Charles Jillings, CEO of Utilico, energized by strong economic momentum across Latin America. Watch the video here.
Status page available here: https://liveservice.lseg.com/node/288
Hmm, tomorrow is Saturday. Guess you'll have to wait a bit!
My understanding is that it's a global commodity trader, think Cargill, Glencore, Trafigura, Vitol, etc (examples, not saying it's one of them specifically). Not a household name, but huge in the industry and with a global reach.
I'm pretty sure we'll all be very happy with whomever it is!
People with a proven track record and of a high calibre. I expect the company has made this move as they expect Poolbeg's commercial activity continue ramping up. Exciting times, and a great use of Cathal's connections to get us a ready-made team that has worked together previously.
That's a good question, but I'm not aware that such a granular level of detail for the proof of concept (POC) has been disclosed yet.
Pure speculation => I imagine they would need to do a short in-situ inspection after each POC (perhaps also pull one cylinder to look at wear). The POC is just to sanity check everything, validate procedures work (bunkering, fuel switching, etc), and ensure nothing untoward appears to be happening in terms of mechanical wear and engine configuration.
In theory they could bunker both fuels at once at switch between them, but I'm guessing they'll do a smaller loop segment and inspect + bunker (e.g. Belgium/Netherlands to Balts and back again which is about a week).
But either (or some similar variant) seems plausible.
I sure hope we hear more soon 🤞.
> How much of the Morocco test setup consists of components provided by QED, I always imagined it would be just the fuel ?
If you refer to all of the Morocco RNSes and segments in the reports, you'll see Quadrise provided the PHU (Pumping and Heating unit).
There are pictures on this article (search for "Pumping and heating unit on site") https://www.edisongroup.com/research/the-clean-solution-to-a-global-problem/28303/
The original pump design used has failed multiple times now.
I might be confused and you are referring to something else entirely.
I suspect you are right @WongaFC.
And agreed @manu19, my view is that because LinkedIn is a platform where Quadrise engages with customers, partners, and peers, we should be very careful what we post there. We all want Quadrise to succeed, so berating the team in front of their potential customers is only harming ourselves by damaging their critical relationships.
IMO, nothing wrong with making views known via IR, IMC, email, AGM, etcetera — platforms that are focussed on us shareholders.
From previous advice, it should take at least a couple of weeks to complete the tests if everything goes to plan.
On that basis, let's hope and expect the news falls towards the latter part of the month (i.e. uninterrupted).
What is the claim about next week based on?
Hi All,
I was asked to share this response by a regular poster on The Quadrise Shareholders' Forum that was just received from QED — they felt it was useful for wider circulation.
===
“Hi *,
Apologies for the delayed response, it’s annual results season and there’s a lot going on behind the scenes project-wise hence I can imagine the frustration given the state of the markets in general.
Regarding your question re MSC fuel supply, this is definitely in the category of “Somebody interested but sorting out detail”, so please bear with us.
The FOWE system is a water in fuel system using 10-15% water that is very similar to a product that MAN already supply themselves (and many others), hence the apparent ease of approval.
KR, Jason”
Probably multiple factors, including operational efficiency and building up relationships of trust and demonstrating value of the product.
Both of those should improve into the future as we consolidate locations, bring certain services in-house that are being outsourced, and are able to charge more as we repeatedly demonstrate to clients the value of challenge trials in expediting approvals (and de-risking programmes with early go/no-go decisionmaking, more broadly).
Hi, FunkyGibbon.
I queried the possibility of powering heavy locomotives/trains with MSAR several times at previous AGMs, but was batted away — with it being stated that even low-sulphur MSAR is too high in sulphur for inland use in UK without scrubbers (and we tend not to use scrubbers in UK).
You have to wonder whether bioMSAR might be compliant, especially with a low-sulphur feedstock?
We now know that it works very well on 4S diesel engines, after all.
AIUI, a nominal dividend is a regular yearly dividend of some predictable/fixed amount — as opposed to other types of dividend that are discretionary and might be a percentage of profits or some more arbitrary.
The idea is that it provides a baseline income predictability which is attractive to institutional investors such as pension funds.
Honestly, the Moroccan client has been extremely cooperative considering the technical hitches. Hopefully, that's a good sign that they are interested in continuing the collaboration well beyond the current commercial testing phase.
Why does it not surprise me that Shempsky is trying to push antivaxx disinformation and lies on these boards? Or that he idolises someone who believes extreme and embarrassing c-19?
No doubt it is because the same sort of disordered thinking that believes you can predict the future from tea leaves also readily subscribes to unscientific conspiracy theories, such as the health services "murdering people".
Seek help from a qualified professional.
Reported and blocked.
Hi, Fyoz. They are not going to be using a refinery for the trials (likely for the reasons you have mentioned), instead the plan as outlined by JM was that they will use a terminal and likely HFO or similar as a substitute for resid during the trials. That will expedite the process significantly as they won't need to wait for an annual refinery maintenance slot.
JM claimed they had secured and validated the necessary glycerine supplies, and now it is a case of selecting a terminal with the necessary permits for biofuel blending, storage, bunkering, etc.
Make of it what you will and apply necessary salt given the usual inaccuracies on timelines.
Permits for the trial wells are still pending DOGM's approval also.
DOGM indicated during the DOGM Board meeting that those permits should be approved/finalised very shortly (for the original trials wells, not including the one requested this month).
You can see on the Utah Data Explorer what the current status is. It has been a very long road for them.
Your memory is correct, clients have shared costs for expanding/new facilities in the past.
As I understand it, big pharma have deep enough pockets that expediting challenge trials by some significant period of months will easily pay for itself by getting the product to market sooner, so chipping in for HVO's expenses on expansion is worth it.
Pharma companies are also racing their peers on certain products to get to market first.
Great RNS, and yet another rather muted SP response to great news.
@Crownos, I suspect Valkor/HSO/ACO desired this approach because they believed they could demand better investment terms based on having approvals for the full commercial drilling plan rather than just the pilot wells.
I hope they change their legal team before the next hearings...
Valkor is a privately held company, but yes, legal team now seem to have messed up the slide order as well...
Valkor's geologist is extremely impressive, he speaks very clearly and has excellent recall and detail.
Hoodoo are trying to attack the legitimacy of the plans and whether the Valkor people brought up to testify are sufficiently involved and/or expert. I expect that's a tactic to inflict more delay as they are hoping they can inflict a continuance until next month or whatever.
Obviously Hoodoo's avenues for attack have narrowed but not been eliminated, but Valkor's Inspector Clouseau attorneys seem to be doing their best to screw it up with their bumbling and bungling approach.