Replies to post #50372 on FuelCell Energy Inc (FCEL)

[peafunke]

And what I am trying to say is “As the field widens, the pie for FCEL shrinks. “, I believe this to be false as you are implying that the fields are the same. They are not. Totally different intakes and application. They are not ‘competing’ technologies in my book.

They both address different methods of the same output but the customers are NOt sitting there saying ‘should we do FCEl or DRAX as our solution’. It’s not the same pie

[XenaLives]

CLEAR AS MUD

BECCS is a valid theory covering many technical variants. There is no reason to say it is proven or disproven.

SHADOW BOXING:

I have never seen this argument made:

If the argument is BECCS is not proven then the same argument applies to FCEL's unproven work to net ZERO. True?

STRAW MAN ARGUMENT:

While BECCS may not be proven to usual standards it does appear to have engendred interest and capital from parties who see promise. The Exxon relationship with FCEL has been going on for what....8 years with nothing to show for it. That's why Exxons isn't waiting and is moving forward with new relationships and investments.

There are multiple approaches to carbon capture and providing alternative energy sources. Many are complementary. BECCS needs no proof or disproof because it includes many of these approaches.