'s plasma burner trials: @cusam Mention of IOC plasma trials in a presentation from a few days ago: https://lnkd.in/gJ54YVyp And from PyroGenesis' Q2 Business Update: Iron Ore Pelletization Torch Trials: As mentioned in previous Outlooks, the commissioning of the plasma torch systems – for use in the pelletization furnaces of a client previously identified as Client B – was underway, with the Company’s engineers onsite at Client B’s iron ore facility. The commissioning process includes installation, start-up, and site acceptance testing (SAT). The Company previously announced that it had shipped four 1 MW plasma torch systems for use in Client B’s iron ore pelletization furnaces, for trials toward potentially replacing fossil-fuel burners with plasma torches in Client B’s furnaces. As mentioned in previous Outlooks, this project continues to move forward, however the commissioning suffered a series of unforeseeable delays caused by, among other things, damaging regional torrential rainstorms that flooded and damaged the facility’s electrical system and furnace components, and intermittent power outages that led to damage of the plasma burners cooling system. Client B remains committed to the trials and additional process steps are being designed to account for the client’s particular mechanical and environmental risk variables. BCONTVentures wrote: Worth a repost: BCONTVentures wrote: Great comment from ceo: @ordos As usual those looking from outside think that they know better how the company should be run, having minimal knowledge about all the work behind the scenes. The recently posted Rio presentation demonstrated just how much is involved just to test the torches. A lot of supporting equipment, such as torch handling rails, power supplies, cooling systems, staff training, etc, etc. It can take months and months. Do we know how much is involved in powder qualification, locking down a process for production, etc? Rhetoric question. @Namazon It's nice to finally see a different picture of the induration torch in context and to see the actual size of it in comparison to the guy putting it in... Quite the flamethrower. BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
BCONTVentures wrote: Worth a repost: BCONTVentures wrote: Great comment from ceo: @ordos As usual those looking from outside think that they know better how the company should be run, having minimal knowledge about all the work behind the scenes. The recently posted Rio presentation demonstrated just how much is involved just to test the torches. A lot of supporting equipment, such as torch handling rails, power supplies, cooling systems, staff training, etc, etc. It can take months and months. Do we know how much is involved in powder qualification, locking down a process for production, etc? Rhetoric question. @Namazon It's nice to finally see a different picture of the induration torch in context and to see the actual size of it in comparison to the guy putting it in... Quite the flamethrower. BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
BCONTVentures wrote: Great comment from ceo: @ordos As usual those looking from outside think that they know better how the company should be run, having minimal knowledge about all the work behind the scenes. The recently posted Rio presentation demonstrated just how much is involved just to test the torches. A lot of supporting equipment, such as torch handling rails, power supplies, cooling systems, staff training, etc, etc. It can take months and months. Do we know how much is involved in powder qualification, locking down a process for production, etc? Rhetoric question. @Namazon It's nice to finally see a different picture of the induration torch in context and to see the actual size of it in comparison to the guy putting it in... Quite the flamethrower. BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
BCONTVentures wrote: @Namazon Finally some definitive proof that we would have killed for a couple of years ago… these 2 names on the same page. Plus, it’s amazing to see all the work, at clearly some large expense, that has been put into making this “trial” happen. Makes me wonder what kind of company would go to these lengths… to only “try” this technology. ~3 to 6 more months… Meh! Gives you an idea the size of how big the equipment (and PYR's torches) are ^^.
Receive investor kits and email updates from Stockhouse and directly from these companies.
