Periodic Reporting for period 1 - Tryst Energy (Tryst Energy: Light Energy Harvesting for the IoT-industry)
Berichtszeitraum: 2018-09-01 bis 2019-02-28
During the technical requirements session of the Tryst module for the three major market segments will be analysed and determined. In order to assess the technical feasibility of upgrading the technology from TRL7 to TRL9 TWTG will investigate which parts can be standardised into use-case adaptable components in order to reduce manufacturing time and cost to an acceptable level. This task results in a realistic prediction of the manufacturing costs of the Tryst technology, including a technology roadmap for getting there.
Determine commercial feasibility by validating the financial and environmental benefits for all stakeholders
Based on preliminary calculations, both the environmental and the financial benefits of Tryst compared to the conventional batteries are large. However, potential buyers have indicated that they need stronger proof in order to take the investment decision. Therefore engineers of TWTG will develop a mathematical model capable of giving a realistic prediction of reduction in operational and investments costs and environmental impact for using Tryst. The outcome in terms of return on investment will be discussed with the existing potential buyers, resulting in a realistic prediction of sales in the next five years. The economic feasibility depends on the outcomes of this task.
The result of the technical study was that the expected lifetime guarantee would have to be adjusted to 15 years vs 60 years we previously calculated and validated. This due to less performing solar technology (still very early stage) heavenly impacting the life expectancy.
These technical changes impacted the commercial feasibility study and the case study versus battery powered sensors resulted in a negative outcome for the tryst module.
The conclusions we drafted after carrying out these studies are:
-The technology stands and performs to be a viable energy source for low power devices.
-The benefits over a regular battery solution are not commercial viable (in contradiction of the assumptions before carrying out these studies).
-The environmental impact of an energy harvesting solution is less than that of a battery, but more than anticipated before carrying out these studies.