Biomass steam in both plans, PV on the factory roof only
Deploy test site / deploy (push) Successful in 49s
Deploy test site / deploy (push) Successful in 49s
User, 17 Oct 2026: "only put solar on the factory, prepare the other buildings for solar, option a and b should operate on biomass". - Steam: two 500 kg/h biomass modules (Getabec class, 6M to 10M THB) plus a fuel store and handling block (1M to 2M, estimate) in both plans; the electric bank becomes the alternative. ~0.67M THB of fuel a year against ~4.9M for electric steam; grid demand ~264 kW instead of ~980 kW. - Solar: ~520 kWp on the factory roof (the biomass-case optimum is ~500 to 550 kWp, hourly sketch in sustainability.md "PV size with biomass steam"); office roof and parking canopies built PV-ready (~120 kWp later). ~87 % used on site, ~61 % of the plant's electricity. - Calculator: biomass default, bFuel row, pvKWp 520, pvSelf 87, iso fills the factory roof first and shows the other roofs as PV-ready. - Numbers: launch plant ~168M / 232M / 296M with contingency; Plan A ~182M (~2M above 180M: the Chinese-route lever priced only electric boilers; a Chinese biomass quote is the way back), Plan B ~217M (label ~215M), ~35M more. Calculator EBITDA A 2.17M, B 2.23M USD. - CSV, total-investment, revenue-model, sustainability, scale, biomass, site-candidates, boi, steam-cooling, construction RFQ (canopies PV-ready), README, roadmap; business plan draft 0.3 rebuilt (A and B 63 pages) with new renders.
This commit is contained in:
grabowski committed
1 parent
9ff5feef11
commit
984ced2485
35 files changed
+849
-665
No files matched your search
@@ -670,23 +670,24 @@ What it says:
|
||||
|
||||
The business plan comes in two versions
|
||||
([total investment](total-investment.md#two-plans-a-at-180m-thb-and-b-at-215m-thb-october-2026)):
|
||||
**Plan A** (~177M THB, the launch plant with six cost levers) and
|
||||
**Plan B** (~216M THB, the same launch plant with everything in), both
|
||||
priced without contingency and with the ramp-up reserve. Both run the
|
||||
**Plan A** (~182M THB, the launch plant with six cost levers) and
|
||||
**Plan B** (~217M THB, the same launch plant with everything in), both
|
||||
priced without contingency and with the ramp-up reserve, both on biomass
|
||||
steam with PV on the factory roof (October 2026). Both run the
|
||||
same three presses, so volume, price, direct cost, title services and
|
||||
overheads are those of the launch-plant table above; only the
|
||||
depreciation follows each plan's capital (estimates):
|
||||
|
||||
- **Plan A**: the high end of its blocks (6.25M USD) over 10 years, the
|
||||
midpoint (4.90M USD) over 12.5, the low end (3.56M USD) over 15. The
|
||||
solar PPA adds its power price to the energy line (~0.07M USD a year in
|
||||
the calculator for the ~640 kWp array), not shown here.
|
||||
- **Plan B**: 7.73M USD over 10 years, 6.08M over 12.5, 4.42M over 15.
|
||||
Its owned solar (~640 kWp, every roof and canopy) saves the PPA power bill; cassette and CD-R sales, tours
|
||||
- **Plan A**: the high end of its blocks (6.44M USD) over 10 years, the
|
||||
midpoint (5.06M USD) over 12.5, the low end (3.68M USD) over 15. The
|
||||
solar PPA adds its power price to the energy line (~0.06M USD a year in
|
||||
the calculator for the ~520 kWp factory roof), not shown here.
|
||||
- **Plan B**: 7.79M USD over 10 years, 6.11M over 12.5, 4.42M over 15.
|
||||
Its owned solar (~520 kWp on the factory roof) saves the PPA power bill; cassette and CD-R sales, tours
|
||||
and the Payap programmes it opens from the start are not modelled.
|
||||
- **Payback** is counted on the whole plan price including the ramp-up
|
||||
reserve (Plan A 3.86M / 5.35M / 6.85M USD, Plan B 4.72M / 6.53M /
|
||||
8.34M USD from the low to the high end).
|
||||
reserve (Plan A 3.99M / 5.52M / 7.05M USD, Plan B 4.73M / 6.56M /
|
||||
8.40M USD from the low to the high end).
|
||||
|
||||
| USD/yr | A adverse | A central | A favourable | B adverse | B central | B favourable |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
@@ -697,23 +698,23 @@ depreciation follows each plan's capital (estimates):
|
||||
| Title-services contribution | 0.07M | 0.23M | 0.48M | 0.07M | 0.23M | 0.48M |
|
||||
| Cash overheads | 0.45M | 0.33M | 0.20M | 0.45M | 0.33M | 0.20M |
|
||||
| **EBITDA** | **0.23M** | **1.73M** | **3.79M** | **0.23M** | **1.73M** | **3.79M** |
|
||||
| Depreciation | 0.62M | 0.39M | 0.24M | 0.77M | 0.49M | 0.29M |
|
||||
| **Operating profit** | **-0.39M** | **1.34M** | **3.55M** | **-0.54M** | **1.24M** | **3.50M** |
|
||||
| Depreciation | 0.64M | 0.40M | 0.25M | 0.78M | 0.49M | 0.29M |
|
||||
| **Operating profit** | **-0.41M** | **1.33M** | **3.54M** | **-0.55M** | **1.24M** | **3.50M** |
|
||||
| Revenue | 2.28M (~75M THB) | 3.65M (~120M THB) | 5.41M (~179M THB) | 2.28M (~75M THB) | 3.65M (~120M THB) | 5.41M (~179M THB) |
|
||||
| Payback on the plan price (EBITDA, mature year) | ~30 yr | ~3.1 yr (2.2 to 4.0) | ~1.0 yr | ~36 yr | ~3.8 yr (2.7 to 4.8) | ~1.2 yr |
|
||||
| Payback on the plan price (EBITDA, mature year) | ~31 yr | ~3.2 yr (2.3 to 4.1) | ~1.1 yr | ~37 yr | ~3.8 yr (2.7 to 4.9) | ~1.2 yr |
|
||||
|
||||
What it says:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Plan A** breaks even on operating profit at **~0.2 million records a
|
||||
year**; its adverse corner still loses money, because it would need
|
||||
~0.9 million records to cover depreciation and the three presses make
|
||||
~1.0 million records to cover depreciation and the three presses make
|
||||
0.58 million at that rate.
|
||||
- **Plan B** breaks even at **~0.24 million records**, and its adverse
|
||||
corner loses more (~1.1 million records needed to cover depreciation).
|
||||
At the central cost and volume the price that covers its depreciation
|
||||
is ~2.8 USD (~92 THB) a record.
|
||||
- **On these numbers Plan B's extra ~39M THB earns little**: the same
|
||||
EBITDA here (the calculator, which splits energy by plan, puts it ~0.07M
|
||||
- **On these numbers Plan B's extra ~35M THB earns little**: the same
|
||||
EBITDA here (the calculator, which splits energy by plan, puts it ~0.06M
|
||||
USD a year ahead for the PPA bill the owned array avoids), more
|
||||
depreciation and a longer payback. Its case rests on what
|
||||
the table leaves out: the PPA power bill it avoids (the BOI no longer
|
||||
@@ -726,11 +727,13 @@ What it says:
|
||||
|
||||
The [calculator](../fleet-calculator.html) presets, at the team's
|
||||
planning rates (3 records a minute per Duplex system) and its own cost
|
||||
build-up, give at 850k records: **Plan A** EBITDA 2.05M USD, payback 2.4
|
||||
years on the investment, cash payback in year ~3.9 and ~25 % IRR over ten
|
||||
years with the reserve in year 0; **Plan B** EBITDA 2.12M USD, payback 2.9
|
||||
years, cash payback in year ~4.4 and ~21 % IRR (pre-tax, pre-financing,
|
||||
estimates).
|
||||
build-up, give at 850k records: **Plan A** EBITDA 2.17M USD, payback 2.3
|
||||
years on the investment, cash payback in year ~3.8 and ~26 % IRR over ten
|
||||
years with the reserve in year 0; **Plan B** EBITDA 2.23M USD, payback 2.7
|
||||
years, cash payback in year ~4.2 and ~22 % IRR (pre-tax, pre-financing,
|
||||
estimates). Both rose ~0.11M to 0.12M USD a year when steam moved from electric to
|
||||
biomass (~4.2M THB a year less energy); the table above does not split
|
||||
energy by fuel, so it does not show that saving.
|
||||
|
||||
## Operating picture at full capacity (five-press fleet)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user