Member Info for dustofnations

MSAR proportionally has more water, which causes a larger reduction in NOx because it lowers combustion temperatures (amongst other mechanisms).

bioMSAR has proportionally less water, because some of that is displaced with glycerine — hence its NOx reduction isn't quite as significant. But both perform extremely well.

Fantastic, thank you DiverKing. She's a busy bee! If and when we can get Leandra using our bioMSAR and MSAR fuels, it'll be a great feeling and surely provide a tangible reflection of progress to the market and customers.

It's not an easy task (history proves that), but it's a goal that is worth chasing. I hope this timely appointment of Peter Borup will help us build up a head of steam.

And hopefully something to positive celebrate in the coming months. We certainly deserve it.

DiverKing - please share some snaps, if you're able to!

Good points, sempahorRed.

And the marine tramping market, which is Peter's immediate area includes bulkers and tankers — an area that has greatly interested Quadrise for several years for trials and commercialisation, but we've not really made any inroads.

Peter will undoubtedly have many useful contacts in that sub-sector, and understand the correct commercial and logistical requirements for that market (e.g. which bunkering spots are important for which target operators).

I hope this will be complementary to our much-delayed trial campaign with MSC, as expanding the market for the marine product stack was one of the key elements of the strategy.

Fingers crossed...

Background research for an interview isn't the same as doing background research after accepting the role.

There are many months worth of deep knowledge he needs to build up on the technology; business/commercial model; market segment, placement, and viability; personnel; existing contracts/potential; finances; etc, etc.

Yes, I reckon the market needs to see positive business development activity to affirm belief in the company. Given Peter's extremely strong CV, I suspect he could have taken any number of jobs in the industry. Instead, he's seen something in Quadrise that he believes in, so I see that as a positive sign.

I'm sure Peter understands that Quadrise is a company in its 'proof is in the pudding' phase of life, and will not maintain its SP over hype alone.

His job is to get things over the line and work his magic to push partners and clients along to commercial deals rather than perpetual trials and being repeatedly shuffled behind other projects/priorities. That's where customer management skills are absolutely critical.

I welcome Peter and think this is a good investment of our money. After all, runway is only useful you believe there will be something delivered by the end. I believe someone of Peter's calibre should strongly benefit our ability to deliver in a reasonable timeframe (especially given the deadlines for EU and IMO CO2 compliance are not too far away, so we need to be in the mix before that starts to bite).

He doesn't start the job until next month, but I'm sure he'll already be doing his background research so he can hit the ground running.

Posted this on the Quadrise Shareholders' Forum this morning, but here's a very interesting interview with soon-to-be CEO Peter Borup from a few years ago. I've put the timestamp to 20 minutes where he covers several relevant areas.

He speaks very well indeed:

https://youtu.be/HSGDEysx9i4?si=AtiuTxo8tXADR5IC&t=1204

Well, indeed, good thing their ships move faster than their lawyers.

I was talking specifically about the oil that HSO are trying to extract (heavy sweet oil from underground sandstone formations). Which has not been achieved commercially before, as there was not even regulatory/legal framework in Utah to do it. I didn't think I needed to be explicit that I wasn't talking about every other source of oil in the state.

If it were easy to get that oil out in Utah, it would have been done before (many have tried previously and failed). That it has been a challenge is not a surprise to me, from all perspectives (legal, technical, financial, etc).

Kudos to them for persisting.

The OEM for the kiln, yes.

It's a different manufacturer at 'Site A' they've shifted the trials over to versus 'Site B' previously. It seems we're log-jammed again until the new OEM decides to cooperate with us.

Touch of deja vu. We've had this similar issues OEMs holding us up with marine, etc.

I don't think there's a special OEM trial, unless I'm misunderstanding. We just need OEM approval to continue with the already-planned commercial-scale trial at Site A.

It all seems a bit ridiculous considering it's just burning MSAR for heat.

Based on historical commentary from the management team, yes, if the project activity is deferred then significant planned expenditure will also be deferred.

That's obviously good and bad.

Good in the sense that the runway is greatly extended.

Bad in that exciting project development activity hasn't occurred yet. We are all keenly aware of that aspect, though!

Yes, Valkor delayed payment was new information, but not surprising if you've been following the trials and tribulations out at Asphalt Ridge I've posted over the last year or so. They're clearly still having challenges getting things rolling (and funded).

There have been no EDGAR updates (e.g. to IPO prospectus) since March.

Hopefully they can make the breakthrough they need very soon. They've had a few unfortunate events with the duff downhole heaters and poor advice from the manufacturer to inject large amounts of water, which has set them back.

It also sounds like they've needed to add some extra technologies to their stack to get adequate production rates.

I assume that Quadrise will not want to put excessive pressure on them, given the critical phase their project is in, but enough to cover at least some of the the costs Quadrise have incurred thus far.

Plus, one of the key functions of the senior leadership team is to apply a bs/credibility filter to what customers, counterparties, staff, contractors, etc, say.

What the lawyers say is just one data point.

That's one of the skills of that kind of leadership role. You also need to use other signals and techniques than "it's what they said" to figure out whether things are progressing.

Re-reading I think I phrased it badly. I mean 46G disclosed information about the 'private' conversation/meeting he had with Andy on the forums.

I don't believe/mean that 46 disclosed market sensitive information.

But, the way 46G communicated it here, and the nature of the meeting risked giving the *appearance* that something could have happened.

Hence, IMO, the rushed RNS may have been a reaction to that under pressure from a jittery NOMAD.

But, I am fully prepared to be wrong on that opinion.

[As you've gently prodded at with your remarks, I'm not sure why the inclusion of the whole garden party aspect was necessary either, other than to impress us. I'm sure we're all incredibly jealous that AM hasn't visited our gardens.]

I don't think anything disclosed was non-public and I didn't say that.

But, having met the NOMAD at previous AGMs, he is very sensitive to even the *appearance* of any kind of favouritism/non-public info transfer, etc. They are very much cover-your-ass kinds of people.

I wonder if Lionel served escargot?

The Sparkle result is surely a strong positive. A successful test on a large MAN genset.

I'm slightly baffled why they buried the lede on this one.

I have a bad feeling this RNS was rushed out in response to 46G disclosing various information on the public BBs that caused the NOMAD to fill his delicate underwear. That is purely my speculation, but the timing and sloppiness of the RNS is striking.

That said, I think we can all be rightly unimpressed by the lack of progress on MSC and Morocco. Some unlocking needed, clearly.

Correct semaphorRed.

The hope is that in the longer term once several different blends have been successfully approved that a more broad "specification-based" approval should be possible from OEMs/industry.

In the same way that every different blend of HFO doesn't need approval, as long at meets specifications.

At the moment there is no specification for OIW emulsion fuels.

It's normal and understandable to be frustrated by the missed timelines.

Whether that coalesces into a signal about MSAR's viability, IMO, it is a little too early to say — I don't blame people for coming to their own conclusions on the matter.

Even those of us who believe in the product are certainly deeply unimpressed by the lack of adherence to timelines and/or chronic poor timeline guidance. It has been the pattern of a decade plus.

The subtle thing is that many of us think these two things simultaneously: "it's a great product where a breakthrough would be transformational" and "the timelines/delivery has been poor". It's not a case of 'rose tinted glasses'.

That said...

The factors SemaphorRed and others have mentioned still give us hope, IMO. Regulatory alignment, product-market fit, consumer pressure, low barrier to entry, etcetera.

I certainly hope we can find a CEO that has that rare "small company gets big company to do stuff" skillset. Sometimes those soft skills are key to prodding the right people and getting up the priority list.

I am sure the Quadrise team understand they have everything to prove to us, and I hope that fires them up to get these projects rolling (or get them off their plate, pronto). I hope they see it as a challenge from us to them. The time is now, so let's see it moving forward.

Considerable risk abounds; it's not a sure thing by any standard.

Yes, RFK is casting a long and malodorous shadow over businesses such as HVO, but as Mo and the team have said, it's a temporary effect. I know many of you are thinking "how can we be so unlucky", but it's just one of those things. I will keep holding; the fundamentals are sound, and the blockage will flush out in due course.