What I get from your post is a massive confusion, you (and in that regard I know that you are not alone behind this, Stocky is involved and maybe his “professor” from the last time he took on Peter of Pyro, (KD)) as you are trying to extract information from the press release that are simply not there…

Anyway you will find my reply underline after your comments…

The January 2017 report states that the yield increased from 0.1 gram to 8.8 grams (on test 32) in a single test (I always understood it was one batch per test for Gen 1) And it was also stated in the news release that a 9000 % increase in yield was achieved. 

There is no confusion in what was stated in words. The images do not seem to offer further clarification since they are photographs comparing two different tests (batches?), that the test 32 batch was made up of a bunch of chunks does not seem to change what was stated. Am I understanding this correctly?

No, remember that in you first question you were confusing the 8 gr of the largest individual chunk of Si with GEN 2 with the 8.8 gr total amount produce with Gen 1…  and I covered that subject already…

You are starting another completely different line of questioning…

Anyway as long as wasting my time let go back to what was actually stated in the January 2017 press release:

·      ·As a result, yield went from less than 0.1 g to 8.8 g (test #32), an increase of approximately 9,000% (hundredfold).

 Now using the same wording as our last press release, that is the same as saying

·      The total mass of Si produced during one Gen 1 PUREVAP™ test is 10 times greater than the previous GEN 1 PUREVAP™ tests.

Now in this week press release, we said:

·      The total mass of Si produced during one Gen 2 PUREVAP™ test is 11.5 times greater than the average of the top 20 GEN 1 PUREVAP™ tests.

 So bottom line Gen 2 is working as expected we are producing more Si… 

 And in my previous reply to you, I even covered the improvement from test #32 and the Gen 2 results…

·      The total mass of Si produced during one Gen 2 test is 2.5 times (+250%) the highest Gen 1 production result, attained only once during the 94 Gen 1 tests program.

 So the conclusion is clear, the Gen 2 is working as expected we are producing more Si…

 I agree that if people don’t pay attention they may confuse the usage of the term “yield” used in the January 2017 press release, which clearly refers to the increase in total production, and the usage of the term maximum “production yield” in the November report… but these are clearly two different terms whereby production yield clearly refers to the conversion factor between the quartz that comes in the process and how much Si is produced…

Since the final overall report from November 2017 indicated that the maximum yield obtained during testing of Gen 1 was less than 10% and that test 32 produced 8.8 grams (at maximum yield of less than 10%), the recent Gen 2 test report must actually be indicating that the 8.5 gram batch yield used 5.7 Times less Quartz. A great result!

Just to re-cap, test 32 was reported to have produced in a single batch, 8.8 grams of silicon, with the highest yield at a yield less than 10% (based on the final report) which means that the Quartz feedstock quantity must have been about 88 grams (about 900 % above theoretical requirement). 

What you have written make no rimes or reasons, how can one make any supposition base on the following statement:

 “Tests confirmed that the Si production yield of the Gen 1 PUREVAP™ played an important role on the final purity of the Si produce, as its maximum production yield was limited to below 10%.”

There is simply no credible way to make that type of math… simply because below 10% is large, and you will agree stating below 10% does not implies that it 10%

The new Gen2 unit is reported to have increased the yield by 5.7 times. This can only have been achieved by reducing the amount of Quartz feed used by about 5.7 times, which suggests the amount of Quartz used to make the reported 8.5 grams must have been around  14.9 grams. Is my understanding correct Bernard?

NO, wow whoever told you to write that should return his $1,000 how to make Si book,.

What we said in the press release is:

·      Gen 2 PUREVAP™ is achieving significantly higher production yield 5.7 times more (+469%)

Remember production yield clearly refers to the conversion factor between the quartz that comes in the process and how much Si is produced…

All that this implies is that the GEN 2 is working as expected, since we expected production yield to increase…

In addition to the greatly reduced amount of Quartz used, the Gen 2 batch was produced 23 times faster than the fastest time in Gen 1, according to the latest report. Also a great result!

In the last paragraph, the only word I agree with is Great result. The rest is total fiction…

This all based on what has been reported in published news releases indicates that the Gen 2 yield now only has to be increased by 14.9/8.5 (about 175%) to get to 100% yield. Clearly the maximum practical may only be 90% yield as indicated in the final report from November, so a yield improvement of about 165% is required to get to where the purity is expected to be around 4N according to the final Gen 1 report.

Please correct me where I have misunderstood Bernard.

Saint, you are making statements that do not make any sense and you are trying to extract information that is not there…

The aims of the PR was not to explain all that we are doing, but simply to report back to shareholders that the Gen 2 is working as expect and that we are on track.

One last point, you have to remember that before our pr is release it is reviewed by PhD at PyroGenesis and then Pyrogenesis CTO confirms that he has validated the technical content on the press release…. So you can rest assured that what is written is back up with the appropriate scientific data…

I seriously hope this is your last question on the subject..