The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Greenfield even, not PQE. You get my drift.
Don’t be a negative nelly ;-)
Products proven so no issues there. Customers will want it pending a secured supply is my bet. Even if it takes time to secure an MSAR customer it will still probably save PQE money sending MSAR to a refinery in place of the diluents used presently. A proven supply of quality MSAR coming from Utah I can’t imagine will have trouble finding a local home, if not further afield.
Such an exciting time for the PQE and QFI technology. Both compliment each other brilliantly.
PQE allows for clean/greener extraction, QFI allows for a clean/greener product. Both provide cost advantages that outperform any natural competitors. A really exciting hook up and I hope it all goes ahead like it seems to be, it’s not often you have a greener/cleaner solution that also improves the bottom line of producers and consumers. This has got to be gathering the attention of some larger players, it’s highly highly disruptive to the status quo.
At the close. Hopefully update due shortly.
Low sulphur MSAR would sell for more than a discount WTI price to a local refinery. MSAR would also reduce the cost of production by removing the need for expensive distillates to achieve a reasonable pour point. It’s also a more environmentally friendly fuel product than what the refineries would produce.
So basically barking it reduces their operating costs, increases their sales price and is more environmentally friendly. It’s a no brainier.
I suggest leave them to it. Oil sands by their very nature are bituminous, or at least very close to. It’s widely reported;
https://geology.utah.gov/resources/energy/tar-sands/
The only way this very viscous product becomes useful is either by blending with expensive diluents (same old historic oil sands story), or by producing a HFO at source using MSAR.
The potential USP as I see it for PQE is that they can possibly command a premium for the clean sand if this is proven to be viable as a sellable by-product. That could swing the economics and make it profitable even without MSAR, but it begs the question - why would you choose to have an unprofitable product stream when it could be profitable?
MSAR is still in the mix I’ve no doubt is the key consideration for the tech. It’s simply a no brainer that transforms the whole project.
I think the upticks are largely gratitude to HotFinance14 for sharing the IR comms.
You’d be forgiven for thinking QFI was a solution invented solely for the oil sands industry - it’s such a perfect fit. Be a real shame if politics got in the way of everyone making money and a greener environment to boot.
Suspect there’s a case of both parties not wanting to demonstrate an over-reliance on one another before commercial terms are negotiated.
Why not accept and just build a new position..?
I suspect it’s because he’s still in disbelief that we have MSC trials and BioMSAR on the go, both of which he would have scoffed at as possibilities towards the end of last year
Correct HF (except BioMSAR). The roadmap set out by the team showed the following;
Morocco;
End Q2 - Site B industrial trial completed
End Q2 - Phase 2 Study results
End Q3 - Site A commercial trial completed
Utah;
End Q2 - Commercial Demo on site completed (delayed due to late start up of POSP, no revised timeframe provided since)
MSC;
End Q2 - Trial definition completed
End Q3 - Trail preparation started (prepare vessels and MSAR supply underway)
BioMSAR;
End Q3 - VTT / Wartsila BioMSAR testing complete
End Q3 - Glycerine Production & Market Expansion report findings
No. We are expecting at least some developments on each front (MSC / Morocco / Utah / BioMSAR) before end June so no news would be disappointing for me. For what it’s worth I’ve every faith things are progressing just fine in the background though, as indicated in the recent IR communications.
As per investor meet presentation in March;
Q19: Has the EOR made any decisions around MSAR integration at the refinery? If chosen not to integrate MSAR can you relay to us the rationale.
Recent IMO2020 marine fuel sulphur rules, Covid pandemic, and the impact on reduced oil demand, together with decarbonisation have resulted in a number of clients including the EOR from changing how they operate. We are still reviewing the fit of MSAR and bioMSAR, but cannot say more at this stage.
Q20: Has there been any development relating to the EOM for MSAR manufacture given our developing projects?
Following the launch of bioMSAR we had a positive call with the EOM, but cannot say more at this stage
Thanks for the valuable input Barking. Trust you’ll be the first to congratulate the team once news of fuel development commences and MSC start burning MSAR?
I’m inclined to agree Indigo. Also, for Quadrise, Utah has never been the target or main prize. MK only even started properly acknowledging it a few months ago..
I’d love Utah to come off but for me it’s all about MSC right now. Let’s get fuel production started and the MSC fleet burning MSAR, I don’t care about anything else until then.
With the exception of Utah, for which QFI have no control over, there are no reported delays.
MSC trial definition due for completion before end Q2. Morocco industrial trial and phase 2 studies due end Q2. BioMSAR VTT testing & Glycerine production due End Q3.
Solid contribution, Hugh.
Equally as solid as your end Feb comment “6p? Have you been on the absinthe?”. You must be really thrilled with how the SP has performed these past few months. Glass of celebratory poodle juice to celebrate?
Dpsandison - the MSC Joint development agreement RNS released on the 21st jan stated “Initial activities under the JDA will include project initiation, definition, high-level scoping and feasibility activities ("Initial Activities") of the overall Trial. The Initial Activities are to be completed within 3 months”.
Re: the other timelines these were all stated in the investormeet presentation held on the 8th March.
Obviously it’s speculative but I think we’re looking at days / weeks not months Tuchman. MK clearly had something in mind to claim the MSC trial definition would be completed within 3 months and as we’ve just passed this point now I imagine we’ll hear something imminently. Not to mention we also have Utah samples, Morocco updates and BioMSAR updates due now. One of those at the very least will be showing itself imminently IMO.