Member Info for dustofnations

MSAR produced in Utah can be used for local consumers as well (industrial and power purposes), which is something Valkor have mentioned numerous times. They will need to prove that concept out and get those consumers on board, but Valkor well placed as an EPCI company to provide those services themselves.

Sealion Singh is trolling you into talking about his incessantly repeated talking points and derailing any other conversation. You don't owe Sealion Singh a debate. Everyone, please ignore.

> QED down and TOM up

Quadrise market cap £30 million.

TomCo market cap £1.15 million.

The bullet points have just been updated as I posted this! Now they make sense. Talk about timing, ey.

Have a nice weekend, everyone.

With thanks to Maggulus on the forums, Lafayette Energy Corp (LEC) has finally updated their website, and Quadrise are mentioned.

Scroll down to the section entitled, "Multiple Offtake Opportunities​" — https://lafayetteenergycorp.com/oil-and-gas-targets/

The bullet points appear to be placeholders, so don't read into those too much at the moment, IMO.

Didn't they make clear they were no longer going to routinely publish contract win RNSes, as this is now "business as usual"?

> I assume we will be looking at extensive trials at each as per Morocco. Or am I missing something here.

I have no idea, how extensive it needs to be will be down to Valkor/HSO/Lafayette and their future customer(s). Valkor is an EPCI company, so I expect they can do any necessary design, testing, and installation work themselves (or via their contacts).

Without knowing the application or commercial arrangements, it's hard to say.

My opinion on the bitumen for Utah roads department.

[This just is my opinion/analysis based on comments made in various DOGM Board meetings, comments by the Valkor team, comments by the QED team, experience of the PQE/POSP project, and reading various filings and publicly available documents. So, usual caveats apply.]

Bitumen sold to the roads department tends to be extremely seasonal. Utah has a sub-zero set of cold months that are not amenable to roadwork, so there is a "roads season" which occurs during the warmer months of the year and they then typically halt everything other than emergency work.

It's likely that roads department is a useful outlet for modest quantities of bitumen until (A) their stores are full, and (B) during the warm months when they're actually consuming meaningful amounts of bitumen. So, I think the roads department is useful during the very initial phase of production to "get rid" of material and get some revenues flowing.

Getting higher value out of the product and being able to actually sell large volumes of material will require MSAR technology, in my view. Initially local industrial consumers, then eventually transporting via rail to marine terminals, etc.

There isn't enough demand locally to sell very much bitumen, and the local refineries are not configured to accept any meaningful quantities of very heavy bitumen (they're set up for medium waxy crude, which has been Utah's traditional oil).

Hmm, I wonder where a refinery might get some oil products from.

I'm just speculating, but the DOGM Board approval plus the 100 barrels funding landmark seem like a sensible moment for Lafayette Energy Corp (LEC) to finally close their IPO and shift things into high gear.

I should add that Quadrise still will need to characterise the post-fractionation bitumen and produce an optimised MSAR formulation that they are willing to contractually stand behind as being "on-spec" tell the customer they are 'good to go'.

Given the modest difference between HSO's fractionated and unfractionated bitumen, it should be entirely uncomplicated, but assumptions often make fools of us, so best to just follow the process and ensure everything is bulletproof before declaring success. That's how I interpret it.

Fyoz — both should work fine.

HSO may be able to further enhance/optimise their economic return by producing MSAR + diesel rather than solely MSAR. So there's an element of optimisation. Plus, SB mentioned that they needed to remove the lighter fractions in order to 'make spec' for the roads department where they hope to initially offload some of the bitumen produced during the warm months.

They will only be able to sell bitumen to roads department during warmer months and there's inherently a very limited ceiling to demand for that application. So I think it's just a way to get rid of material as they scale and develop MSAR customers.

By way of comparison, MSAR technology can emulsify HFO, which is a mixture of heavy residue with lighter fractions such as light cycle oil (basically a crappy diesel).

AIUI, midi-MMU going to OCP trials, trace-heated full sized MMU going to Utah, full sized MMU earmarked for marine.

More MMUs can be acquired with a moderate lead time, as they are a modified PMB (polymer-modified bitumen) units, used mostly for producing high-quality road bitumen mixtures, and other similar applications. There are a couple of different manufacturers we've used before, both based in Denmark (ENH and DenimoTech).

Once the midi-MMU has finished with the OCP trial, it can presumably be redeployed as needed.

Good to see an institutional investor, Octopus, taking another chunk of HVO — their holding us now a nice and round 8%.

Yes, the short-term game is selling to roads department, etc, which makes sense to "get rid" of material while they're getting started. However, they likely won't buy that much during the winter time; there's a "roads season" in places like Utah due to the extreme weather during winter.

Doug and SB mentioned the goal being to sell ultra-low sulphur fuel oil (ULSFO) into the marine sector, as their bitumen is naturally very low in sulphur and can comply with the latest IMO regs without needing scrubbers. That's hopefully where Quadrise comes in to provide the technology that enables it.

Exciting times.

Unfortunately, one of the downhole heaters broke and they had to wait a while for a replacement, so it'll take a short while to get to first oil — but they mentioned that some little bits had come up already, so, as Doug said, some of the key fundamental technical risks have been mitigated.

There are still some unknowns given the lack of data in Utah (vs California, Canada, etc). Until they try, they won't know for sure stuff like how much heat input is required to produce oil, and how long a well will produce for given a particular heat input/investment (even more so once they move to huff 'n puff and steam flood, etc). And, things like total recovery factor will be confirmed only after several years — so nothing to really worry about for now.

But, this was a comprehensive repudiation of Hoodoo's obstructionism, and it's just a shame they had to go through so much additional cost and timewasting to be vindicated on every single technical point that Doug and Brian had made over 1 year ago. Anyway, what's done is done and they push forward.

With Michael L. Peterson now dedicating himself to Lafayette Energy's upcoming IPO (which is, in my view going to become "Heavy Sweet Oil, Plc", in UK parlance), things should pick up in pace pretty rapidly over the coming few weeks and months.

(Also, as I posted some time ago, when they hit 100 barrels of production, they will receive additional funding from one of their key investors, which is an important milestone).

Onwards and upwards, and wishing best luck to the whole team. Success on their side can only benefit Quadrise.

You can find the information here about 3%+ holders: https://hvivo.com/aim-rule-26/#significant-shareholder

And bear in mind there are IIs we know of holding HVO below discloseable 3%, as some of the regulars here have pointed out that HVO appears in the holdings list of various funds[1] (thanks to all those posters; you know who you are!).

Funds don't really like going above 3% until they need to, because it's an administrative burden and "shows your hand" to some degree. Plus, once above the threshold, you must notify every subsequent 1%, which is additional hassle.

The rules are there for a good reason, but I note this just to explain why IIs often prefer to stay under 3%, and then suddenly buy big chunks. Once you've popped the seal, there's no need to be stealthy any more!

Hope all holders have a great week; great to see things continuing to head in the right direction.

[1] Examples: IFSL Marlborough UK Micro Cap Growth, Hargreave Hale; https://www.fidelity.co.uk/factsheet-data/factsheet/GB00B9275X97-hvivo-plc/profile

> Present incumbent has no right to remain

This just is not true.

It may well be the case that CF exits at some point given his significant new ventures, but the idea he has 'no right to remain' makes no sense to me.

There is no requirement for a chairman to hold stock in order to execute their function.

Plus, the executive team is way more important than the non-exec chairman.

TBH, given how fantastically well the company is executing, I'd rather there were no leadership changes in the short term.

If CF continues doing a good job as non-exec chair, I have no problem with him remaining .

Plus, CF remains significantly tied to Poolbeg, which is closely associated with HVO, so there's some synergy there.

@oilbagger, precisely. Perhaps to put an even finer point on it — IHT funds choose only stable companies, because they cannot tolerate high volatility/risk (i.e. a client passing during a large SP dip would be extremely unfortunate). That is an exceedingly strong vote of confidence in HVO.

Well, we can now see who bought another huge chunk of that stock. Octopus Investments up to a whopping 7.61%.

Guys, please don't amplify Sealion Singh. Your engagement is his oxygen.