Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Not even news can move this POS. Down 5%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a joke.
Very well put Dubster! All anyone has to do is look at Hopesters' post # 59310 not long ago to see he definitely said $0.50 was imminent. Hasn't materialized. The only thing coming from his court is negativity.
You know folks can see all of your other posts right?
You post nothingness and no where else.
You post nothing, trade nothing, add nothing, but I guess have hope that the position you took here long ago rescues you someday! I have been around the sad little iHub long enough to spot those that fail. The “investment” you must have made here long ago, wrecked you.
Hang in there. Eventually you will learn manners and maybe how to be successful instead of the wickedness.
The 3 blind mice are bragging now that they bought shares at a low price here.
The only reason they would post and announce that is they're seeking affirmation that they did the right thing.
What that means to me is, they really don't have the confidence in their purchase and need other fellow Bulls to affirm it.
Can't give you a target low. The avg px analyst have on it is $1.48 with the low of $1.00.
According to Peter Lynch ( highly respected on Wall Street) his formula says FCEL has a negative worth which means it could go much lower but not necessarily.
In effect, there's little or no fundamental reason to own the stock at all. That's been the case for years. The company's results confirm it.
Terchnically its trend continues decidedly down.
So what a Bull is left with is a bad gamble. History proves that as those same Bulls bought every drop only to see the stock go lower.
A couple of them on this board have no understanding or appreciation of fundamentals or T/A. There results prove that.
When the fundamentals change and the technicals line up, it'll be a time to be serious about owning shares. Right now, FCEL is selling shares into the market.
How's that for confidence?
Best advice is to sit on what you have and cross your fingers. Avoid what you hear from te pushers.
In the case of ENRON there was massive manipulation of the company practices and the stock price. It benefitted a few insiders. ENRON is case in point that companies and stock can be manipulated. It was a malicious attack that devastated retail investors life savings. FCEL is no ENRON.
Reddit proved that stock prices can be pushed either way. In Gamestop it was pushed up forcing major hedge funds to cover their short positions or lose massively. FCEL is no Reddit.
It is possible that what a company does to benefit long term outlook appears to benefit only a minority of investors when in fact the long term objective is plainly stated and feasible once you understand the plan. It is beneficial to all investors. That is FCEL.
And it is not the FCEL of 6-10 yrs ago. If FCEL is selling shares, and they most probably are, then smart shorters are going to short this stock. Whether they are savvy enough to get out in a timely fashion is not the concern of longs. In fact it is amusing to watch the scramble.
The plan of continuously adding recurring revenue within the bounds of preserving cash flow is sound. The opportunity exists however to make life altering decisions that benefit FCEL and all long investors. Worrying about what short sellers are doing or whether the company is financed with debt or equity takes your eye off the ball.
CCS plus Solid Oxide H2 generation plus efficiency , diversified revenue streams and leadership is what matters.
ENRON screwed a lot of every day people.
There are companies that have a plan and execute the plan and benefit investors.
That is FCEL.
Buy low, sell high.
Saying you know so much about the stock and so far you’ve been right how low is this going to go?
"In September Toyota TLS was waiting for LEED certification."
there is nothing in Sept's pr that says anything about waiting for certification...they announced the completion of the facility and presented it as ready to go...
todays pr is literally a cut and paste of sept's pr...
this is almost a joke...they put out this pr out simply to sell shares...how is the pps supposed to rise into earnings if they just keep manufacturing pr's to sell into?...
it looks to me like Few may have thrown in the towel and is just going to dilute the whole 500 mil shares at whatever price he can get and then r/s and start all over....i think people buying shares right now may be buying way too high...
Can't get past $1.00. How's it going to get to $1.60 ?
In your reasoning , If/when it get to $.50 it'll be a screaming buy.
Ever think there's a reason why it struggles to stay above $.80 ?
Tell me its "manipulation" going on for 3 years. LMAO
That answers the WHY. I couldn't figure out why the stock didn't pop on the news .
Wasn't aware they made this announcent in Sept.
Notice the 3 blind mice added shares thinking the news was something to write home about. CLUELESS !!!
Ya I caught a few shares at 0.8585.
Cash on hand over 340 mil plus physical assets of around 450 mil total not including patents, etc puts share price around $1.85-$1.90. Shorties keep shorting doing me a favor.
In September Toyota TLS was waiting for LEED certification. Today is Grand Opening. May be that Toyota obtained certification therefore different from "completing" construction. Also interesting is that
in April 2024, the first heavy-duty FCEV Kenworth T680 Class 8 truck was filled at the adjacent Shell HD filling station using Tri-gen-produced renewable hydrogen hence Shell closing their stations in the area vs importing H2.
Looks to me like fcel already made this announcement back in Sept…how many times are they going to make the same announcement?…lol
Might be why it’s down…Few probably had no other way to dilute millions of shares without tanking the pps badly…so he’s recycling old news?…
This is pitiful…
You are seeing the light! Welcome to the bright side. Do you see any reason to make announcement from Toyota/Port of Long Beach today?
No doubt shorties still trying. I see buying opportunity. At these prices, a doubling to $1.60 is a steal. Actual valuation without adding in Derby probably closer to 1.90.
I like the idea of licensing in theory but if other variables like tax incentives etc do not go through there may not be demand enough for licensing. So we are back to how to capitalize on tremendous technology that benefits the effects of climate change. I feel some of the pieces of Rotterdam are missing. For instance the amount of carbon in flue exhaust will directly affect the total amount captured. I think Rotterdam was chosen because of the higher concentration of carbon. For example, capturing 100% of carbon from a plantthat only has the potential for a million lbs total capture compared to capturing 50% of another plant whose potential is 10 million lbs is a factor for any future planning with regard to capitalization. On the one hand a million lbs capture compared to 5 mil lbs. Five times the capture. Perhaps the metric should be % captured compared to % concentration in the exhaust gas.
I am trying to keep the numbers coherent.
The Toyota announcement today joined by FCEL's FEW, re: trigen is the 1st solid piece of news the company has annonced. It may be enough to move the needle to $1.00 or so.
Finally something to talk about.
Volume is currently only 97,000 shares. That combined with yesterday's action tells me the shorts have not given up yet. This minimum gain pre 9:00 a.m. could just be the attempt to try to create some volatility again. Historically they want to retest support two to three times minimum. That support check could be in If we hold over yesterday's close through the first hour and break 95 cents.
FuelCell Energy and Toyota Motor North America Celebrate Launch of World's First "Tri-gen" Production System at the Port of Long Beach
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fuelcell-energy-toyota-motor-north-113000504.html
Correct in my opinion, however, Exxonmobil was pushing testing and improvements throughout the entire process, because they also knew they needed the policy support in order to make the technology profitable. I'm confident they will get better than 90% but if they get 88 or 89% and they're on budget it will still be considered a success. However, I think your facts on mobile thought they were going to fall short of 90%. They would not have moved forward with the project. Last night I was thinking about all this As I was watching a very recent video from Vijay Swarup with ExxonMobil. In his 17 minute video of his lecture, He reiterated a couple different points numerous times, scale and collaboration. A huge light bulb turned on. Licensing! FCEL is never going to be able to get to 300-400MW production prior to 2030 because they won't even get a green light for commercialization until 2026. If this is in fact the best or 1 of the few proven options to affordably and efficiently capture carbon, we can, and I believe should license the tech to others that can bring scale to 1,000MW a year more quickly. FCE can potentially get up to 200MW without buying more land or massive increase in capex within 1 year from go. But beyond that is a different ball game.
Johnny, the issue with Capital Power is that economically the CCS system there was failing but the technology is sound. The powers that be in Calgary and their environmentalists see CCS as an added expense rather than an ecologically beneficial response to climate change. As you state, the infusing of tax incentives is needed for CCS here in the states to support proven technology. Two competing trains of thought, environmental vs economical issues.
"The dawn of the renewable hydrogen era is upon us", from the Port of Long Beach post. 1,200 kg of hydrogen and 1,400 gallons of water a day!!! Virtually zero pollutants! How do you beat that? Simple, You don't!
If, If the Rotterdam project results stated 88% carbon capture was achieved would that necessarily be a failure? How often are goals immediately met exactly as planned? Also , the premise for pairing FCEL's modules with the added heat from nuclear plants is to reach 100% efficiency. The semantics here seem to be confusing the issue. If you capture 90% of Co2 is that not the same as 90% efficiency?
Can't wait until we get 1 of these waste water treatment plants in a state other than California or Connecticut. How many are there in let's say the United States? Other countries are following suit, there's 1 in Scotland just announced with another company.
https://www.google.com/url?rct=j&sa=t&url=https://www.bioenergy-news.com/news/fuelcell-energy-technology-to-be-used-in-sacramento-wastewater-clean-energy-project/&ct=ga&cd=CAEYACoSMjg5NzE2MDQwMjkxODI0MTQwMhozZjZjMTI4ZjIzMzRhODI4OmNvbTplbjpVUw&usg=AOvVaw07QkOnnCvFdPvlrDWMPlIy
OK Max - I think I get it.
This is not a power plant in Rotterdam. It is a refinery. So, the number of modules and the metrics are not the same as it would be for a power plant, and it is not measured in MWs, I guess.
Thanks to everyone for the info. It helps me understand.
I look forward to Rotterdam completion - but still seems like a turtle's pace for Exxon to be demonstrating FCEL tech. Why can they not - in parallel - be demonsrating 90% capture at one of their many power plants? Well ... whatever ... I hope FCEL/Exxon come through in the long run ....
Max you said this:
"While you are correct that a 500MW power plant would require 35-40 2.8MW modules...this Rotterdam project is not that."
I don't know how you know this to be true or not. I am in agreement that it is most likely true. But I only base that on the $11 million figure that has been thrown around. I have not heard anything else about the number of modules or the capture rate for the apparently 500 MW power station.
I am at a loss to understand why they would not capture at 90% and then proudly tell the world that they have the very best system to be used throughout the world. There must be some reason for that. Because after 3 years more, to then say that they have successfully captured 5% or 10% at this plant will be totally laughable and inconsequential and just such a joke because the entire world is going to require 90%, and all of the political discussion is centering around the fact that CCS cannot cut it at scale, and therefore all of CCS and all of blue hydrogen should never be supported because it is a dead end and only green hydrogen and solar panels and wind should be the only avenues for public policy.
Maybe I'm wrong about some of my assumptions, such as the size of the power plant being 500 megawatts. Maybe it is only 50 megawatts or something like that and that is considered to be 'at scale'. But that is not how I understand the issue as it is being discussed politically in all the articles I have read regarding the EPA rules for CCS.
Anyway, like I said it would sure be nice to get clarity from Exxon and/or FCEL. Not sure why there is no clarity.
Johnny Rotterdam is a joint demonstration project with an Exxon purchase order in the $11M range for modules and equipment from FCE. The PR said the "modules" are being made currently so it could be two 1.4MW modules. FCE and Exxon has stated they have achieved 90% C02 capture in the lab...not it's possible, and this project is to demonstrate that in an industrial environment.
It's a pilot fuel cell plant on Exxon's refinery that will scale to the exhaust flue gasses and the exhaust stream is then purified by chilling the stream to extract CO2 liquid. The purified CO2 can then be transported by pipeline for underground storage (demonstrated at Rotterdam) or used in a variety of applications such as beverage bottling, meat processing, or aid in the production of cement and plastics. (which FCE will have operational around October 2024)
"The Rotterdam pilot plant aims to obtain data on performance and operability of the carbonate fuel cell (CFC) technology, jointly developed with FuelCell Energy. Additionally, the pilot aims to address potential technical issues that may occur in a commercial environment and better understand the costs of installing and operating a CFC plant for carbon capture."
"Pending a successful demonstration, the technology could be deployed at ExxonMobil's manufacturing sites around the world."
While you are correct that a 500MW power plant would require 35-40 2.8MW modules...this Rotterdam project is not that.
https://investor.fce.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2023/ExxonMobil-to-Build-CCS-Pilot-Plant-with-FuelCell-EnergyUsing-Carbonate-Fuel-Cell-Technology/default.aspx
https://www.thechemicalengineer.com/news/exxonmobil-to-build-ccs-pilot-plant-using-carbonate-fuel-cell-technology/
Carbon capture plan faces doubts after $2.4-billion project cancelled
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-capital-power-alberta-carbon/
CCS Tax Credits are the key issue in all this. So many politicians saying that climate change will literally kill us all. Yet they will not give sufficient tax credits to save us all. smh.
My point about the 90% capture rate:
I understand that FCEL and Exxon have both said 90% capture is possible. Therefore I wonder why if FCEL/Few have not been forthcoming with information about the project. From what I understand the modules are currently under construction so why should we have to guess as to how many modules this will entail? Will it be one 2.8 MW module or will it be more like 35 such modules? And if it is 35 modules, which from what I understand is necessary to capture 90% at a 500 megawatt power plant, then will they basically be giving them away for free to Exxon for 11 million dollars? Or are the terms something much different than that?
Why do we need to debate this here why do we need to ask ourselves what's going on? why is neither Exxon nor FCEL forthcoming with the information which apparently has already been determined because the modules are apparently under construction? Why are the analysts not asking these questions?
This is a huge issue because not only has Biden mandated that future new gas plants will need 90% capture rate but the G7 countries and soon probably the rest of the world will be moving that way. And there is serious doubt whether anybody can provide 90% carbon capture at scale (meaning for real at a 500 mw plant) to do this. So one would think under normal business conditions if a company like fuel cell is the first to be able to do this, then they would be singing the praises so high and yelling that they have a project which will soon deliver on the 90% capture rate. And the financial terms would not be a secret. But it is the opposite. There is no clarity. Why?
Lab results prove greater than 90%. Almost certain I saw 94% in one report from ScienceDirect.
Looks like Calgary is running 24/7 or will be!
https://careers.fuelcellenergy.com/search/
Not sure why you are suggesting Rotterdam won't capture 90% CO2 emissions.
"The fuel cell maker FuelCell Energy will expand on its research partnership with ExxonMobil by installing a pilot system that can capture carbon dioxide while generating additional power at the oil company’s refinery in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The firm’s fuel cells electrochemically oxidize methane using CO2 to carry electrons through a molten carbonate electrolyte. The upshot is they can strip about 90% of the CO2 from a combustion flue gas stream while also yielding electricity, heat, hydrogen, and water."
https://cen.acs.org/energy/ExxonMobil-pilot-carbon-capture-via/102/i1
Exxon and FCEL have both repeatedly stated for years that CCS was possible at 90% rate.
So why not 90% in Rotterdam?
Makes no sense unless games/politics are in control.
https://corporate.exxonmobil.com/what-we-do/delivering-industrial-solutions/carbon-capture-and-storage/advanced-carbonate-fuel-cell-technology-in-carbon-capture-and-storage
No filling stations. Shell just closed a bunch of them.
There's the hoot.
The hoot might just be a reality...not trigen but a PEM fuel cell. Totally different application. Each to their respective niches.
"Construction has begun on a flexible microgrid that features energy sources available today, including a 230-kW solar photovoltaic system, a 1-MW stationary proton exchange membrane (PEM) fuel cell generator, 325-kW solid oxide fuel cell (SOFC), and an onsite 500-kWh battery energy storage system. The microgrid is designed to support the campus' energy needs, allowing it the ability to operate off-grid. The system is expected to be fully operational by 2026."
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/toyota-establishes-hydrogen-headquarters-to-accelerate-advancement-of-fuel-cell-technology-302132596.html
However, Toyota and FuelCell Energy have established a long term relationship as Toyota has signed on with FuelCell to receive Tri-gen products under a 20-year purchase agreement.
https://www.waste360.com/fleet-technology/toyota-invests-long-term-in-hydrogen-production
"stationary fuel cell power generation" may mean their own brand of trigen ? Haha wouldn't that be a hoot!
Where's the filling stations? Besides, California is 1 state of 50. There's a world out there w/o a place to fill.
The interest rate of the Derby financing from 2 banks is 7.25% and 8%.The loan is for $13 mil subordinated but the company will receive $11.2 mil after fees are taken out.
Dilution will continue in order to make payrents
Stock reacting accordingly. The market doesn't see the Derby projects financing or the return from it as a positive.
Canada rockin & Rollin
https://albertainnovates.ca/news/alberta-innovates-and-emissions-reduction-alberta-announce-new-hydrogen-funding/
From above link
https://www.eralberta.ca/funding-technology/accelerating-hydrogen-challenge/
Look at all these Funding Opportunities!!!
https://albertainnovates.ca/funding/
https://www.eralberta.ca/
We already have $6.8M award
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://investor.fce.com/press-releases/press-release-details/2022/Fuelcell-Energy-Project-Identified-for-Funding-From-Canadas-Clean-Resource-Innovation-Network-to-Design-Pilot-for-Clean-Carbon-Capture/default.aspx&ved=2ahUKEwiv-e37h-2FAxXzFVkFHRE1DQsQFnoECBUQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3fDaUwm_XMci3wNlWSXToJ
Toyota establishes North American hydrogen business headquarters in Los Angeles
"The North American headquarters will lead hydrogen initiatives across sectors, including passenger cars, heavy-duty trucks, stationary fuel cell power generation and port vehicle applications."
"Toyota said it is working on several projects but did not provide details."
https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/toyota-puts-north-american-hydrogen-headquarters-los-angeles
Yes, that's why we get Generation revenue over $15M moving forward. What most don't know, or understand is that they have a significant history of write downs and losses for delays and projects they decided not to do because the financial profile no longer made sense. Those are all gone, with Toyota and Groton being a large part. Financials Will look much better strictly based on that. I recall Michael Bishop commenting that once those were all out of the way margins were going to come in over 40% on generation. Q2 + Q3 should garner much attention from investors and traders alike. You and I both know it's only going to take a little bit of momentum than who knows how far it goes or how quickly. Just assume about $1M revenue per year, per MW of generation. That's close enough that it's not worth trying to figure out the marginal difference. It will take about four quarters to figure out more accurately especially since generation is impacted by the service. So whenever they're doing service they will lose some of the generation but they will gain more than what they lost through service and license agreements to not only offset but give much greater revenue on similar margins.
Reacting poorly to Fed decision. Another buying opportunity.
I went back through financials audio for Q1 (at time stamp 15 min 10 seconds) and although both Derby projects went online in Q1 the full amount of revenue will be realized in Q2.
14 MW and 2.8 MW total 16.8 MW revenue added in Q2 !
C'mon $.96 do I hear $.96!! Powell has to give us something promising. At least suggesting rate cuts likely in the near future.
Yes I'm certain that was factored into his numbers and yes we are the only ones that can do trigeneration on the planet at this point. There's boatloads of water treatment plants out there We already have several installations and one new contract for such. That alone is a huge opportunity. We were not in the electrolyzer or SOFC market before that announcement. That brings a whole new ball game for us to start immediately getting contracts. Much easier to sell sub megawatt or one megawatt Then it is to sell multi-megawatt scale projects, without as much red tape also. We already have three contracts for the electrolyzers. And I expect that to increase yearly moving forward. Hence The increasing capex ramping up production in Canada from 4 megawatts to 40 megawatts, with the expressed possibility to increase to 80 megawatts. I'd like to hear their status on the 400 megawatt manufacturing facility they were previously planning in the United States. That may be the reason they actually needed cash recently. The original estimate was that they were going to need $250 million. They revised that either at the Q4 conference or Q1 conference stating they now only need $100 million. It's a huge savings, And they may have needed the cash to get the ball rolling on that.
There's no way more than one person that has no interest in a company and believes they are complete failure could spend as much time on a message board posting as some I've seen historically. I've blocked them all because they waste time & space. I'm thinking it's 1 maybe 2 individuals on all boards. it's shocking that one person can waste so much time talking nonsense speaking so negatively on a social media platform about a company they supposedly believe should not exist and has no future. So, there's absolutely no way there are three, 4, 5 or more. They never once provided any factual information about why the company is not going to succeed. factual information. Not what somebody else wrote or analysts say. I can tell you they've increased recurring revenue from generation from approximately 7.5 million a year in 2019 to now approximately 63 million a year. I can tell you that they've signed more contracts in the last 6 months then they did in any previous 2 years. They also completed a project with the largest automobile manufacturer in the world. They signed yet another joint development agreement extension with questionably the most powerful company in the world which they've been working with for 10 years. They also were granted the rights to use FCE carbon capture technology developed independently and jointly with ExxonMobil with other partners to develop or install commercially. Bashers repeatedly said they gave away their technology but the new joint development agreement clearly says they are 100% inaccurate. these are facts not opinion. They have the most affordable carbon capture method on the planet, it will prove efficiency at Porthos just like they already have in the lab. it's the most affordable option because it actually creates energy rather than being parasitic like other methods. They were also dead wrong about carbon capture being a failure Carbon capture is now the primary focus globally to address climate change. That's globally. They may want to get some help looking that up and figuring out the definition. within the last 6 months they have also gone 100% operational with a project for the US Navy & the Department of defense. They began commercial operations with 2 separate projects in their home state, 1 which is the 2nd largest (Only to FCE Bridgeport project) in the US.
+++ updates coming from the following within the next 9 months:
1) South Korea, big contracts incoming
2) Canadian Carbon Capture contract incoming
3) Navajo Nation contract incoming
4) MHB contract incoming, all by end of January!!
Q2, Q3, Q4 to average over $40M each
Stated May 1, 2024! Take that and store it in a safe place so you can plan to throw it back at me. I am!!
IMO Volume is back to reality because the shorts are now back to reality, I believe realizing there's way too much support under 90 cents. Although I would love to see us trade over 20 million shares every day, seems not likely right now. Can't wait to see what happens after the Fed speak today. But looking at support Friday to Monday to Tuesday to Wednesday so far, it certainly looks like we're headed back over $1 quickly. Favorable fed speak would be wonderful and may actually allow this thing to run, get a bit of a squeeze, and get to new 52 week highs with a good earnings report in early June. That's not asking a whole lot. I can easily see this ranging between $1.50-$2.50 after a nice run, then breaking loose on ++ fed speak and ++ Q3. Hopefully June-September bring an entirely new/old world to life. Especially with a big contract in SK which I do expect this fiscal year, Hopefully sooner rather than later.
I would have to review Few's numbers because I have difficulty separating numbers from CCS and from Solid Oxide (MOU from Malaysia ? etc)
Cash flow and dilution/share price control is a delicate dance. Factor in the fed decisions and tax abatement and It's challenge to see the outcome. I can see floating the share price between 1-2 until some of the bigger variables shake out this summer and see who is still in and who bails out by Q3. We are only one with Tri-gen right? We have solvency and can control cash flow while we build out CCS and H2 production.
The following pulled from FCEL seems to imply we were ready to go with solid oxide if we were "accepting orders" a year and a few months ago. Was that factored in to
future revenue?
DANBURY, Conn., Dec. 06, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- FuelCell Energy, Inc. (Nasdaq: FCEL) today announced it is accepting orders for its solid oxide electrolyzer and solid oxide fuel cell platform. The platform will give more organizations the option to implement a flexible energy strategy in order to..
* Start their energy transition today knowing they can shift to 100% zero-carbon hydrogen in the future.
* Produce clean hydrogen for use or storage from zero-carbon renewable or nuclear power, managing the peaks and valleys of renewables and providing flexibility to nuclear energy production.
* Create energy from any combination of available sources — from renewables, hydrogen, biogas, or natural gas.
* Provide continuous power and reduce grid dependence, co-locating generation and use wherever possible.
FuelCell Energy, Inc. (NASDAQ: FCEL) is an integrated fuel cell company that designs, manufactures, installs, operates and services stationary fuel cell power plants.
As a leading global fuel cell company, we provide ultra-clean, efficient and reliable baseload distributed generation for electric utilities, commercial and industrial companies, universities, municipalities, government entities and other customers around the world.
Direct FuelCell® (DFC®) power plants manufactured by FuelCell Energy can utilize a variety of fuels including renewable biogas from wastewater treatment and food processing, as well as clean natural gas, directed biogas and propane.
Our DFC power plants produce power electrochemically — without burning fuels — making them clean, quiet and environmentally responsible alternatives to combustion-based generation.
Our power plants have generated more than 1.5 billion kilowatt hours of ultra-clean electricity, equivalent to powering more than 135,000 average-size U.S. homes for one year.
FuelCell Energy’s world headquarters are located in Danbury, Connecticut, in the USA. Our global markets are served from a state-of-the-art production facility in nearby Torrington, Connecticut.
Our customers in Europe are served by German-based FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH, a majority owned joint venture with sales and service located in Dresden, Germany and manufacturing in Ottobrunn, Germany, which is near Munich.
Customers in Asia are served by our partner POSCO Energy from manufacturing facilities located in Pohang, South Korea.
FuelCell Energy offers a comprehensive portfolio of services for fuel cell power plants. Specially trained technicians and engineers remotely operate and maintain virtually our entire installed base of Direct FuelCell power plants globally, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year from the state-of-the-art Global Technical Assistance Center located at our Danbury, Connecticut headquarters. Field service technicians directly employed by FuelCell Energy service the power plants on-site.
FuelCell Energy scientists are actively researching unique applications for our versatile DFC technology including hydrogen generation and carbon capture. In addition, we are pursuing research with solid oxide fuel cells as well ashydrogen compression and storage.
FuelCell Energy’s international reputation for leadership in ultra-clean energy solutions has been built on a long history of innovative research and development that reflects the successes of our highly talented and creative workforce. We are the first fuel cell manufacturer to commercialize megawatt-class stationary fuel cell power plants and we believe that we are the first stationary fuel cell manufacturer to generate a quarterly gross profit.
FuelCell Energy traces its roots back to 1969 and the founding of Energy Research Corporation (ERC) by early fuel cell pioneers Bernard Baker and Martin Klein, both chemical engineers with expertise in advanced battery technologies.
In the 1970′s, with funding from the U.S. military and utility companies, the Company conducted extensive research into low-temperature fuel cells as well as silver-zinc battery cells. In the 1980′s and 1990′s the Company switched its focus to high-temperature carbonate fuel cell systems which offered greater commercial applications due to the ability to internally reform readily available fuels such as natural gas and renewable biogas within the fuel cell itself to provide the hydrogen for the power generation process.
Our first commercial power plant was installed in 2003 using a 250 kilowatt (kW) fuel cell stack. Through technology enhancements and cost reductions, we have increased the power output of the stacks by 40 percent to 350 kW and reduced product costs by more than 60 percent. Today we are installing multi-megawatt fuel cell plants and fuel cell parks globally.
The production facility in Torrington, Connecticut, USA was completed in 2001 and produced [2] megawatts (MW) of product the first year. As of the end of fiscal year 2012, the plant was producing at an annual run-rate of 56 MW. The total annual capacity of the facility is 90 MW.
FuelCell Energy began expanding globally in 2007 through its partnership with POSCO Energy , targeting markets in Southeast Asia, particularly South Korea. A European manufacturing, sales and service presence was established in 2012, with German-based FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH.
1969 | Company founded as Energy Research Corporation (ERC) |
1992 | 120 kilowatt fuel cell stack demonstrated |
1992 | Initial Public Offering (IPO) |
1996 | 2 megawatt demonstration plant installed in Santa Clara, California |
1999 | Company focuses on carbonate fuel cells, is renamed FuelCell Energy, Inc. & spins off battery division, Evercel |
2003 | First commercial installation of a Direct FuelCell® power plant |
2003 | Annual production of approximately 3 megawatts |
2007 | POSCO Energy partnership begins – global expansion commences |
2007 | Annual production of approximately 11 megawatts |
2009 | Production of 350 kilowatt stack commences |
2011 | Power output milestone reached with one billion kWh of ultra clean electricity produced since 2003 |
2011 | 11 megawatt fuel cell park commences operations in South Korea |
2011 | Annual production of approximately 46 megawatts |
2012 | European presence established with FuelCell Energy Solutions, GmbH |
2012 | Asian manufacturing strategy implemented through license agreement with POSCO Energy |
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |