Quadrise Share Price (QED)

> Thats a shed load of MMU's around the world

A single full sized MMU can produce a vast amount of MSAR: Quadrise advises about 350,000 mt/year or 1000 mt/day, the former of which includes assumptions for maintenance downtime.

There are only a handful of major bunkering hubs worldwide that the majority of large container vessels take on fuel. And if they need a top-up of a different fuel, they can store it in a separate tank (fuel switching is performed routinely nowadays).

I think the major challenge is more about getting these LONOs done, clients committed, and getting ourselves into each major bunkering hub — e.g. setting up the supply of resid with a refinery (alternatively HFO for bioMSAR), sourcing and supplying residual biofuels, finding bunkering partners, getting all permits, etcetera.

That's where partnerships should come if Quadrise are able to get over the painful sticking points we've been waiting on for ages now.

I agree that the Utah project should be more straightforward, but the key moments there will be if/when Valkor reveal they have local customers willing to try and buy MSAR, and of course, signing the license agreement.

(p.s. not sure why folk keep writing Utah in all caps? 😅)

I think the supply is not the problem… this is solved with the marketing concept where they do not own or sell the product, but technology. So fast scale up is not the issue. If there will be demand, the suppliers can buy the units and licenses… And the production of an small unit is not a problem, because equipment suppliers are all around the world. From this interview I just hear out that the market is ready for proven and accepted solution, that can deliver sufficient supply… so the diversification of components it’s a good strategy, where if there is no bio components, you burn MSAR, if you have sufficient feedstock you go for bioMSAR in different mixtures…. So the fundamentals are good. But as it was mentioned few times regularly framework has to be supportive to it. So let’s see what next months brings…

Its always bothered me as to how QED could supply enough MSAR or newer version to the likes of MSC. Thats a shed load of MMU's around the world. Doesn't seem likely somehow, UTAH is defo more doable.

Https://www.freightnews.co.za/article/supply-chains-are-undergoing-significant-changes-msc-ceo

The main challenge in decarbonising the industry, Toft explained, lay in the availability of fuel, which is why MSC opted for LNG.

He added that there was a pathway from LNG to greener alternatives such as synthetic LNG, and noted that MSC had already invested over $20 billion in dual-fuel vessels.

Seem to be doing exactly what Maersk did with VLSFO, pivoting away to a more expensive and more polluting fuel regardless of financial and environmental costs.

Wasting our time and money just for the fun of it.

As I assume we where informed correctly, BioMSAR is cheaper and better as LNG, flexible for scale up and flexible in terms of feedstock of bio components, QED has still big market to deliver their solution on the table. Now is the question for few millions, will QED manage to get the chair on the table and will they be ready with good set of cards to play in this game….