Member Info for dustofnations

Some problem with the hosting provider, I think. All OK now.

Companies like Maersk are always have massively outsized power when it comes to the contracts they sign with technology providers. They will ensure they can get out without paying anything, if at all humanly possible.

I don't think there's anything news-specific going on with QFI; it's just the vagaries of the current market.

I seriously doubt Maersk's fuel-related news is relevant to our SP at this point, as we're far past the days of QFI collaborations, and the fact they are going a different direction is priced in. If they decide to come back to us, then perhaps the equation changes; but it doesn't seem likely in the short-medium term...

Interesting link VINCE72. The name of the power plant (Karlshamn) triggered my memory as having a link to emulsion fuel trials way back that was discussed at an AGM or similar years ago. After a bit of digging, I found:

May 2005 - Karlshamm Power - 500 tons of heavy fuel oil emulsified and combusted (EON) - Sweden

https://wp-quadrise-fuels-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2020/03/09121917/Technical-DD-MSAR-Refinery-EBRD-.pdf (page 17)

Absolutely, Tuckman.

Morocco - pure industrial application (heat for rotary calcinators).
MSC - marine propulsion application (large, slow-speed 2S marine diesel).
Panama/Honduras - medium-sized power application (medium-speed Wartsila 4S power gensets)
Mexico - longer opportunity, but pure in-refinery application (likely heat)

You can see the pattern: diversity of sectors; diversity of applications and technical implementations; diversity of countries and counterparties.

Still, no guarantee it'll work out, but it's definitely better than the old "1 or 2 megaprojects" approach which left us hanging after various unfortunate incidents.

I don't know how anyone could reasonably expect the largest shipping company in the world to trial only one solution. Bud Darr, their leader in this area, has said they expect to commercially adopt multiple solutions.

If you think MSAR/bioMSAR is a good fit for MSC's business needs, then we're in with a good opportunity. Not guaranteed, but I seriously doubt anyone thinks that.

Green Methanol is extremely expensive at the moment; mostly because of the very significant energy requirements (e.g. green e-methanol).

BTW, QFI has indicated that methanol can be blended into the bioMSAR mixture. So likely an interesting additional feedstock (if the pricing is good enough).

Just to defend QFI shareholders for a moment...

There's a long way to go yet. But, I would say everyone I know personally from the QFI community is *well aware* of the risks, and they are simply accepting of the need to 'wait for results'. So, not complacent, but just aware that other players vying for a slice of this vast new energy space isn't necessarily a problem -- Quadrise are in the mix to get into the market before the final decisions are made about which fuels are going to become the de facto standards for the foreseeable future.

We don't have any significant oil-fired power stations in UK any more, and those consumers that could potentially work with oil don't have scrubbers, and hence they would not meet the sulphur emissions regulations in UK (amongst other things). HFO has not been a popular fuel choice in UK industry or power for a long time.

Shockingly, the QFI team has thought about this, and is trying to work in jurisdictions that have either have different emissions regulations and/or are using scrubbers.

There may be bioMSAR opportunities, as it can run more easily on diesel engines and can get under the sulphur cap by virtue of glycerine content, but QFI have their plate full with 3-5 large projects already.

Anyway, probably not worth wasting too much of our brain power on trolling/deramping.

There's a severe bear market at the moment, you have to take that reality into account; essentially the bar is raised on what is required to make the market react positively.

Ultimately, there are tangible commercial deliverables due over the next year, which is what seems to be required now to move *any* stock.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_qfi-fueloil-hfo-activity-6963072274862108672-Zu8F

rpg7 & Hurrycane -- thank you very much for those really excellent comments. If you don't mind, I might have to come back to you gents for a future Quorum edition; I've been looking for some experts to add some (short) technically-oriented opinion pieces. We're very lucky to count a good number of chemical industry veterans amongst the ranks of QFI shareholders.

rpg7 -- that's why I find the idea a 'bare' water-in-fuel emulsion could last 6 months surprising (i.e. nothing to stabilise). I'm not a chemist, but I don't know of a mechanism by which that seems possible. Unless they are using a very loose definition of what they mean by 'lasts 6 months'. I guess because they are using HFO rather than resid, the density difference between the phases is lower, and hence phase separation is also slower? Also perhaps smaller particle sizes can be achieved with cavitation, but they don't have any of that data available in the open.

I recall the same iantobach. I think that was the Maersk Singapore, if memory serves correctly?

Assuming we're referring to the same thing, then both refinery and power station were in Lithuania.

Elektrenai power station
Orlen Lietuva's Mažeikiai refinery (part of the Polish PKN Orlen group)

One would hope QFI are reengaging there. Not sure what the timescales would be, though.

WongaFC - I understand what you are saying, however I think it's clear that the Mexico project (if it ever happens) will take a considerable amount of time to get through the PEMEX bureaucracy, be designed, be approved, be scheduled, execute trials, enter commercial negotiations, etc, etc.

We have so many other projects that will be *far* ahead of that should be striving for commerciality before MX is likely even entering the trials phase that such a project should be (relatively) lower risk to the financial health of the company.

QFI also tend to ensure that the client carries the fair share of costs themselves.

As others have said, MX is so influenced by other non-technical and non-economical factors that it doesn't look especially likely at this point that anything will happen in the foreseeable future (although I'd be delighted to be wrong). Cokers just seem like an insane non-solution, yet...

Vince, I suspect the main portion of the time will be sorting out the supply side of things (logistically, contractually, etc); I agree the economics and technical aspects seem extremely strong.

Resources:
- https://www.researchgate.net/post/How-do-we-explain-why-low-temperature-combustion-engines-achieve-higher-thermal-efficiency
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110016816301958

Even if you have an issue with this award, it's important to be recognise that this is not a QFI-specific thing.

Over-remuneration and massive wage growth of execs and upper management generally is a decades-long phenomenon in UK and USA particularly.

Regrettably, loss-making AIM companies over-remunerating is absolutely standard. QFI are totally unremarkable in that regard, and are probably pretty tame by comparison to their peers. The best we can do is exert pressure on the company to exert remuneration restraint.

So, if you put your cash into any AIM company (with rare exception), you have to be aware of this factor as one of the key investment risks.

It's also worth bearing in mind that investing in a company and working there at the same time is doubling your risk. You could lose your job and your investment at the same time. Just because someone works at QFI doesn't mean they have the same appetite for risk as you or me.

I don't see how it could be solely Miton as they would have hit a reporting threshold by now given the volumes we've seen over the recent week or so.

QFI likely has many sub-3% IIs that hold smallcaps.

I think many of them have been waiting for an opportunity to sell as, small cap funds have been slaughtered and they need to honour redemptions of punters exiting. So they are selling hard into anything that has liquidity.

Cue QFI's good news about the LONO(s) going ahead...

This is a cross industry thing, those funds are suffering badly.

Ultimately, the timing wasn't great to get the re-rating many people hoped for, but what can you do. There's a global situation at the moment.

So, we just keep holding and wait for the good news to (hopefully) continue flowing, and eventually things will start to correct.

Salinger, I think you mean 'Proactive' interview rather than 'practice'? Assuming yes, that's also my understanding from Jason's latest video.

The gear is on-site and ready to go, they just need the client to give the final thumbs up to start the burn on day X, the MSAR fuel manufacturing to be done in Europe and transported via ISOTANK to site.

Although container shipping is still pretty clogged up, it is way better than earlier in this year (and last year especially where you sometimes couldn't even get a quote). So I hope it will occur within the guided timespan.

My understanding is that 'Site B' trial is first (see the notes from meeting, etc).

The client chose those names and the order of operations, in case people are wondering why 'B' goes before 'A'!

As far as I'm aware, they restated their target of having the Site B trials completed this quarter. The idea is then, if successful, to enter into commercial negotiations for Site B, whilst separately looking at doing some trials on Site A.

Yes, they stated they will not be doing running commentary RNSes. They will announce when the trial is done (or whatever the end status is).