Member Info for dustofnations

Orimulsion was a very popular product, and stopped by the Venezuelan government for purely political reasons.

Folk associated with Orimulsion were not Chavistas, and so they decided to get rid of the product and the people to avoid any potential build-up of anti-Chavez political or economic power. At the time, Chavez saw PDVSA as an enemy.

It is not just Orimulsion, and is substantially more advanced and capable.

The guidance was (and is) Q2 to Q3 for major progress updates.

There will likely not be major commercial revenues during 2019, but the team are developing robust opportunities that will allow for funding, followed by commercial revenues 2020 onwards.

I suggest folk read the half year report, read the November AGM coverage, and listen to the recent investor conference calls to confirm that.

All of that is not to say there aren't plenty of risks around funding and projects (including timelines) -- but things *currently* appear to be running according to the rough schedule as guided by the roadmap from the AGM.

Orns -- this is actually a really interesting area, and one that's hard to answer. It seems 6-9 months is easily doable with the compressed timelines described by the teams several times.

However, it's definitely possible that some of the preparatory work that contributes towards the timeline you describe would not be announced, as it's paid for by the client and may be part of the process that leads up to whether they establish a trial, contract, etc (refer to the QFI 'project development' page to see what I mean).

Annoyingly, we'll really have to wait for an announcement to determine how much 'homework' any clients have done in advance.

And to add to what PrepH says, the guidance since the AGM has always been late Q2-Q3.

Not sure where some people are getting this idea that we were expecting trials or contracts in Q1.

Length that existing funding is expected to last is unchanged, so guess this was factored in already.

All marine scrubbers I am aware of are wet scrubbers (including closed loop)

Quorum 5: Quadrise Fuels announces agreements in Kuwait and Morocco, following successful £1.5 million fundraising

https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2019/03/11/quadrise-announce-agreements-in-Kuwait-and-Morocco-following-successful-1.5-million-fundraising.html

It's been a busy few months for Quadrise Fuels: successful fundraising of £1.5 million; announcements of representation agreements in Kuwait and Morocco; and a retail shareholder visit to the QRF. In addition, we have an exploration of last year's announcement of a relationship with a global oil major, and the progress of Quadrise's MOU with Freepoint Commodities into a contractual arrangement.

This one has a been a huge time-sink (even by Quorum standards), and quite a bit of stress finally getting it out of the door.

Please read (as slowly as possible! ??) and let me know what you think.

That article is from 2012. Don't know why it's being highlighted (probably a technical glitch).

Discovered by Rob79 on QFI Shareholders Forums:

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-oil-refineries-netherlands/shell-to-start-two-month-major-maintenance-at-europes-biggest-oil-refinery-idUKKCN1PB1CG

""
Royal Dutch Shell will begin “major maintenance work” on a number of units at its Pernis oil refinery in Rotterdam beginning on 25 January, the major said on Thursday.

The maintenance is expected to last two months and at its peak will require 3,000 extra workers at the site, Shell said.

Shell did not specify the units involved in the turnaround.

The refinery is Europe’s largest and has the capacity to process 404,000 barrels per day of crude.
""

New Mike Kirk interview: Quadrise offers clarity on what investors can expect for 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juo0QqsdV9k

I am surprised we didn't raise the full amount; I must admit that the timing of the raise wasn't ideal for me to contribute a bit more in my excess facility. Perhaps timing was an issue for many of you also? Christmas/NY, moving to new jobs, ISA full, holidays, etc.

But, it appears it is sufficient, which is a relief.

Full steam ahead; time to deliver is now.

@noosking -- The results won't be known until 21st approx, I believe.

These are joint projects using Freepoint's assets, skills, and financing that would be otherwise unavailable to Quadrise. Freepoint part or wholly own refineries, bunkering locations, physical and virtual trading hubs, transportation, power generation, and power retail, etc.

Freepoint is unusual in that they operate in ALL of the markets Quadrise have been targeting. It should be clear how this could be an extremely good partnership, and a mutually beneficial relationship.

Naturally, it's an extremely hard market to penetrate, and I am always extremely cautious given the consequent high-risk of AIM and QFI... But, I do believe FP is probably the most important partner we've had -- their incentives are very well aligned with QFI's, and they are a 'hybrid' company that has fingers in all parts of the market we wish to enter.

Fyoz: I'm sure you have also noticed this new interlocutor's style is quite... familiar :-)?

Quadrise General FAQ and Investor FAQs have been updated. They talk a bit more about the 3 different business modes that they are pursuing (licensing, tolling, and BOO), Maersk, and relationships with JGC and FP.

https://www.quadrisefuels.com/general-faqs
https://www.quadrisefuels.com/faqs/investor-faqs

Here's a key quotation that may interest you:

Clearly, we have been in a difficult situation since the KSA discussions broke down, but we have been progressing alternative routes to commercial revenue and *we believe that the Freepoint CMPDA may prove to be more significant than any agreement we have signed in the past*.

I think that's right, Fyoz. On the CC MK stated that alternative funding arrangements were entirely possible, but would involve a substantially larger discount than O/O participants are receiving; it would also dilute existing holders and use substantially more of the approved share issuance allowance.

This approach respected LTH's requests to be involved in fundraising and not to be diluted (and LTH's complaints about brokers and other institutions "flipping" shares for a quick buck rather than holding long).

Bears repeating: the large shareholders have already indicated they will support the raise (listen to the investor CC if you wish to confirm this). The extension was because a major individual needed more time to complete their side of things; I see no reason to doubt that.

If you tuned into the latest investor call, the team confirmed large holders have offered their support to the raise. That's why the RNS is something to be taken at face value, in my view.

(That's not a statement speaking to the overall risk of QFI, I'm talking specifically about this RNS).

Absolutely, Sammagmil. I work for a large multinational, and the company is largely closed for the last week of the year, and extremely sparse for the first. The rationale you suggest is likely to me. Also possible that liquidating assets and bank transfers from elsewhere has been held up for the same reasons.

Very strange. DPE if you pop onto the Shareholders Forums, I would expect some folk have managed to set things up with Barclays. Look at the thread, "Open Offer December 2018" and perhaps post a note if you have a moment.

MSAR has a lower specific energy density than traditional HFO. This means you will consume more MSAR on a journey of the same length than with traditional HFO -- however, the cost per unit of energy from MSAR is substantially lower. Put another way, per J/calorie, MSAR is cheaper than HFO.

Whilst you would need to carry more fuel mass to sail the same distance in absolutely identical conditions, my understanding is that fuel mass is a relatively small contributing factor to overall fuel consumption; both HFO and MSAR have high energy densities, and other factors like vessel loading, weather, etc, will be more important in terms of impact. The economics for MSAR are still very good.

I'm not aware of them releasing any specific studies on this topic, but it seems it was something they evaluated during the Maersk trials and it was not an issue.

A bit more on range considerations here: https://quorumzine.gitlab.io/quorum/content/2018/11/30/quorum-live-2018-agm.html#whats_the_minimum_viable_bunkering_setup_that_the_company_thinks_is_required_to_really_kickstart_marine_msar

I suggest you peruse the QFI website, as they explain how the technology works. But, AIUI, the water helps provide better combustion characteristics (more uniform combustion temperatures, fuel pre-atomisation, full burnout, etc). After this most of the water does pass out as steam.