Dear All,

Someone asked me a question privately that I thought everyone could benefit from the answers.

Here it is I have answered in red:

Good morning ,

My question is basically how does the collaboration of these companies involved with HYBRIT impact what we are trying to do promoting the plasma torch in the pelletization process?
It looks like they believe they are not expecting this hydrogen process to be up and running for a number of years? Does this put us in direct competition?

Plasma and hydrogen are two possible solutions to the decarbonization of the steel industry. The disadvantage of hydrogen is that you need to build large-scale hydrogen production facilities to feed a whole iron pelletization plant. Generally, it would be done with electrolysis of water, which consumes large amounts of electricity. Plasma torches also use electricity, but they convert it directly to high temperature heat, essentially bypassing the need for hydrogen.

Where it appears the hydrogen is 100% carbon neutral, can we conceive iron or pelletization companies may hold out with capex until that technology comes around or could we be a stop gap?

If the source of electricity used to make hydrogen is carbon neutral, then so is the hydrogen. However, so would our plasma torches, since they are 100% electric.

Could hydrogen be a feed stock for Plasma torches?

No, there would not be an advantage to operating the plasma torch with hydrogen. One of our advantages is that the torch can run on compressed air, making it simple and less expensive than the production of hydrogen.

One other big advantage of the plasma torches is that there are no combustible or explosive gasses. With hydrogen, there are risks of fire and explosions which pose a real danger to the operators. Not so with the plasma torches.

Hope that Helps

Peter