Plans for Hydrogen Development At Dogger Bank D Gain Ground
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
Dogger Bank D, the potential fourth phase of the world’s largest offshore wind farm under construction, Dogger Bank Wind Farm, has awarded contracts to engineering consultants to support the feasibility and optimization of a large-scale green hydrogen development option on the project
These three paragraphs outline the project.
SSE Renewables and Equinor, the developers of the Dogger Bank wind farm in the UK, awarded contracts for green hydrogen concept and engineering and optimization studies to Genesis, H2GO Power, and Fichtner.
If progressed for delivery, Dogger Bank D would be located in the North Sea around 210 kilometers off the northeast coast of England. Subject to the successful outcome of further technical studies, the project could be capable of generating up to around 2 GW of renewable power.
The 2 GW offshore wind farm is currently planned to comprise 128 wind turbines and up to six offshore platforms.
Note.
According to the article, this would be one of the UK’s largest green hydrogen production facilities.
The partners said, that the project could contribute to the UK Government’s electrolytic hydrogen ambitions for 5 GW by 2030.
This is said about the studies.
Using AI machine learning and robust modeling, these studies will investigate the multitude of interdependent variables required to optimize a potential green hydrogen production facility, such as offshore wind farm sizing, electrolysis capacity, transport and storage capacity, water availability, and offtake optionality.
I was using robust modelling on projects such as these fifty years ago, both with Artemis and bespoke software.
To my mind, SSE Renewables and Equinor are doing the right thing. If anybody has a similar project with lots of variables, I’d love to give my opinion.
I have some thoughts.
How Much Hydrogen Will Be Produced?
Ryze Hydrogen are building the Herne Bay electrolyser.
- It will consume 23 MW of solar and wind power.
- It will produce ten tonnes of hydrogen per day.
The electrolyser will consume 552 MWh to produce ten tonnes of hydrogen, so creating one tonne of hydrogen needs 55.2 MWh of electricity.
This would mean that if the Japanese built one Herne Bay-size electrolyser, then it would produce around three hundred tonnes of hydrogen in an average month.
Consider.
- Dogger Bank D is likely to be a 2 GW wind farm.
- This document on the OFGEM web site, says that the Dogger Bank wind farms will have a capacity factor of 45 %.
- This means that Dogger Bank D wind farm will produce an average of 900 MW over a year.
- This works out at 7,884 GWh of electricity in a year.
As each tonne of hydrogen needs 55.2 MWh to be produced, this means if all the electricity produced by Dogger Bank D, is used to create green hydrogen, then 142,826.1 tonnes will be produced.
How Will The Hydrogen Be Brought Ashore?
142,826.1 tonnes is a lot of green hydrogen and the easiest ways to transfer it to the shore would be by a pipeline or a tanker.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see the use of tankers, as this would give more flexibility and allow the export of hydrogen to countries in need of hydrogen.
Will There Be Hydrogen Storage In The Dogger Bank D Wind Farm?
This would surely be a possibility, but there are security considerations.
Cost would also be a factor!
The Location Of The Dogger Bank D Wind Farm
I clipped this map of Dogger Bank A, B, C and D wind farms from this page of the Dogger Bank D web site.
Note.
- RWE’s Dogger Bank South wind farm is not shown on the map.
- Dogger Bank D wind farm is the most Easterly of the four wind farms being developed by SSE Renewables and Equinor.
- Dogger Bank D wind farm must be the closest of the Dogger Bank wind farms to the Eastern border of the UK’s Exclusive Economic Zone or EEZ.
Dogger Bank D wind farm would appear to be ideally placed to supply hydrogen to a number of places, by either pipeline or tanker.
Could Dogger Bank South Wind Farm Also Produce Hydrogen?
In RWE Partners With Masdar For 3 GW Dogger Bank South Offshore Wind Projects, I talked about the change of ownership of the Dogger Bank South wind farm.
I would assume that the Dogger Bank South wind farm will be located to the South of the Dogger Bank A,B, C and D wind farms.
Whether it will produce hydrogen will be a matter for the owners and market conditions.
I do believe though, that it could share some facilities with the those that might be built for Dogger Bank D wind farm.
Conclusion
After this brief look, Dogger Bank D could be an ideal place to build a large hydrogen production facility.
South Korea, UK Strengthen Offshore Wind Ties
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
The Republic of Korea (ROK) and the UK have signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) concerning cooperation on offshore wind energy
These three paragraphs outline the MoU.
The UK and ROK already have a proven relationship in offshore wind, with large-scale investments in the UK’s supply chain and in the development of ROK’s offshore wind sector.
This MoU emphasises the will to build on this existing cooperation to accelerate deployment, address barriers to trade, and encourage mutual economic development through regular government-to-government dialogue and business-to-business cooperation, according to the partners.
The participants will support the UK and ROK’s offshore wind deployment by sharing experience and expertise from their respective sectors.
These are my thoughts.
The British And The Koreans Have A Long Record Of Industrial Co-operation
My own experience of this, goes back to the last century, where one of the biggest export markets for Artemis; the project management system, that I wrote was South Korea.
We had started with Hyundai in Saudi Arabia, where the Korean company was providing labour for large projects.
I can remember modifying Artemis, so that it handled the Korean won, which in those days, came with lots of noughts.
The Korean, who managed their Saudi projects returned home and luckily for us, wanted a system in Korea.
Paul, who was our salesman for Korea, used to tell a story about selling in Korea.
Our Korean friend from Hyundai had setup a demonstration of Artemis with all the major corporations or chaebols in Korea.
Paul finished the demonstration and then asked if there were any questions.
There was only one question and it was translated as “Can we see the contract?”
So Paul handed out perhaps a dozen contracts.
Immediately, after a quick read, the attendees at the meeting, started to sign the contracts and give them back.
Paul asked our friendly Korean, what was going on and got the reply. “If it’s good enough for Hyundai, it’s good enough for my company!”
The King Played His Part
King Charles, London and the UK government certainly laid on a first class state visit and by his references in his speech the King certainly said the right things.
I always wonder, how much the Royal Family is worth to business deals, but I suspect in some countries it helps a lot.
With Artemis, we won two Queen’s Awards for Industry. Every year the monarch puts on a reception to which each company or organisation can send three representatives. I recounted my visit in The Day I Met the Queen.
For the second award, I suggested that we send Pat, who was the highest American, in the company.
Later in his career with the company, when he was running our US operations, Pat. found talking about the time, he met the Queen and Prince Philip, very good for doing business.
I wonder how many business and cooperation deals between the UK and Korea, will be revealed in the coming months.
This Deal Is Not Just About The UK And Korea
This paragraph widens out the deal.
In addition, participants accept to promote business activities and facilitate opportunities for UK and ROK companies to collaborate in ROK and the UK, as well as joint offshore wind projects in third countries, according to the press release from the UK Government.
An approach to some countries without the usual bullies of this world may offer advantages.
Has One Secondary Deal Already Been Signed?
This paragraph talks about a recent deal between BP, Dutch company; Corio and the South Koreans.
The news follows the recent announcement from South Korea’s Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy that two UK companies, Corio Generation and BP, submitted investment plans for offshore wind projects in South Korea totalling about EUR 1.06 billion.
This deal was apparently signed during the state visit.
There’s A Lot Of Wind Power To Be Harvested
These last two paragraphs summarise the wind potentials of the UK and Korea.
The UK has the world’s second-largest installed offshore wind capacity, with a government target to more than triple this capacity by 2030 to 50 GW, including 5 GW of floating offshore wind.
Back in 2018, the South Korean Government set a 2030 offshore wind target of 12 GW in its Renewable Energy 3020 Implementation Plan, which was reaffirmed by the now-former South Korea’s president Moon Jae-in in 2020. Since 2022, it has been reported that the country has a target of reaching 14.3 GW of offshore wind power by 2030.
Note that the UK’s population is almost exactly 30 % bigger than Korea’s.
So why will the UK by 2030, be generating three-and-half times the offshore wind power, than Korea?
Twenty days ago, I wrote UK And Germany Boost Offshore Renewables Ties, where I believe the sub-plot is about long-term power and energy security for the UK and Germany.
Long term, the numbers tell me, that UK and Irish seas will be Europe’s major powerhouse.
Australia’s Offshore Wind Market Could Significantly Benefit from Collaboration with UK Suppliers, Study Says
The title of this section, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
A new study has been launched that highlights significant opportunities for the UK to share its wind farm expertise with Australia’s emerging offshore wind market
These three paragraphs outline the study.
The Australian Offshore Wind Market Study, conducted by Arup, evaluates potential Australian offshore wind markets and analyses the strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for UK support.
Key findings indicate that the Australian offshore wind market could “substantially” benefit from collaboration with the UK suppliers, given the UK’s 23 years of experience and its status as the second largest offshore wind market globally, boasting 13.9 GW of installed capacity as of 2023, according to the UK Government.
Currently, Australia has over 40 offshore wind projects proposed for development.
I believe that the Australians could be a partner in the deal between the UK and Korea, as all three countries have similar objectives.
Conclusion
The Korean and German deals. and a possible Australian deal should be considered together.
Each country have their strengths and together with a few friends, they can help change the world’s power generation for the better.
- Just as the UK can be Europe’s powerhouse, Australia can do a similar job for South-East Asia.
- Any country with lots of energy can supply the green steel needed for wind turbine floats and foundations.
I would have felt the Dutch would have been next to join, as their electricity network is solidly connected to the UK and Germany. But after this week’s Dutch election, who knows what the Dutch will do?
Silvertown Tunnel Works – 24th September 2023
I took these pictures of the Silvertown Tunnel works on the North Bank of the Thames today.
I was on a train going to Woolwich Arsenal.
What Is The Silvertown Tunnel?
The title of this section, is the same as that of this article on the Londonist, which is an excellent description of the Silvertown Tunnel.
The article says this about tolls.
The new tunnel will require you to part with some pounds if you want to use it. Despite the consultation on this taking place a decade ago, the final details have yet to be publicised. We can expect something similar to the Dartford Crossing (currently £2.50 for cars etc, free for motorbikes/mopeds).
As there is a mayoral election next year, I doubt that Sadiq Khan will announce the charge on the Silvertown and Blackwall Tunnels before the election.
Let’s Play Accountants
This is a paragraph in the Londonist Article.
Construction of the tunnel is eating up something like £1.2 billion (2020 estimate). It’ll then cost another estimated £1 billion over 25 years to pay for maintenance, financing and operation. Riverlinx paid up-front costs and will be paid back by TfL through money collected from tolls.
The running costs would appear to be a billion over 25 years, which is £ 40,000,000 in a year.
This is said on this page on the Greater London Assembly web site.
Blackwall tunnels (northbound and southbound) each carry approximately 50,000 vehicles per day in only two lanes of traffic.
That means that each tunnel handles approximately 18,250,000 vehicles per year.
Dartford Crossing charges are according to the Wikipedia entry are as follows.
- Cars, motorhomes, small minibuses – £ 2.50
- 2-axle buses, coaches, vans, goods – £ 3.00
- Multi-axle goods, coaches – £ 6.00
The Wikipedia entry also says this about the capacity and traffic through and over the Dartford Crossing.
The design capacity is 135,000 vehicles per day, but in practice the crossing carries around 160,000.
My good friend; Bob from the 1970s had an impeccable cv.
- Chief Accountant of Vickers.
- Chief Management Accountant of Lloyds Bank.
He was also one of two outstanding practical accountants I have known.
Several of his practical tips on how to handle money in computers, ended up in Artemis; the project management computer system, I wrote in the 1970.
Bob and I would solve problems in Mother Bunches Wine Bar and I suspect, we’d come to the conclusion, that an average charge of £3 per vehicle will be charged in the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels.
I also believe from my fluid flow experience, that a proportion of the excess traffic through and over the Dartford Crossing will divert to the new Silvertown Tunnel.
- Together the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels will have four lanes in both directions.
- The Silvertown Tunnel will hopefully designed to modern standards and be more free-flowing, than the Blackwall.
- Sat-navs will direct drivers to the quickest routes.
Just as water finds its own level, an equilibrium will develop between the flows.
- I suspect that during the day, the flow over the Dartford Crossing will drop to the design capacity of 135,000
- At night, will vehicles divert through the free-flowing Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels?
- Will those living in North Central London inside the North Circular Road drive through the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels?
- Will the free-flowing Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels encourage people crossing the Thames to use their car, rather than the train, as the car is more convenient and the toll will be less than the train fare?
- We should also beware that new roads, railways and tunnels generate new traffic, that no-one predicts.
My feeling is that combined traffic through the four lanes of the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels will be upwards of seventy thousand per day.
I can now calculate revenue for different levels of combined traffic through the Blackwall and Silvertown Tunnels.
- 40,000 vehicles in each direction per day is a total of 29,200,000 vehicles per year, which would raise £ 87.6 million per year in toll charges.
- 50,000 vehicles in each direction per day is a total of 36,500,000 vehicles per year, which would raise £ 109.5 million per year in toll charges.
- 60,000 vehicles in each direction per day is a total of 43,800,000 vehicles per year, which would raise £ 131.4 million per year in toll charges.
- 70,000 vehicles in each direction per day is a total of 51,100,000 vehicles per year, which would raise £ 153.3 million per year in toll charges.
- 80,000 vehicles in each direction per day is a total of 58.400,000 vehicles per year, which would raise £ 175.2 million per year in toll charges.
I am assuming the following.
- All days of a 365-day year have similar traffic.
- Everybody pays without fuss, by technology like number-plate recognition.
- The average toll chare paid is £ 3.
I am drawn to the conclusion, that the contract signed between Transport for London and Riverlinx, is a licence to print money.
Even, if the tunnels only attract 40-50,000 vehicles per day, the revenue is way in excess of the £40 million needed for maintenance, financing and operation of the Silvertown Tunnel.
I have a few further thoughts and questions.
Who Are Riverlinx?
This is said on the About Roverlinx page of the Riverlinx web site.
TfL awarded Riverlinx SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) the contract for financing and overseeing the design, build and maintenance of the Silvertown Tunnel in 2019.
The Riverlinx CJV (Construction Joint Venture) is contracted by TfL and Riverlinx SPV to complete the design and construction works, delivering the Silvertown Tunnel on time and on budget.
Riverlinx CJV is a joint venture, a partnership bringing together international, market leading expertise from three civil engineering and construction companies: BAM Nuttall, Ferrovial Construction and SK ecoplant.
In collaboration with TfL, our supply chain and other key stakeholders in the project, Riverlinx CJV will complete construction of the Silvertown Tunnel in Spring 2025.
Note.
- BAM Nuttall is a construction and civil engineering company, that is a subsidiary of the Dutch Royal BAM Group.
- Ferrovial Construction is the construction subsidiary of Spanish company; Ferrovial.
- SK ecoplant is a subsidiary of the South Korean conglomorate; SK Group.
These companies should be capable of building the Silvertown Tunnel.
Where Will The Money To Build The Tunnel Come From?
In World’s Largest Wind Farm Attracts Huge Backing From Insurance Giant, using an article in The Times, I explain how Aviva invest our pensions and insurance money in wind farms.
Strangely, a tolled tunnel is a bit like a wind farm financially, in that if it’s working and the wind is blowing or the traffic is coming, it will continue to generate an income.
Built by quality construction companies, as most tunnels are, they will be the sort of investment, that would satisfy the Avivas of this world.
Will Riverlinx Get All The Tolls From The Tunnel?
Nothing is said about how the excess of income over expenditure will go.
I suspect, as the project is being designed, financed and built by Riverlinx, that they will not go unrewarded.
Will The Mayor Set The Toll Charges?
I suspect that the Mayor and TfL will set the charges.
These are some figures with different charges for 70,000 vehicles in each direction per day or a total of 51,100,000 vehicles per year.
- £3 in each direction would raise £ 153.3 million per year in toll charges.
- £4 in each direction would raise £ 204.4 million per year in toll charges.
- £5 in each direction would raise £ 255.5 million per year in toll charges.
- £6 in each direction would raise £ 306.6 million per year in toll charges.
Note.
- Some of the papers are talking of a four pound charge.
- A pound increase may not be much to the average driver, but they will certainly mount up.
Higher toll charges could be used by an unscrupulous Mayor to deter vehicles entering Central London or nudge people towards public transport.
What Happens If The Tunnel Springs A Leak?
I can remember the following tunnels being built under the Thames in my lifetime.
- Blackwall Tunnel – second bore
- Dartford Tunnel
- DLR to Greenwich and Lewisham
- DLR to Woolwich
- Elizabeth Line to Woolwich
- Jubilee Line – four crossings
- Victoria Line to Vauxhall
None of these seven seems to have sprung a leak recently. And neither have the older Victorian tunnels.
Tunnels with an income stream, appear to be a good risk, if they don’t spring a leak.
But London tunnels don’t seem to have a high likelihood of leaking.
Fines
Fines could be a problem, but this article on Kent Online, which is entitled Dartford Crossing Continues To Generate more Than One-Third Of Income From Fines As Profits Total More Than £100m, says otherwise.
Conclusion
This would appear to be a low risk venture and I suspect it will make Riverlinx and TfL a lot of money.
Ørsted Divests Remaining Stake In London Array For EUR 829 Million
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
Ørsted has signed an agreement with funds managed by Schroders Greencoat to divest its remaining 25 per cent minority interest in the London Array offshore wind farm in the UK.
These first three paragraphs outline the deal and give Ørsted reasons.
The total value of the transaction is GBP 717 million (approximately EUR 829 million).
Ørsted originally owned 50 per cent of the project and divested an initial 25 per cent of London Array to Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec (CDPQ) in 2014.
The company does not have operations and maintenance (O&M) responsibility at the 630 MW London Array, and as the firm only holds a minority interest, Ørsted said it considers the asset non-strategic.
Note.
- Ørsted is the world’s largest developer of offshore wind power by number of built offshore wind farms.
- Schroders Greencoat LLP is a specialist manager dedicated to the renewable energy infrastructure sector.
This is a typical transaction, which is enabled between companies in the world’s financial centres all the time.
- Company A has an asset, which generates a predictable cash flow and needs money to invest in similar assets.
- Fund B has lots of money, but needs a predictable cash flow to pay interest to its investors.
So it is not surprising, that Fund B buys the asset from Company A.
I should say that the project management computer system, that I designed; Artemis was leased to the end users.
This eased the process of funding the sales.
In later years, I seem to remember, that we took bundles of leases with companies like BAe, BP, Shell, Texaco and sold them to banks, who needed a safe investment.
30 MW Offshore Wind Turbines Being Considered For New Project In Sweden
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
Freja Offshore, a joint venture between Hexicon and Mainstream Renewable Power, has submitted an application for an offshore wind farm in Sweden that could have an installed capacity of between 2 GW and 2.5 GW and, according to the project’s consultation document, could feature wind turbines of up to 30 MW per unit.
This paragraph, indicates how turbines have grown over the last two decades.
The wind turbines in the future will probably be taller, the rotor diameter larger and the turbines more powerful, the joint venture says in the consultation document, and compares the largest wind turbines launched in 2011, which have a rotor diameter of 164 metres and an installed capacity of 8 MW, with those launched 10 years later, featuring a rotor diameter of 236 metres and an output of 15 MW.
Moving on a few years to 2030 and it doesn’t seem unreasonable that turbine size will double again to 30 MW.
I could see them becoming the standard turbine, providing they aren’t too heavy for the fixed foundations or floats.
It would be an interesting exercise to model the costs of wind farms, as the turbines get bigger.
With North Sea oil and gas, I was told several times, by Artemis users, that as cranes got larger, which allowed bigger lifts, the costs of offshore infrastructure decreased.
Note.
Run Larger, Multi-Site Offshore Wind Tenders, French Energy Commission Recommends To Gov’t
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on offshoreWIND.biz.
This is the sub-heading.
The French Energy Regulatory Commission (CRE) has recommended that the government conducts larger offshore wind tenders, inviting bids for several sites. This is according to the latest update from CRE, which has now published specifications for the country’s AO5 tender for a floating wind farm in southern Brittany.
Looking at the building of large numbers of wind turbines and their fixed or floating foundations, I am drawn to the conclusion, that it might be better if all were as identical as possible.
I should also note, that we were very successful selling Artemis project management systems in France. Our manager in the country, said it was because all the country’s top managers had been to the same schools and universities and passed the best solutions around themselves.
So perhaps a standard solution appeals to the French psyche?
In the UK, BP are currently designing and planning these fixed foundation wind farms.
- Mona – 1500 MW – 35 m. depth – 30 km. offshore
- Morgan – 1500 MW – 35 m. depth – 30 km. offshore
- Morven – 2907 MW – 65-75 m. depth – 60 km. offshore
Given that Mona and Morgan are in the Irish Sea and Morven is North-East of Aberdeen, I wouldn’t be surprised to find that BP treat these three projects as two separate 3 GW projects, which could share the same turbine design and fixed foundation designs, that were very similar.
I’m sure BP would save money, if they used a similar design philosophy on all three projects.
125 mph Upgrade For MML OLE South Of Bedford
The title of this post, is the same as that of an article in the June 2023 Edition of Modern Railways.
This is the sub-heading.
Targeted Investment Benefits From Project SPEED Approach
The main objective was to upgrade the 1980s electrification between Bedford and St. Pancras, so that it could support 125 mph running by East Midlands Railway’s new Class 810 trains.
Originally, a total replacement was envisaged, but in the end a more selective approach will be carried out.
This paragraph indicates the benefits of the approach.
The proposal for wholesale replacement of the OLE South of Bedford would have cost several hundreds of millions of pounds, whereas the approved scheme comes in at just £84 million, around one-third of the previous cost – testament to the application of SPEED principles.
I have a couple of thoughts.
Network Rail’s Project Management
If I go back to the 1970s and 1980s, when we were developing and selling the project management system; Artemis to the world, we sold very few systems to the UK Government and none to British Rail or the NHS. Later Artemis was used on the Channel Tunnel and the Rail Link to London, the Jubilee Line Extension, sections of the Docklands Light Railway and railways in Australia and Hong Kong.
So it is good to see, Network Rail getting to grips with managing the electrification upgrade of the Midland Main Line with some good project management.
An Encounter With A Group Of Drivers
It might have been five years ago, when I travelled with a group of drivers from East Midlands Trains positioning to St. Pancras.
- One of the observations they had was that the Class 700 trains coming into service were not fast enough as they were only 100 mph trains, whereas their Class 222 trains were capable of 125 mph.
- Since then the Class 360 trains have been introduced on Corby services. These trains have been uprated from 100 to 110 mph.
- We now have the situation, where Class 810 trains capable of running at 125 mph will replace the Class 222 train.
If you look at the traffic at West Hampstead Thameslink station, you can see that Both Thameslink and East Midlands Railway are using the fast lines, through platforms 3 and 4.
The fast lines have a maximum speed of 125 mph North of Luton and generally 100-110 mph between Luton and West Hampstead Thameslink station.
Would it help the timetabling of services on the Midland Main Line, if the Thameslink services were capable of running faster, when they were using the fast lines?
I feel the drivers may have a point.
Coeliac Journey Through Covid-19 – Introduction
Introduction
I am coeliac and I had an interesting journey through the Covid-19 pandemic.
My experiences will be laid out in this narrative, as I believe they might be of use to someone.
I was born in 1947 and after a good education at Minchenden Grammar School in North London, I read Electrical Engineering and Electronics at Liverpool University, where in addition to getting a B. Eng degree, I met and married my late wife; Celia. We had three boys in the early seventies.
My working life was mainly spent in the solving of mathematical problems and writing software to perform complex calculations mainly in the fields of data analysis, project management, statistics and the solving of simultaneous differential equations.
The Artemis software, that I wrote in the 1970s, controlled the building of the Channel Tunnel, was the software of choice in the development of the North Sea oil and gas fields and was even used by NASA to plan the missions of the Space Shuttles and their refurbishment after each flight.
My business partners and myself sold the company to the American aerospace company; Lockheed in the 1980s.
Since then, I have been involved in various ventures.
The most successful was to back two inventors, who had developed an aerosol valve that used nitrogen as the propellant.
We sold that on to Johnson & Johnson, but the experience led to the development of the Respimat Inhaler for Boehringer Ingelheim.
Hail The Hercules
The title of this post was used on the front page to indicate an article in the Meccano Magazine about the arrival of the Lockheed Hercules in the mid-1950s.
The Wikipedia entry for the Hercules, starts with this sentence.
The Lockheed C-130 Hercules is an American four-engine turboprop military transport aircraft designed and built by Lockheed (now Lockheed Martin). Capable of using unprepared runways for takeoffs and landings, the C-130 was originally designed as a troop, medevac, and cargo transport aircraft.
The aircraft first flew in 1954 and nearly seventy years later they are still doing the same operations, they were designed for, with various reports of Hercules flying to the remote Wadi Seidna airstrip in Sudan.
This Google Map shows the airstrip.
Note.
- There appears to be two runways and some form of operational building or terminal.
- The River Nile is at the East of the map.
It looks like an airfield, where Hercules are intended to be used, even in circumstances, where severe damage has been inflicted to the runway.
When Metier Management Systems and Artemis were sold to Lockheed, I had several conversations with senior people and the company was and probably still is rightly proud of its long-lived design.
Meet HiiROC, The Startup Making Low-Cost Hydrogen Free From Emissions
The title of this post, is the same as that of this article on UKTN.
This article explains the technology behind, what I feel is one of the most promising start-ups, I’ve seen.
It is certainly a must read.
This paragraph explains how they plan to lease the machines.
It plans to bring in revenue by leasing its machines to companies charging on the output of hydrogen and carbon.
That is almost how we sold the Artemis project management software, I wrote over forty years ago.
- Our bank manager liked it, as we were leasing to companies like BP, Chevron and Shell.
- His bosses liked it, as leasing companies don’t normally have that dodgy word; innovation.
- Our in-house accountant liked it, as we had an easy to predict cash flow.
- Our customers liked it, as all they had to provide was a 13-amp socket and paper for the printer.
It was a model that served us well.
Conclusion
The more I learn of HiiROC, the more I like the company.
The Anonymous Widower 