Member Info for VINCE72

Sorry my typing has to improve. Jason, not Jadon.

Good name that though.

Investors have mistaken Jadon's confidence many times in the past, and here we still are waiting for any news on any front. Imminent, 9/10, when not if all phrases from Qfi and each and every time we get to the nxt quarter and its the next quarter then the next etc.

I'm still invested in Qfi, 12 years in and not sold any along the way and stumped up every fund raise, but I consider Qfi another aim company now and treat it as such.

Talk is cheap and there's been plenty of it from the greenwashing companies we are dealing with.

. Considering April/May were really busy and constructive months, what has it really resulted in. An updated Morocco agreement where the trial date initially to finish in early Q3 is now just Q3, seems as the cost of the trial will be footed by us.

Forums, Conferences galore and still nothing on paper from MSC yet they can committ to 20 LNG ships despite the environmental leakage from methane slip being far worse than just using straight HFO

And Utah self committed deadline of June 30th for the receiving and testing of samples as well as negotiations with potential clients are missed.

Pivitoal year have to get some of these projects over the line. Yada yada yada.

Just do not believe a word out of Qfi anymore.

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Social-Backlash-Is-Wreaking-Havoc-On-Ecuadors-Oil-Industry.html

Those factors along with a history of heavy-handed state intervention in extractive industries are weighing heavily on Ecuador’s appeal to foreign energy companies. It is for these reasons that foreign oil companies will continue to view Ecuador as a high-risk jurisdiction thereby deterring further urgently required petroleum investment.

Based off these comments its highly unlikely the previous interested consortium who were intrested in developing the Esmaraldes refinery will be intrested anymore, so does this put Qfi back in the limelight in Ecuador.

Not really bothered tbh as getting our existing projects to any kind of commercialisation is proving to be a royal pain in the ass so not holding my breath for Ecuador.

But the techno-economic report and the online conference were an utter waste of time.

While Msar wouldn't have solved their oil production problem, it would have solved their fuel crisis and energy needs. Shortsighted and over confident

https://247newsagency.com/opinion/142649.html

Another Country that toyed with using Msar. If they had gone for Msar use in the interim while trying to secure tender for the refinery, they wouldn't be in the situation they are in now, with oil production completely halted in 48 hrs due to protests about soaring prices.

They could have had cheap diesel, since that would have been freed up from making the 48% of fuel oil the refinery produces and cheap energy if the refinery and the local electricity company would have used Msar for power generation......Ahhh well.

Apologies for some of the kak handed typing. Lol

We are all assuming that Cepsa's San Roque refinery shbeinh be tied in with Morocco is the first and only option on the table a good choice when you think about it. But look at the operational.update

" In parallel, preparations for the 4,000-hour LONO trial continue, with the procurement process for the vessel fuel booster system now underway. The selection of suitable MSC LONO vessels and fuel production sites are also in progress, with a number of options being investigated to minimise cost, time and risk."

"Fuel production sites"

Now goto
https://www.quadrisefuels.com/msar-applications/case-studies/marine-case-study/

You will see that the POC for the Maersk trial, the fuel was produced at klaipeda in Lithuania and then transferred by bunker barge to Bremerhaven

MSAR® was loaded on to a bunker barge at the Port of Klaipeda and transferred at Bremerhaven to the Maersk containerships by ship-to-ship (STS) transfer.

If you look at sailing times, a bunker barge running at 10 knots travels the 862 miles in 3.6 days.

So maybe as well as Cepsa, the orlen lietuva refinery might be tied into the trials and the extra time we are waiting for is a bunkering route in the making which due to the Ukraine war and now the threat against Lithuania by Russia is just undergoing extra analysis to see if it will work or not.

Or some variant of that.

Just a wild Saturday night theory , but Orlen lietuva was alluded to in the past by JM as a possible bunkering site.

So with the new threat to Lithuania's power needs maybe the extra time is to include Lithuania....maybe. possibly etc etc

https://shipandbunker.com/news/apac/708647-bp-marine-to-supply-marine-biofuel-in-singapore

It seems everybody else can schedule a trial and 18 months later according to the presentation we are still in the planning stages.

We are at the stage now after 18 months where MSC should be putting pen to paper and showing commitment to this trial. Verbal still means nothing as far as I'm concerned.

Multiple conferences, multiple presentations and we are still talking about the potential amid a global diesel crisis and the biggest differential between HFO and VLSFO.

The environmentals, the economics are all in place and yet we are still scanning presentations for any clue of whats going to happen.

If its taken this long with MSzc, don't hold your breath with
PEMEX

Fully agree Tuckman.

No offence Tuckman, but the lets wait and see mantra has been the norm since the strategic review. A point has to be reached where these projects start to be committed to and initiated. The time for potential, exploring, could might and imminently are stale and tired.

Take the Morocco RNS the trial was foreseen as finishing early Q3 and then in the transfer agreement update it has now become Q3.

6 months to prove they can do it. Because if at the end of this year we are roughly in the same position who is going to believe 2023 is the year.

Just for the record those are my own views and in no way do I stand with the likes of crippen ( Brookemia scum) or anyone else of that ilk.

You can see why no refiner is jumping to get onboard with all the dithering that OCP and MSC have exhibited upto now. MSC can make a comittment to having 20 LNG ships built no problem, but actually putting pen to paper to comitt to the LONO trial is taking forever.

Been with Qfi for the past 12 years and won't be stumping up any more money unless things materially change in the nxt 6 months.

Qfi seem to give you just enough information in keeping you hanging on then kick the can down the road to the next quarter.

https://shipandbunker.com/news/apac/794434-msc-orders-20-lng-fuelled-boxships-alphaliner

Almost 18 months later we are still waiting for an official signature to say officially say our trial is going to proceed.

https://learngerman.dw.com/en/mexicos-huge-step-backwards-on-energy-and-the-environment/a-59510451#

She explained that Pemex was already producing over 240,000 barrels of heavy fuel oil per day. Comprising the residues from refineries, it contains considerably more sulfur and other pollutants such as heavy metals.

Since a ban was introduced on burning heavy oil fuel in certain international waters, the market has shrunk, which is why it is now being used in CFE thermal power stations and causing air pollution

It calculated that a kilowatt-hour of energy generated by the CFE costs three and a half times more than one generated privately.

Like I've said if CFE want to remain competitive in this market and they are serious about achieving their climate change goals, MSAR has to be included in the mix.

240,000 barrels of HFO to burn in power stations just isn't going to cut it.

Another classic wodewick. Lmao

https://www.seatrade-maritime.com/containers/msc-launches-biofuel-campaign

While this article has been posted already ( somewhere,) this stood out

We are continually improving the energy efficiency of our fleet, as well as collaborating with partners across the maritime ecosystem on research, trials and pilots to promote the wider adoption of low- and zero-carbon fuels of the future.”

Just a personal opinion, but nxt week with the decarbonising forum taking place, next week would be a great time for a launch.

https://www.bunkerspot.com/americas/56505-americas-us-sees-highest-residual-fuel-oil-demand-for-may-since-2011

Demand is there, so if we are on track this month, we could be selling into a healthy market by October, providing we have secured some customers, and the oil permits are in place and we've received and tested the sample, and the oil flows at a reasonable rate.

https://www.vallartadaily.com/mexicos-state-owned-oil-company-has-doubled-emissions-in-three-years/

A lot of pressure is on Pemex at the moment to clean up their act. They seem to be ignoring all calls to do so. Financial pressure and their accessibility to debt markets is only exacerbating the pressure.

While this article is about gas flaring, due to inefficiencies in refinery operations, power generation in the plant and that used by CFE is massively contributing to the overall problem.

If CFE want to remain competitive in the power generation market MSAR is the only way forward.

A capitulation point hopefully will be reached soon.

Its not a reference to Qfi. Its a reference to a bio blend they already are using.

https://www.al-monitor.com/originals/2022/06/calls-rise-reactivate-moroccos-only-refinery-oil-prices-soar

Now wouldn't that be something if it happened.