Member Info for VINCE72

A critical part of Production and supply of Biofuels is certification....the ability to trace the biofuel to its source.....is the problem we are still waiting for this certification before we can proceed

https://shipandbunker.com/news/apac/296563-sing-fuels-wins-iscc-certification

With this certification we able supply sustainable and traceable biofuel blends..

So this audit of the traceability of the glycerine supply from Cargill could be the hold up...

But again, for this to be on track with JM timelines, the agreements have to be signed before the AGM.

As Stockchump loves to say Yorkie...He's talking his own book.

The delay to the climate plan could have put us even further to the bottom of the MSC paperwork.

But the IMO regardless of outcome shouldn't really have that much impact the decision....this is purely down to MSC alone and any external factors such IMO should reiterate there decision.. the fact that they supported IMO guidelines, the fact they attend conferences on green fuels, the fact they are investing in LNG, the fact they have all the information they need on Msar / BioMsar has been attained should mean they Either want it or dont....Just Efffing say which and get it over with.

Https://shipandbunker.com/news/apac/621788-japanese-firms-test-worlds-first-hydrogen-ship-engine-on-land

I mean Wow thats impressive.. so tested the 4 stroke and are building a 2 stroke and will be ready for testing in 2026...we've tested ours to death in a lab and a couple of months on a Cummins....yeah negative nellie

Well according to Andy the time is now...but thats been for the past year

Https://shipandbunker.com/news/world/187940-cosco-completes-sea-trials-of-retrofitted-methanol-fuelled-boxship

Last one from me...this is precisely what im getting at..

Methanol, expensive, in short supply and highly flammable and YET, YET they still went for the conversion...Managed to schedule and complete a trial and will despite IMO or not will be at least using some of their fleet on Methanol..

And then there us US after 4 and half years and talking every bit of minutiae and listening to StockChump on Secret trials and powering Data centres.

i've told you once and ill tell you again akhm, because this ****es me off no end.....i will not sell up because some random jeff tells me i should, because they dont like to hear an alternative viewpoint.

so either filter me, ignore the post and scroll past or offer me the difference in what i paid and what they are worth....otherwise dont mention me selling again.

i've already said that if nothing by dec 31st i will be selling half...mot because anybody suggests it...but because i chose to...

now let that be the end of people telling me o should sell

Https://splash247.com/imo-stalemate-exposes-deep-global-divides/

One potential upshot from this month’s indecision, according to analysts at Jefferies, an investment bank, could be a shift back to conventional fuel engines for new vessel orders and for many of those currently in the orderbook.

“We expect many to shift their dual-fuel ‘capable’ newbuildings to dual-fuel ‘ready’ to lower capex, especially for 2027 and onward deliveries (when engine changes can still be made). If there is one benefit to the IMO’s stalled initiatives, it is that shipping costs may be coming down,” Jefferies mooted in a note to clients.

So like I said, not being forced to do anything....buisness as usual especially with fuel prices expected to be at all time lows nxt year..

I think MSC can live with being called the most polluting shipping company after all they have done for years

Did Borup come from another company to QED or was he between jobs and just decided while he's at a loose end to have a go.

Despite every scenario being g in our favour since 2020 , nobody has taken us up..

1) IMO 2020 rules

2) High price HFO/ Vlsfo......now the exact opposite

3) Diesel shortage

4) Increasingly harsher environmental policy especially from EU

And yet absolutely Nothing....and Now Borup saying he doesn't know if our product is the answer.

I found that shockingly poor and reaffirms my belief .......this isn't going to happen....

Not long to wait now folks but let's give them a good chance as the rewards are potentially huge if they pull it off.

This has been said enough times over the past decade, to not have the impact it once had.

When you look back, all IMC and AGM meetings have been a damp squib, at the time what seemed to be great forward looking news, turned out to be nothing of the sort. Just another spin on old information. Just to keep the usual salivating puppies like StockChump coming back for more.

If We cant get this MSC agreements signed by year end....why should 2026 be any different...we said this in 24,23,22...and yet once again after putting in the work and time (4 and half years) we reach the final hurdle only for them to freeze up.

MSC have all the information from MSAR and BioMsar they need, they have the result of the IMO and how investment impacts them....so they should have made their decision, which shouldn't take longer than a few weeks after IMO, so to me .....those agreements if they are going to be signed have no excuse not to be signed before the AGM......because as we all know about all other past " Should be signed in December deadlines.....they never are.

Which then rolls this on into nxt year, rinse and repeat.

Still looks that shipping is either not convinced or procrastinating by the way Peter is talking....you know IMO has been postponed a year .....but you guys shouldn't just sit on your arses and wait for Oct 2026...you can being taking steps now......and shipping seems to be replying MEH...

Ha Ha ....youre the king of Baseless scenarios....secret trials and zig zagging ships.

It could also be interpreted by entering into a collaboration to develop a new biofuel blend , spending 4 and half years in development, only at the last minute to never intend to use it...while still standing on the world stage saying how much the shipping industry needs to decarbonise. Fully knowing they have an immediate drop in solution right now.

So again only an RNS is going to clear this up....unless as been suggested by another poster ( cant remember his name)...they are sitting back even longer waiting for BioMsar Zero knowing they have till 2030 or longer now....which is think would be stupid as they can start immediately to save now and prosper through the uncertainty..

Hi Aussie, hope your good, I share your frustration in this and my BS radar is always on alert....I assume MSC must have had some kind of input in the development to jeep QED believing that they are onto a winner, but as I allude to it could well be that its nothing more than a greenwashing exercise on MSC 's part.

But only a RNS saying they've signed it or that they've decided not to use it will say otherwise.

But like I said JM stated with the agreement of Peter that they want this agreement signed within 2 months...so only we can do is wait.

What i do believe is its not signed by Dec 31st they aren't interested

Say hello to Lytton and the Kiwi guy , was it JezzanUK , nxt time you are in the forum..

Https://www.lr.org/en/knowledge/horizons/october-2025/the-blossoming-of-biofuels/

Biofuels already offer measurable returns. Perez illustrated this with the example of a Panamax bulk carrier sailing from Brazil to Rotterdam. Under 2025 conditions, the vessel would face annual fuel and compliance costs of nearly US $450,000. Per trip, switching to a low biofuel blend would add around US $11,000 in fuel cost but save over US $22,000 in compliance charges, predominantly coming from FuelEU.

The bottom line is that Trumps decision has thrown a spanner in the works, but why should it have to derail MSC decision.

Facts are that MSC have for years been awarded shamlessly the title of worst Shipping polluter of the year.

If MSC are serious about changing this direction they have to do something, most of their ships are old polluting ships....to convert all of these to LNG is impossible and not financially intelligent.

So that leaves either keep using VLSFO or HFO with scrubbers which is doing absolutely nothing to change, even though scrubbers reduce CO2, they are reducing NOx or particulate matter.

So if MSC approached QED to ask if they could develop a biofuel version of MSAR and then spent the next 4 and half years developing it with QED....only to walk away and say no....then why would you do that if they no it ticks the Financial and economic boxes.....

The question is....was it a greenwashing exercise all along, just to be looking they were doing something.

Again I point out the way JM came across in the IMC , his inference was that they are going to get signed within the next 2 months.

So even if there is no global carbon tax, the EU still have theirs and again if MSC are serious about changing, especially in this uncertain environment then QED's modular , quick install, quick return technology is a no brainer....

But if this just keeps rolling on and on...you have to ask .

Are they truly serious .

There can be no excuses whatsoever to not get the signatures from MSC and Cargill and the approval of the OEM for Morocco this year...none whatsoever based upon everything that was said in that IMC meeting...and the way it was inferred .

Well if im honest I had a dream it was Thurs 23rd Oct , but none of my dreams ever come true tbh.

That is true I will have sold , maybe not all but definitely half.