RE: 50p?20 Apr 2025 15:32
The 2028 carbon tax should give the industry a kick up the backside to start adopting transitional fuels but how many viable options are actually out there which can be deployed at scale in the next 2.5 years? I think surely oil majors should be threatened by QED but when I think about it surely they would prefer a technology like ours to be widely adopted as it won't hit their bottom line so hard as opposed to other fuels.
I asked AI for pros and cons and if oil majors should back quadrise or not and this is the response...
Why Oil Giants and Shippers Should Back Quadrise (and QED):
1. Drop-In, Transitional, but Future-Proof: BioMSAR works today with minimal engine changes. BioMSAR Zero gives it a pathway to full net-zero by 2050 — meaning it's not just a bridge, it’s a long-term compliance solution. That’s gold for companies nervous about getting stranded between transitional and green fuels.
2. IMO Carbon Tax (2028) Compliance: From 2028, shipping companies will start paying real money for emissions. BioMSAR already delivers a 20–25% CO₂ reduction. That’s immediate savings. BioMSAR Zero, built from waste-based feedstocks, takes that even further and sets shippers up to reduce costs and emissions simultaneously — all without switching to volatile or infrastructure-heavy fuels like ammonia or hydrogen.
3. Utilising Existing Oil Infrastructure: QED’s tech still uses heavy residual oils or biomass waste — both of which fit seamlessly into the current refining and transport systems. For oil majors, that means their assets keep earning — no stranded refineries, no pipelines gathering dust.
4. Abundant Waste Streams = Energy Security: QED’s access to municipal, agricultural, and industrial waste streams means they can produce low- or zero-carbon fuels at scale, without competing with food crops or depending on green hydrogen availability. This sidesteps one of the major problems with alternative fuels: cost, volatility, and supply constraints.
So Why Haven’t Oil Majors Jumped In Yet?
1. Not Owned by a Supermajor: Oil giants like to control the tech. Until QED proves large-scale adoption or partnerships with Tier 1 players, they may wait in the wings or try to acquire them outright.
2. Regulatory Conservatism: Some majors are hedging their bets, investing in methanol or hydrogen because that’s where policy headlines are — even if those solutions aren’t practical yet.
3. Perception Risk: As BioMSAR still uses hydrocarbons, some may view it as delaying the transition. But once BioMSAR Zero is proven and certified, that objection collapses.
Big Picture:
QED offers something rare: a bridge fuel that doesn't just tick the box for 2028 — it extends all the way to 2050 net-zero goals. If proven at scale, they’re the ideal partner for oil majors, refiners, and the shipping sector — helping them transition profitably, without tearing up existing systems.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
