Member Info for haggismchaggis1

HF14,

Looks like you posted on the wrong thread, so I've put this on the Shell thread.

I would not read too much into that list, as Shell are a major global oil refiner and likely supply fuel to the bunker suppliers that don't have their own refineries (a lot of them don't, they just have Bunkering facilities).

https://www.shell.com/business-customers/marine/fuel.html

Although Shell is also a major Bunker Fuel supplier in it's own right too.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/shell-bunkering-unit-tops-singapores-list-2020-marine-fuel-suppliers-2021-01-14/

As MSC are driving this trial forward, it would be great if they could twist the arm of other engine manufacturers to get more engines under LONO trial, either from day 1, or to start after the interim LONO inspection point.

We could end up with trials that expand to more and more vessels (with different engine types) quite quickly.

"In conjunction with the Trials, MSC and Quadrise will jointly continue discussions with other marine engine suppliers to investigate testing bioMSAR™ and MSAR® on their engines.".

Shell, as decarbonisation partner, really should be involved, based on the perspective of the trial from the MSC MD & CEO.

Commenting on this agreement Prabhat Jha, Group MD & CEO of MSC Shipmanagement Ltd, said:

"MSC Shipmanagement is delighted to be working with the Quadrise team under this new agreement, as together we have an important enabling role in the marine energy transition towards a net zero carbon future and reducing our own vessel emissions. MSC has one of the youngest fleets among the world's leading shipping lines, and we seek to continually improve energy efficiency by collaborating with suppliers such as Quadrise to promote the wider adoption of low and zero-carbon fuels. We each have an important role to play to accelerate the decarbonisation of the shipping and logistics industry and we look forward to progressing commercial testing of bioMSAR™ and MSAR® technology on our fleet together with Quadrise."

Yeah, reading the announcement again, I can see it is very long term view, with many things mentioned that are a long way off being even minor in powering shipping vessels.

Now that MSC have signed the agreement with QFI, it would make sense based on the MSC+Shell agreement for MSC to bring Shell into the picture, as it is a decarbonisation project, and Shell are their official decarbonisation partner.

https://www.shell.com/business-customers/trading-and-supply/trading/news-and-media-releases/shell-and-msc-sign-collaboration-agreement-on-decarbonising-shipping.html#

Y-Alam,

I didn't say "they sold 30m".

What I said was they might have sold 24m to 30m.

That guess was only based on the total of big trades that were possibly sells, I don't know if they all were, as many were O trades that might have been delayed buys.

Clearly from what I said, they might have sold that many or might not.

They also have 3 trading days to notify TR-1 holdings change, so IF they have sold to below 4% on Friday, then an RNS can be delayed until as late as Wednesday.

So if no TR-1 tomorrow, don't go assuming it's not Miton that's been selling.

IF they go below 3% they no longer have to report their holding, so we will never know when they are gone, unless anyone fancies visiting the Registrar to check the Share Registry.

Bulp,

Not sure QFI could cope with all those enquiries?

We know they have always been monitoring the Lithuania situation, they told us numerous times over the years in RNS, videos, and at AGM's, so any useful info we find might be of use to them to ascertain if things are changing there which might lead to an opportunity opening up.

In the meantime I think QFI have plenty on their plate to be getting along with, MSC just kicked into second gear, Morocco is ready to go to rocket boost, Utah ticking along very nicely, other projects progressing too. Presuming MSC go well, QFI will still have a lot on their plate getting refineries geared up to produce BioMSAR and MSAR. I'm sure QFI have a nice big list of other opportunities they had to put on the back burner whilst they concentrated on the most desirable projects, so even after MSC fuel is sorted they won't be able to put their feet up.

https://www.biobased-diesel.com/post/glycerin-blended-marine-biofuel-to-be-tested-by-msc-shipmanagement-of-cyprus

http://www.worldports.org/quadrise-and-msc-partner-on-trials-of-low-carbon-fuels/

https://www.eblueeconomy.com/quadrise-and-msc-partner-on-trials-of-low-carbon-fuels/

http://futurefuels.in/msc-to-collaborate-with-quadrise-for-trials-on-glycerine-based-biofuel/

A longer article with more info.

https://lithuania.postsen.com/news/20670/Fuel-oil-burning-is-called-a-solution-for-dry-teeth-in-winter-heating-bills-could-be-twice-as-high-as-last-year.html

That might explain why a load of the bashers usually here are nowhere to be seen.

"Developers in three West London boroughs are being told of limits to new building because the grid is full to capacity. This is likely to be the first of many such announcements."

https://www.computing.co.uk/news/4053991/centres-blamed-londons-electricity-crisis-bigger

So loads of potential for AFC EV Chargers and Gensets in these areas, and more to come.

Great to see Microsoft proving Fuel Cells in a Data Centre situation. That really opens up the market for serious investment into this, which means ABB's clients will be mobilising project teams to get working on it if they are not already.

"The successful test has been described as a “moon landing moment” for the data centre industry"

https://www.itpro.co.uk/server-storage/data-centres/368679/microsoft-hydrogen-fuel-cell-system-data-centres

And of course, Microsoft are a partner of ABB, so that opens it up for ABB to supply our systems to Microsoft, instead of the expensive PEM systems that Microsoft tested.

https://global.abb/topic/ability/en/partners/microsoft

Ok, I'll send it in then ;-)

Vince,

Did you send that parliament info to QFI?

"About 117 pounds of CO2 are produced per million British thermal units (MMBtu) equivalent of natural gas compared with more than 200 pounds of CO2 per MMBtu of coal and more than 160 pounds per MMBtu of distillate fuel oil."

https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/natural-gas/natural-gas-and-the-environment.php

BioMSAR can reduce CO2 emissions by 50% vs HFO. So based on the above figures would produce 80 pounds per MMBtu vs Gas at 117, a 31.6% reduction.

So Lithuania could actually cut CO2 emissions by over 30%, by switching from Natural Gas to BioMSAR.

I'm not a ramper, I do research and analysis, post any facts I find, maybe a few opinions or suggestions of what might occur next, I never ramp and anyone that thinks I do does not have a clue what ramping actually is.

semaphored,

These deals are closed at board level, QFI do not need commercial salesmen, they are not currently commercially selling, they are creating projects that transition into commercial agreements, and all they need for that is project managers, technical experts, and people that can subsequently sign off at board level.

MSC etc do not want to deal with salespeople, they want to work collaboratively with directors, technical experts and project managers.

Lietuvos Elektrine would be going from Natural Gas to HFO, which would significantly increase their CO2 and other emissions. BioMSAR would be a much better choice from an emissions perspective.

Good work Vince!

I'll just add this little reminder:

As noted above, refineries can potentially offer MSAR at a discount to HFO, making it an attractive proposition for power generation. In 2008, Quadrise successfully completed a commercial demonstration of MSAR as boiler fuel in Lithuania. Over 22,000 tonnes of MSAR were produced at ORLEN Lietuva’s 200,000bpd (10Mt/year) refinery from Urals crude-based residues. The MSAR was transported c 300km by rail to the 1,800MWe (megawatt electrical) Elektrenai power plant in Lithuania. This plant is operated by Lietuvos Elektrine, a former Orimulsion customer, and is the primary source of Lithuania’s electrical power. Lietuvos Elektrine concluded that the performance of MSAR was similar to or better than Orimulsion. The trial results were independently verified by consultants from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), but the project did not proceed to commercialisation because of the financial crash in 2009. The project has not been revived since, because Lithuania now has a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal at Klaipeda so security of fuel supply is less of an issue than when it was dependent on Russian gas.

Based on the studies carried out for utility companies and using the spread value given above, Quadrise calculates that the cost of converting a 400MWe boiler to MSAR would be $2.5m, generating fuel savings of $20m/year compared with HFO costs of c $280m pa at current prices. This represents a payback time of only a few months. Quadrise estimates that over 80% of the running costs for a boiler are related to fuel costs.

https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/cleaner-fuel-cleaner-planet/30256/

Good work Vince!

I'll just add this little reminder:

As noted above, refineries can potentially offer MSAR at a discount to HFO, making it an attractive proposition for power generation. In 2008, Quadrise successfully completed a commercial demonstration of MSAR as boiler fuel in Lithuania. Over 22,000 tonnes of MSAR were produced at ORLEN Lietuva’s 200,000bpd (10Mt/year) refinery from Urals crude-based residues. The MSAR was transported c 300km by rail to the 1,800MWe (megawatt electrical) Elektrenai power plant in Lithuania. This plant is operated by Lietuvos Elektrine, a former Orimulsion customer, and is the primary source of Lithuania’s electrical power. Lietuvos Elektrine concluded that the performance of MSAR was similar to or better than Orimulsion. The trial results were independently verified by consultants from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), but the project did not proceed to commercialisation because of the financial crash in 2009. The project has not been revived since, because Lithuania now has a liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal at Klaipeda so security of fuel supply is less of an issue than when it was dependent on Russian gas.

Based on the studies carried out for utility companies and using the spread value given above, Quadrise calculates that the cost of converting a 400MWe boiler to MSAR would be $2.5m, generating fuel savings of $20m/year compared with HFO costs of c $280m pa at current prices. This represents a payback time of only a few months. Quadrise estimates that over 80% of the running costs for a boiler are related to fuel costs.

https://www.edisongroup.com/publication/cleaner-fuel-cleaner-planet/30256/

As per the Proactive Investors interview, a Patent for the 'Blend-On-Board' solution has been applied for this June, in partnership with Nouryon.

08 June 2022
(Journal 6942) GB2206071.9
Applicants: Quadrise International Limited and Nouryon Chemicals International B.V.
Title: System for producing an oil-in-water emulsion
Date Lodged: 26 April 2022

https://www.ipo.gov.uk/p-pj?startYear=2022&startMonth=January&startDay=26th+-+6923&endYear=2022&endMonth=July&endDay=27th+-+6949&filter=Quadrise&perPage=10&sort=Publication+Date

Link to the point on the video where JM advises on this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LDAR6Ty7Ok&t=352s