This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

CFU - Ceramic Fuel Cells

Jump to new
frank,

I think that as mentioned by others the utilities are necessarily conservative and if I was in their shoes I would never make a big company wide commitment to partially field tested technology that has a question over its service intervals.
Whether this is sorted or not, they will not commit their reputation and steady way of operating to this until it is clear to them that there is little risk and it offers them the financial rewards they would require, whether its offsets of just dollars and bonus reputation points.
If I was Origin for example, I would be more inclined to go the wind farm route (understood, developed, feasible and accepted plus supported by gov), burn my gas in turbines, utilize the power lines and sell that and keep bluegen as an interest on test until it is very clear that it is going to do what it is designed for - which is a fantastic idea (are we allowed to use that word here?)
With CFU, a great product line and looking good, but why would utilities rush in a new technology when the earnings from producing other ways is working for them? (this is not rhetorical, I am asking a question here)

cheers, hope everyone is having a good weekend.
2c
 
Fine, that was then, this is now.
I'm am not wasting my time looking back, moving forward, remember.
Things have changed, and energy supply will be changed so the current suppliers wont benefit from selling more power.
Utilities are and will continue to be stripped of their monopolies, with new entries such as Google, Virgin, the like, not along way off from their entries into the power markets.

You sort of misunderstand that these small generators will only make up a small portion of the mix, not a huge expensive investment or switch at all, for any utility.

No more risk than putting solar on the roof of houses, which they are doing,
no more expensive either. And of huge benefit to gas companies.
 
Ceramic fuel cells to recieved $3.9 mil from legal case.

They won the case. Cashflow problem solved

Watch the share price rise today
 
They will now have 15.5 mil cash in bank.

I estimate negative cashflow will be -4.5 a quarter as there should be no more capital equipment requirements. That means they have enough money for 3 more quarters easily.
 
Knobby22 said:
They will now have 15.5 mil cash in bank.

I estimate negative cashflow will be -4.5 a quarter as there should be no more capital equipment requirements. That means they have enough money for 3 more quarters easily.
Click to expand...

I think you are right Knobby,
and further to that, if the orders dont come in, in the next 6 months,
they never will.
That is that, the end of the fuel cell experiment, as far as CFCL is concerned.
If there are no takers, it wont be that the product is not good enough.
It will be that there is no market for it.
At least at this time anyway.
So, this is it, last roll of the dice.
 
By the way,
http://www.wabusinessnews.com.au/en-story/1/82799/Oakvale-in-6-8m-Ceramic-settlement

After legal costs and IMF's share of the settlement sum, Ceramic said it will receive approximately $3.9 million.

In a separate statement, IMF said it will receive $2.9 million and generate a profit after capitalised overheads of approximately $1.9 million.

"IMF is considering a proposal to fund further litigation by Ceramic Fuel Cells against other parties for the balance of its losses," IMF said in a statement.
 
frankblack said:
I think you are right Knobby,
and further to that, if the orders dont come in, in the next 6 months,
they never will.
Click to expand...

Its unfortunate the gfc rolled around when it did for this stock as the oil crisis, environment etc went straight out the window.
 
Knobby22 said:
They will now have 15.5 mil cash in bank.

I estimate negative cashflow will be -4.5 a quarter as there should be no more capital equipment requirements. That means they have enough money for 3 more quarters easily.
Click to expand...

Gday Knobby22, this hasnt stopped them putting their hand out for more bucks apparently..
"funds will be used to take the Company to the next stage of development, including scaling up production to meet expected future demand including working capital and manufacturing investment."

I would have been happier to read to meet existing orders.
.. maybe they have forgotten to tell us something about a big fat juicy sales order.
 
You would think that this would have been like Icarus and flown too close to the sun by now surely. It creates electricity and places it back into the grid. It replacs old heaters and creates heating to our homes. It is cost effective. It is carbon neutral. IT TICKS ALL THE BOXES !!

So why oh why isn't this technology readily available and why isn't CFU at $43.17 by now ?? HUH ?
 
Whether or not it is cost effective depends very much on the selling price.
 
Trainspot,

This statement of your has a couple of errors..

It is cost effective. It is carbon neutral. IT TICKS ALL THE BOXES !!
Click to expand...

So why oh why isn't this technology readily available and why isn't CFU at $43.17 by now ?? HUH ?
Click to expand...

It is not cost effective.
For a utility to be interested in large orders, say 100,000, the current cost would be $4,500,000,000 for a 2 year lease (perhaps they would be a bit cheaper in bulk )
This is for the equivalent of a 200Mw power station. The 200MW power station built to state of the art gas turbines would cost ~ $250-400m, less than a tenth of the price, with far more researched life span reliability/lifespan (known that is).

Both would operate at 55-60% efficiency for electricity production.

It is not carbon neutral, it just produces less CO2 than coal fired power stations.

For the residential purchaser, it is not cost effective. Earlier in this thread I worked out what it is 'worth' to residential customers on a cost basis...

On economic terms the unit is 'worth' $1345 per year plus some hot water.
Click to expand...

Again at the current cost of $45,000 for a 2 year lease, it is not in the ball park of being cost competitive, assuming a feed in tariff equal to domestic rates.

brty
 

Sorry brty I was getting a bit ahead of myself on this CFU bandwagon. I was involved in the beginning and would have thought it had progressed by now ?

You have confirmed why I SOLD OUT. Production costs were the killer for me. Great company, good corporate structure, fantastic product, shares can be shorted on a daily basis (did I say this?) but NO ORDERS to pay for it. Again.
 
Its beginning to look like it will take longer than thought to get the ceramic fuel cell sales and implementation.

So why didnt CFU get the CUDECO treatment.???????

Taken at face value the CFU shareholders are taking a much longer term view.
Longer than I would have expected.

To figure the fundamentals of this stock out, you need to know what Utilities,
and more importantly Governments are thinking and planning.
I still believe the Governments will need to do something to get this happening.

So what can holders look forward to??
The only thing I can feel sure about, is a Victorian feed in tariff.
But this on its own wont achieve much, more would need to come from Brumby if he alone is to save the company.
Found this CFU quote,
Ceramic Fuel Cells’ products have achieved electrical efficiency of 60 percent, which the
Directors believe is higher than any other technology in the rapidly expanding market for
small scale power and heating products. When heat is recovered from the electricity
production process, total efficiency is up to 85 percent – twice as efficient as the average
among current European power stations.

But dont mention the war, maybe the Germans or Japs can get their acts together, heres hoping.
 
A capital raising!!!

What a surprise!!

At 18.25 cents, this is a little close to the wind with the current share price now 19 cents. If successful it buys the company 2 years at current cash burn rate, and time to look for alternative revenue streams with the technology.

Anyone here planning to take up their entitlement??

Anyone here planning to buy more shares to gain access to the entitlement?? (it goes ex-entitlement on the 24th I believe)

The directors hold ~1% of all shares, a very minor holding, with only one director, R Harding, holding a large amount ~10m shares. The rest have no great capital commitment which helps to explain to me the constant capital dilution of existing shareholders, with buying time being more important than making money.

Frank,

The point is not the efficiency. In the market place it is the cost of that efficiency. Just being efficient by itself is irrelevant if the cost is too high, and this is not something the directors have come to grips with.
 
brty said:
The point is not the efficiency. In the market place it is the cost of that efficiency. Just being efficient by itself is irrelevant if the cost is too high, and this is not something the directors have come to grips with.
Click to expand...

There are only 2 points
1. the efficiency in the face of higher gas costs/gas shortage
2. efficiency in the saving of co2 emissions.
There is no other reason for this product!!!

You just said IF the cost is too high, if. We dont know for sure.
The cost whatever it is, must be subsidized by Governments, just like solar, just like wind, whatever comes next, no difference.
Only question here, will it.
I havent changed my story, I have been saying this for quite awhile.
 
Frank.

There are only 2 points
1. the efficiency in the face of higher gas costs/gas shortage
2. efficiency in the saving of co2 emissions.
There is no other reason for this product!!!
Click to expand...

Totally disagree. The only point in making the product is for the financial benefit of the shareholders. If you want something that 'feels good' in a green sort of way, then use your own money to do it, not shareholders funds.

You just said IF the cost is too high, if. We dont know for sure.
Click to expand...

As I have pointed out many times before, we do know. There is a price for the units, whether you buy 1 or 30. The price is a 2 year lease for $45,000.

Only when there is another price, a much lower one, will the big orders flow in, and then only after extensive testing.

The cost whatever it is, must be subsidized by Governments, just like solar, just like wind, whatever comes next, no difference.
Click to expand...

There is a big difference. Solar and wind produce no GHG when producing electricity. BlueGen produces CO2, just not as much as coal, but when compared to modern gas turbines, for the electricity generated it is about the same. Should they also have government subsidies??

brty
 

I hope you voted Green, sounds like you know their policies.

However governments all over the world have already subsidized all the the power generators in some way, since they began. What makes you think they wont subsidize new gas power stations.???
The coal power generators are asking for government to pay for the switch.

Capital subsidies for Bluegen, apply in Holland, California, Japan, Korea, and Germany has other arrangements to subsidize units.

I am not suggesting the govt. do subsidize, merely asking the question, will they.? Because if they do, the price of the fuel cell power unit to the purchaser comes down, giving CFU a chance.
 
Looking at the share price so far seems to be holding rather well considering the announcement people thought would spell the end of CFU's share price. Guess we will have to see what happens after the EX-date. I actually sold after the court ruling thinking there would be no news for the next month or so and my money would be better placed else where very surprised they went for a capital raising so soon. I think they probably were waiting to see how much they would get from the settlement so they could accurately come up with a figure that will see them to the end of 2011 and minimise the dilution as little as possible I think this is good management.

I have read many articles from financial analysts predicting 2011 - 2012 as the time when Fuel Cells will become financially viable. Of the different uses Stationary fuel cells are predicted to be the first product to break the market and SOFC have been identified as most likely to be the the first choice over PEM and the molten carbonate MOFC.

The price of the fuel cells will come down firstly with "economies of scale" and later as nano technology advances.

I guess the negatives for this stock are:
1) And the biggest one... not having their large furnaces going, let hope they sort it out soon as I believe this is critical to the economies of scale argument and the reason the units are so expensive at the moment.
2) Money... A successful capital raising will fix this.
3) Sales / Orders... true they have no large sales yet however what fuel cell company does? I believe if they fix point 1) the orders will start to come in
4) Diversified management, great they are making all these deals all over the world but worried they are too spread out seems to be an expensive business model.
5) Small, in terms capital when you look at it's peers in the stationary fuel cell market (Ballard, Ceres, FuelCell Energy, Pacific, UTC, Plug Power). Even though to me CFU's product seems superior the large energy companies may see safety in size.

I am back in for the capital raising and wish everyone the best of luck.

Dono
 
Good point. The small size of the company is why there is a need to ensure that the utilities are comfortable that they are making a safe decision. That is why the capital raising is required.

I don't think they technically need the capital raising. They have spare cash and they could have borrowed if required. Having the big buffer of cash though will rest minds and speed up takeoff. It will also reduce the capability of external shocks to throw the company off course.

I am confident the orders will flow.

I also will be taking up the rights.
 
Finally, we have a real order.

Victorian Government Confirms Order for Thirty BlueGen Units.

Outstanding result, very happy with that
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...