Fuel Cell Energy “End of relationship with POSCO Energy, no discussion”
POSCO ENERGY “Establishment of Korea Fuel Cell based on JV operation consultation”
[에너지신문] In the molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) market, the conflict between Fuel Cell Energy (FCE) and POSCO Energy in the US, which has been in partnership as a business partner since 2007, has spread to emotional battles and is turning to a point of view.
On the 11th, POSCO ENERGY announced on the 11th that the press release recently distributed by Fuel Cell Energy through a public relations agency contained distorted content that was different from the facts, and expressed its regret to FCE.
It is analyzed because of the concern that POSCO ENERGY, which has taken a cautious position despite the successive FCE announcements, may be caught up in a larger controversy if it does not express its position.
On the 6th, Jason Few, CEO of Fuel Cell Energy, a U.S. hydrogen fuel cell manufacturer, said, “Fuel Cell Energy has ended its relationship with POSCO Energy, and discusses a joint venture, sells carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) modules, There is no discussion in the form of transactions,” he said.
Accordingly, POSCO ENERGY refuted this in some way through an official statement of position.
According to POSCO ENERGY’s position statement, “We are making it clear that we have signed MOUs with FCE two times in 2015 and 2019 and discussed the operation of JV (Joint Venture).” On November 5, 2019, we established Korea Fuel Cell, a company specializing in fuel cells, in order to strengthen the fuel cell business and strengthen competitiveness.”
“Until June 2020, FCE and JV had been negotiated and positively negotiated, but after that, we suddenly lost contact.” “The FCE that stopped communicating with POSCO ENERGY has been licensed for exclusive sales in Korea. “We suddenly filed an international arbitration amounting to $200 million, asking for the termination of the contract, and POSCO ENERGY has filed an objection application of $8.8 billion.”
POSCO ENERGY strongly refuted that the argument that “FCE has not fulfilled its contractual obligations since 2012, when licenses were granted through bilateral contracts,” is not true.
POSCO ENERGY said, “Since 2012, we have paid royalties for sales in 2019, and the fact that we paid royalties means that we did the sales. This is different from the claim that FCE did not pay royalties for licensing for the period. The fact that FCE’s product has not been purchased since 2015 proves FCE’s unilateral false claim.”
In addition, the assertion that POSCO ENERGY requested unlimited rights to all FCE intellectual property rights, including new technologies that are not included in contractual rights, was contrary to the fact.
POSCO ENERGY has discussed how to invest FCE’s intellectual property rights to a joint venture in consideration of the FCE’s position that it is difficult to invest in cash, and if you invest, you will own a stake in the corresponding joint venture according to the valuation of a third party. The fact that the request was made without fair compensation was FCE’s unilateral false claim.
In addition, he stressed that the argument that POSCO ENERGY had split-foundation of Korea Fuel Cell without FCE’s consent is also different from the facts.
Korea Fuel Cell is a wholly-owned subsidiary of POSCO Energy, and the division of Korea Fuel Cell is not subject to FCE’s consent. It was emphasized once again that the establishment of Korea Fuel Cell was aimed at strengthening the expertise of the fuel cell business.
FCE claimed that the termination of the contract, which was notified to POSCO Energy in June, took effect immediately, but said it was not true. FCE is insisting on unilateral termination of the contract without any justifiable grounds in the contract. This is a unilateral argument from FCE, and POSCO ENERGY has repeatedly stated that the contract is valid.
POSCO ENERGY stressed, “I request that the FCE refrain from disseminating distorted facts and faithfully fulfill the contracts concluded by both companies.”
As the conflict between POSCO Energy and Fuel Cell Energy is intensifying, concerns about fuel cell facilities in domestic power plants are also becoming visible.
Currently, the scale of power plants operated by receiving MCFC power generation facilities through a license agreement between POSCO Energy and Fuel Cell Energy is about 69.4 ㎿ (4 sites) in Gyeonggi-do alone, and about 174.8 ㎿ (18 power plants) nationwide.
However, in recent years, there have been disruptions in the supply of facilities and A/S, which has already caused disruptions in the operation of some power plants, and there are concerns about damages such as loss of investments from clients due to the termination of the final contract or prolonged lawsuits caused by conflict.
Copyright © The Energy News Unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited