4 ms·

> Side note: From read this article they desperately need some experts. They are re-solving solved problems, and not working on what their startup is actually a

> Side note: From read this article they desperately need some experts. They are re-solving solved problems, and not working on what their startup is actually about. (I should add that them seem to be aware of this.) That was my thought as well. These guys may have a viable business idea, but they don't appear to have any engineering experience at all, nor do they appear to understand that one can research for existing solutions, or hire/consult with experts. It doesn't bode well for the entire enterprise.

iso1337 8y ago
Looks like they forgot to proof read their website too. "If you are want to consume carbon-neutral hydrogen, please reach us at sales@charmindustrial.com" I wish them the best of luck, but I've seen the first wave of biofuels fail and pivot to selling cosmetics or go under (Amyris, Solazyme, LS9). Sure, this is different, but the economics haven't really changed. It's damn hard to compete against something you can pump out of the ground and has no price tag on its externalities. Personally, I think more effort put into lobbying and activism is better spent. I know we have the technology to make carbon-neutral fuels. I sincerely hope that we transition to using something like EVs for all ground-based transport and biofuels for applications like jet travel that need the energy density. However, it's the market and the economics that don't work out. And they don't work in a way that prevents you from having easy stepping stones to scaling up. There's basically no-one who will buy this commodity at small scale for a much higher price. You have to succeed completely or fail. You can even look at startups using conventional approaches and cheap feedstock (Siluria with methane). 10 years and still working on their tech. These big commodity markets have huge players who have huge competitive advantages.
- ars 8y ago
  Hydrogen is a mistake anyways, they should make syngas instead. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syngas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syngas and then Substitute natural gas (SNG) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_natural_gas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_natural_gas And if you check the articles people already make those. I guess their "new thing" is using grass? switchgrass is usually considered the best plant for this. I don't really understand why they are reinventing things that already exist.
- pkrein 8y ago
  Charm co-founder here... thanks for the typo find, fixed! People have been lobbying and protesting for years, I don't believe it's going to fix things on its own. Policy makers need legitimate technology options to put support behind, and that's what we intend to develop. Thankfully you are simply incorrect that "no-one who will buy this commodity at small scale for a much higher price". We are in active sales conversations with a number of buyers who are very much willing to pay a premium for the commodity given its reduced carbon intensity.

iso1337 8y ago

Looks like they forgot to proof read their website too. "If you are want to consume carbon-neutral hydrogen, please reach us at sales@charmindustrial.com" I wish them the best of luck, but I've seen the first wave of biofuels fail and pivot to selling cosmetics or go under (Amyris, Solazyme, LS9). Sure, this is different, but the economics haven't really changed. It's damn hard to compete against something you can pump out of the ground and has no price tag on its externalities. Personally, I think more effort put into lobbying and activism is better spent. I know we have the technology to make carbon-neutral fuels. I sincerely hope that we transition to using something like EVs for all ground-based transport and biofuels for applications like jet travel that need the energy density. However, it's the market and the economics that don't work out. And they don't work in a way that prevents you from having easy stepping stones to scaling up. There's basically no-one who will buy this commodity at small scale for a much higher price. You have to succeed completely or fail. You can even look at startups using conventional approaches and cheap feedstock (Siluria with methane). 10 years and still working on their tech. These big commodity markets have huge players who have huge competitive advantages.

ars 8y ago
Hydrogen is a mistake anyways, they should make syngas instead. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syngas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syngas and then Substitute natural gas (SNG) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_natural_gas https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitute_natural_gas And if you check the articles people already make those. I guess their "new thing" is using grass? switchgrass is usually considered the best plant for this. I don't really understand why they are reinventing things that already exist.
pkrein 8y ago
Charm co-founder here... thanks for the typo find, fixed! People have been lobbying and protesting for years, I don't believe it's going to fix things on its own. Policy makers need legitimate technology options to put support behind, and that's what we intend to develop. Thankfully you are simply incorrect that "no-one who will buy this commodity at small scale for a much higher price". We are in active sales conversations with a number of buyers who are very much willing to pay a premium for the commodity given its reduced carbon intensity.