Member Info for dustofnations

You can find the $$ values in the first screenshot in this article I wrote a while back (links to original filings are there also) -- https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2020/07/20/quadrise-msar-asphalt-ridge-analysis.html#opinion_how_quadrise_msar_could_help_greenfield_unlock_asphalt_ridge

Under the previous administrations a couple of billion dollars were invested into Esmeraldas Refinery, but the majority of that money apparently disappeared into the ether; plus, much of the work that was actually completed was generally substandard.

Beware taking anything said on Ecuadorean political Twitter at face value; much of what's put out is highly polarised and propagandised, and often lacking in factual accuracy or context.

He's claiming only a very tiny amount of revenue would be received by Ecuadorean state after concession, and that only a modest amount of investment would be needed to fix Esmeraldas. I'm not sure either of those claims are solid.

I suggest you look at the later news sources, because the dates have shifted e.g. https://bit.ly/2CX0ynQ

My understanding on the Quadrise side of things:

Whilst the commercial agreement hasn't been struck yet, QFI typically work on a "shared margin" basis, so they take some small % of the margin created by MSAR (i.e. a share of the uplift in value MSAR creates vs base product such as HFO or ).

How that works precisely for Greenfield is yet to be seen, as it's not just typical refinery setup and has some unique characteristics, but it should be along those lines.

There should then be plenty of local industrial users in the vicinity who may want to use the MSAR fuel; Valkor can utilise their EPC expertise to perform any necessary conversions (e.g. increased boiler feed rates, enhanced burner tips, etc).

I think it should be an extremely affordable technology for Greenfield. From QFI's broad illustrative figures, a 10k bopd project for licensing-only would net QFI $5-$6 million (equates to around $1.5 per barrel). That would scale depending on the premium you are able to sell the fuel for, so the better Greenfield does, the better Quadrise would also do -- win, win.

The vast majority would go to Greenfield, which is fair enough, as they will be the ones who have invested the capital and taken the risk. Naturally, some would also be given to the consumer to incentivise them to use the fuel (i.e. a discount vs local HFO).

I'm sure many of you have seen this before, but in case not:
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_whitepaper-sustainablebusiness-oil-activity-6703963406296203264-diZf

Yeah, I think that getting in now as an interim solution would place us very well to become a permanent solution (i.e. prove just how good the tech is!). At the moment Esmeraldas produces something like 48% residual products. Clearly that can't be sustained.

However, even with a cutting-edge refinery you would still probably be talking 10% or more residual products given the increasingly heavy feedstock. That still leaves more than enough for powering the refinery and nearly powerstations.

Just informed speculation, but that's probably our best-case scenario. I really hope that QFI provide us more detail soon on the opportunity going forwards; being held in suspense for all this time is not great!

foxm, I am slightly more hopeful on the timelines. The tender documents and the technological pathway should come out in this month (approx). Of course, we may not be able to get many details about it, but it should be a key event in the timeline.

One of the most important areas of consideration is what transition technology govt/Petroecuador require for use at the refinery before (A) the tender is awarded, and (B) before the upgrade work is completed by the concessionaire.

For example, even with the best will in the world, there's going to be a long period before any upgrades come into operation. A period 3-5 years is typical for mid-to-high complexity upgrades (e.g. add an SDA, new FCC, etc). That leaves the structural issues in place for a considerable period of time.

So what happens in the interim is a key question for Petroecuador, and consequently the economy of the country. They need to stem the importation of cutterstocks in order to help resolve their dollar outflow crisis. They also have the environmental issues to resolve at the refinery and power stations; even with a new operator those would still be issues, and MSAR offers a solution.

So I think there could be both interim and long-term roles for us, depending how things shake out.

NB: Please don't take this as me thinking it's a walk-in, but I think there could be meaningful progress made on Ecuador before the tender is awarded. Obviously things will be more complex than if Petroecuador were still calling all the shots.

Interested in your thoughts on this.

It's actually $1.6 billion if the MSAR is produced in-kingdom! Savings of $800M on consumer side, $800M on producer/refiner side. And that's without considering environmental aspects.

By way of some examples, if we can crack KSA, then Shoaiba Power Station alone has 14 * 400MWe units all running on HFO.

Each 400MWe unit consumes in the region of 10k bopd (HFO equiv).

In licensing-only mode each 10k bopd (HFO equiv) attracts a margin of $5-$6M pa for Quadrise, according to Mike's numbers in the Proactive One2One session (15:09 timestamp).

Obviously, we've not landed it yet and there's absolutely no guarantee.

Also, people should also consider that it's unlikely there'd be a "big bang" rollout; I expect it'd probably be phased in. Still, there's good potential there.

Matthew's Ecuador presentation is now online. Check it out (slides 28 and 29 particularly).
https://twitter.com/quorumzine/status/1296056089629396992

What are you confused about?

And here are some more bits on the QFI-Greenfield announcement from QFI's LinkedIn & Twitter

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_we-are-delighted-to-have-signed-an-agreement-activity-6701450499583029249-ZfCK

https://twitter.com/QFIPLC/status/1295685328087523334

Well done to all involved. Look forwards to this progressing!

QFI-Greenfield announcement on LinkedIn & Twitter

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_we-are-delighted-to-have-signed-an-agreement-activity-6701450499583029249-ZfCK

https://twitter.com/QFIPLC/status/1295685328087523334

I am slightly baffled that TomCo still hasn't announced this great news. Hope it's not another RNS duff-up from their NOMAD or whatever!

This is a really fantastic RNS.

Note also Steve's comments about potential of using MSAR to enable the transportation of paraffinic crudes, which are notorious for being solid at high temperatures (cue jokes about boot polish, candles, etc). Presumably tankage or maybe even a pipeline eventually?

The POSP site is not paraffinic (it's sweet heavy bitumen).

So this would be a new market and a new purpose for MSAR commercially, if Greenfield pursue it. See the 'Quadrise Wolf Lake' trials for references on a similar-ish proof-of-concept effort. https://www.quadrisefuels.com/msar-applications/ - click on "upstream applications".

Also note, I believe this would also be the first ever upstream direct-to-consumer commercial MSAR sales (am I right?). So they are really going for this.

This is a really fantastic RNS.

Note also Steve's comments about potential of using MSAR to enable the transportation of paraffinic crudes, which are notorious for being solid at high temperatures (cue jokes about boot polish, candles, etc).

The POSP site is not paraffinic (it's sweet heavy bitumen). So this would be a new market and a new purpose for MSAR commercially, if they pursue it.

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/QFI/greenfield-msar-commercial-trial-agreement-fux01m5aim14ui9.html

Congratulations to Quadrise and Greenfield on closing this commercial trials agreement!

Here's the latest version uploaded onto LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/quadrise-international-ltd_a-clean-solution-to-a-heavy-fuel-oil-problem-activity-6701112594117341184-5o7D

Tim, it's an RNS Reach, which is explicitly for non-regulatory purposes.

This will likely interest TOM shareholders.

QFI have released a white paper that explains their MSAR economics and environmental benefits in a compelling way. It is mainly aimed at KSA and power/industrial sectors, but mentions Utah, and the general information is highly relevant and I think answers many of the questions people here had:

https://wp-quadrise-fuels-2020.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/media/2020/08/14133911/White-Paper-v4.3.pdf

Also:

https://www.quadrisefuels.com/middle-east-white-paper/

https://www.quadrisefuels.com/middle-east-white-paper/