Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Fred is IR for FFI
and if Institutional Investors are buying NSOL because of FFI, then you can dismiss any idea that NSOL won't benefit from FFI's rise in valuation.
JMHO
Is NSOL taking out heavy resistance???
I hope!
130k @ .97 ???...thats $126k..wow
344.3k @ .98...thats $337k.. wow wow wow
Type Value Conf.
resist. 1.17 2
resist. 1.01 2
resist. 0.96 4
resist. 0.94 10
resist. 0.91 2
resist. 0.89 2
resist. 0.88 5
resist. 0.86 10
resist. 0.85 3
resist. 0.82 3
resist. 0.79 4
msgbrd, I have seen this pattern before many times on BB stocks,
closing on its low and then taking off
NJGUY and TECHNO, nice call
I got caught in my own game and didn't add any.
Is this the beginning of the BIG move?
Will we have record volume today?
Is the train about to leave?
Got NSOL?
stay tuned....
GLTA
Oh, and everthing is JMHO ;)
Durante lobbying for FFI with government
I think its a good thing, especially when you consider big grain based agricultural companies competing for the ethanol market. They could try to squash FFI
Glad I am not following charts on this one anymore
What a roller coaster ride!
Can't ignore the volume though, somethin is definately up
For the non-believers, this would be a good time to bail.
The name change must have caused some paperwork delays. I hope that's behind us now and we can expect some meaty press releases.
"We're not just trying to build a company, we're trying to build an industry," he said. "The acceptance of a new idea is always difficult. Everybody wants to be the first person to build the second plant."
I really like that quote, from the bottom the article I posted.
NSOL/FFI is pioneering. Great risk and great reward. But I guess that's what life is all about.
I am hanging around for the ride.
Good luck everyone...
Oh, and like it really matters but, .... JMHO LOL
I guess that makes it ok to say anything ;)
NSOL + FFI + Military...
Posted on Sat, Mar. 18, 2006
Military's push to turn coal into fuel picking up speed
JAMES HANNAH
Associated Press
DAYTON, Ohio - The Pentagon is trying to persuade investors and the energy industry to embrace an 80-year-old technology to turn coal into liquid fuel to power planes, tanks and other battlefield vehicles.
Officials have been crisscrossing the country, meeting with energy companies and state government officials to sell them on the idea. At the same time, military researchers have been testing fuel produced by the process to make sure it is suitable for military vehicles, especially older ones.
Michael Aimone, an assistant Air Force deputy chief of staff, was in North Dakota last week to discuss a search for sites for a plant to turn coal into fuel for jets and trucks. He said a study to explore the idea of a plant to make 30,000 barrels of fuel a day from coal is focusing on North Dakota and Ohio, though other states will be considered as well.
The military is worried that political pressure or terrorist acts could cut the flow of oil from the Middle East or hurricanes or terrorists could destroy U.S. refineries.
"We know what the technical challenges are, but we don't see any show-stoppers," said William Harrison, senior adviser for the Pentagon's Assured Fuels Initiative. "There is still a level of uncertainty, but it looks like the technology is mature enough."
There are roadblocks. Building coal-to-fuel plants is expensive - possibly up to $5 billion. Investors worry that their money could go up in smoke if the global price of oil drops, budding government subsidies dry up, or tougher environmental rules are put into place, said Kevin Book, a Virginia-based senior analyst for Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co. Inc.
But then there is coal - lots of it.
The Middle East has about 685 billion barrels of oil compared with 22 billion barrels in the United States. However, there is enough coal in the United States to produce 964 billion barrels of fuel, according to the Pentagon.
Montana, with enough coal to produce 240 billion barrels of fuel, leads the pack, followed by Illinois, Wyoming, West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Ohio.
"We have probably 250 years' worth of coal," said Mike Carey, president of the Ohio Coal Association. "It would have a tremendous impact on the coal industry."
The industry is already on the rise.
Demand for U.S. coal is expected to be a record 1.2 billion tons this year, up from 1.18 billion in 2005, according to the National Mining Association. Production is forecast to be 1.16 billion tons, a 3.2 percent increase over 2005.
Coal is used mainly to generate electricity and in steel-making. Although experts say the coal-to-fuel process works, it is being done in just a few small demonstration projects.
The Pentagon began looking at coal in 2001 when Congress earmarked $13 million to investigate the Fischer-Tropsch process in which coal is gasified and then liquefied into fuel. The technology was developed by Germany in the 1920s and used by South Africa beginning in the 1950s.
The military accounts for about 4 percent of U.S. fuel consumption.
The process promises to produce a cleaner fuel that gives off more energy per pound and be less subject to freezing. It would reduce transportation costs and ease logistical headaches by enabling the military to use one fuel for all its planes and vehicles instead of the more than half dozen different fuels now used.
"See how beautifully clean that fuel is," Harrison said, pointing to a dancing flame inside a large glass tube at a Wright-Patterson Air Force Base lab. The flame turned from orange to blue as the soot was reduced when the fire began to burn fuel similar to what would be produced from coal.
Harrison, chief of the Air Force's fuels lab at the base, has been trying to light a fire in the private sector. He has spoken to state and industry officials in Ohio, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Montana and North Dakota.
Some energy companies are eager to have the military for a customer.
Houston-based DKRW Energy hopes to begin producing coal-based diesel fuel in 2010. The company needs to complete the permitting process and obtain financing for a $1 billion plant that would produce 11,000 barrels of fuel a day in Medicine Bow, Wyo.
Syntroleum, based in Tulsa, Okla., converts natural gas into liquid fuels and is currently involved in several coal-to-fuel projects.
President Jack Holmes said increasing demand for oil should keep the price high and coal-based fuel attractive.
"We think that now's the time," Holmes said. "If we can get these first few plants built and running and get the acceptability in the government and industry, there's a big market to do this."
Others point out that similar talk in previous years evaporated when Mideast producers cut the price of oil.
Dick Bajura, director of the National Research Center for Coal and Energy at West Virginia University advised supporters of the coal-to-fuel idea to make sure "the people in OPEC land aren't going to pull the rug out from underneath you."
Crude oil is selling for more than $60 a barrel. In December, the U.S. Department of Energy scrapped its predictions that oil prices would drop to around $30 a barrel by 2025, saying that costs will persist near or above $50 a barrel for years.
As the military evaluates the fuel made from coal, the Energy Department has funded efforts to refine the process. In January, the department awarded a $100 million grant for the construction of what may end up being the nation's first commercial coal-to-fuel plant, in eastern Pennsylvania. Private financing is still being secured for the $612 million plant, which could be up and running by 2009.
The risk to Mideast oil supplies was underscored in February when suicide bombers in explosives-packed cars attacked the world's largest oil processing facility. The attack was the first on an oil facility in Saudi Arabia and sent world oil prices soaring.
Syntroleum's Holmes said that even though a commercial plant would be expensive to build, it could operate for 30 years or more.
"We're not just trying to build a company, we're trying to build an industry," he said. "The acceptance of a new idea is always difficult. Everybody wants to be the first person to build the second plant."
Why do you add a person for FFI investor relations when you can't directly "invest" in FFI?
5years thanks for your comments
I am no big fan of VCs either and it certainly seems like NSOL/FFI is executing.
Let the pieces fall into place as they need to.
Chess anyone?
Hi 5years
I say all options should be considered. If NSOL doesn't want to pursue VCs, then fine, but at least they should talk to them. They can always say NO. I also think the risk level is much lower than a startup, so I wouldnt expect them to get a hugh percentage. If you were a VC and saw what NSOL/FFI has, wouldn't you want to work a deal that was benefical to both parties? On the other hand, maybe FFI/NSOl has all the money and plans in place and doesnt need them. Even so, it doesnt hurt to talk.
I get that NSOl/FFI is bootstrapping. But if Wall Street can help, I say don't be too greedy. Greed makes NSOL/FFI just as bad as those nasty VCs, right?...lol
GS?...
Well as long as we are dreaming, how about they contact Colin Powell? He's interested in new energy companies. He could clue Bush in and get some VC interest as well.
FFI must be expecting new investors
Why else would they release such a press release?
Seems kinda obvious to me...
A corn refinery uses 300 tons of coal a day to make ethanol!
Anybody see the irony in it? ...lol Startin' to believe FFI really will rule the ethanol world, somebody slap me! See article below...
A Carbon Cloud Hangs Over Green Fuel
By Mark Clayton, Christian Science Monitor. Posted March 25, 2006.
An Iowa corn refinery, open since December, uses 300 tons of coal a day to make ethanol. So just how green can it be?
Late last year in Goldfield, Iowa, a refinery began pumping out a stream of ethanol, which supporters call the clean, renewable fuel of the future.
There's just one twist: The plant is burning 300 tons of coal a day to turn corn into ethanol -- the first US plant of its kind to use coal instead of cleaner natural gas.
An hour south of Goldfield, another coal-fired ethanol plant is under construction in Nevada, Iowa. At least three other such refineries are being built in Montana, North Dakota, and Minnesota.
The trend, which is expected to continue, has left even some ethanol boosters scratching their heads. Should coal become a standard for 30 to 40 ethanol plants under construction -- and 150 others on the drawing boards -- it would undermine the environmental reasoning for switching to ethanol in the first place, environmentalists say.
"If the biofuels industry is going to depend on coal, and these conversion plants release their CO2 to the air, it could undo the global warming benefits of using ethanol," says David Hawkins, climate director for the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington.
The reason for the shift is purely economic. Natural gas has long been the ethanol industry's fuel of choice. But with natural gas prices soaring, talk of coal power for new ethanol plants and retrofitting existing refineries for coal is growing, observers say.
"It just made great economic sense to use coal," says Brad Davis, general manager of the Gold-Eagle Cooperative that manages the Corn LP plant, which is farmer and investor owned. "Clean coal" technology, he adds, helps the Goldfield refinery easily meet pollution limits -- and coal power saves millions in fuel costs.
Yet even the nearly clear vapor from the refinery contains as much as double the carbon emissions of a refinery using natural gas, climate experts say. So if coal-fired ethanol catches on, is it still the "clean, renewable fuel" the state's favorite son, Sen. Tom Harkin likes to call it?
Such questions arrive amid boom times for America's ethanol industry.
With 97 ethanol refineries pumping out some 4 billion gallons of ethanol, the industry expects to double over the next six years by adding another 4.4 billion gallons of capacity per year. Tax breaks as well as concerns about energy security, the environment, and higher gasoline prices are all driving ethanol forward.
The Goldfield refinery, and the other four coal-fired ethanol plants under construction are called "dry mill" operations, because of the process they use. The industry has in the past used coal in a few much larger "wet mill" operations that produce ethanol and a raft of other products. But dry mills are the wave of the future, industry experts say. It's their shift to coal that's causing the concern.
More plants slated for Midwest, West
Scores of these new ethanol refineries are expected to be built across the Midwest and West by the end of the decade, and many could soon be burning coal in some form to turn corn into ethanol, industry analysts say.
"It's very likely that coal will be the fuel of choice for most of these new ethanol plants," says Robert McIlvaine, president of a Northfield, Ill., information services company that has compiled a database of nearly 200 ethanol plants now under construction or in planning and development.
If all 190 plants on Mr. McIlvaine's list were built and used coal, motorists would not reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions, according to an in-depth analysis of the subject to date by scientists at University of California at Berkeley, published in Science magazine in January.
Of course, many coal-fired ethanol plants on the drawing board will not be built, Mr. McIlvaine says. Others in planning for years may still choose natural gas as fuel to meet air pollution requirements in some states.
Other variations on ethanol-coal are emerging in Goodland, Kan., and Underwood, N.D., where ethanol plants are being built next to coal-burning power plants to use waste heat. Efficient, but still coal.
That could spell trouble for ethanol's renewable image.
"If your goal is to reduce costs, then coal is a good idea," says Robert Brown, director of Iowa State University's office of biorenewables. "If the goal is a renewable fuel, coal is a bad idea. When greenhouse-gas emissions go up, environmentalists take note. Then you've got a problem."
Ethanol industry officials say coal-power is just one possibility the industry is pursuing.
"I think some in the environmental community won't be all that warm and fuzzy about [coal-fired ethanol]," says Bob Dinneen, president of the Renewable Fuels Association, the national trade association for the US fuel-ethanol industry. "It's fair to say there's a trend away from natural gas, but coal is just one approach. Other technologies are part of the mix, too."
He cites, for instance, a new ethanol plant in Nebraska strategically located by a feed lot, using methane from cattle waste to fire ethanol boilers. Another new plant in Minnesota uses biomass gasification, using plant material as its fuel.
Coal for now, wood in the future
Coal may end up being merely a transitional fuel in the run-up to cellulosic ethanol, including switch grass and wood, says another RFA spokesman. While ethanol production today primarily uses only the corn kernel, cellulosic will use the whole plant.
Cellulosic ethanol, mentioned by President Bush in his State of the Union speech, could turn the tide on coal, too, by burning plant dregs in the boiler with no need for coal at all.
"It's a fact that ethanol is a renewable fuel today and it will stay that way," says Matt Hartwig, an RFA spokesman. "Any greenhouse-gas emissions that come out the tailpipe are recycled by the corn plant. I don't expect the limited number of coal-fired plants out there to change that."
Still, Hawkins insists that if ethanol is made using coal, the carbon dioxide should be captured and injected into the ground.
"We favor getting ethanol production up," Hawkins says. "But we obviously favor a cleaner process. We need large cuts in global warming emissions from transportation. It's not good enough for ethanol to simply be no worse than gasoline."
Jim Cramer's Ethanol comments from last night
sorry for the caps but I just cut-n-pasted from this site
http://madmoneyrecap.com/daily_summary_032706.htm
THE SUNDAY NEW YORK TIMES BUSINESS SECTION SAYS THAT YOU CAN'T MAKE MONEY OFF OF ETHANOL. THEY'RE WRONG.
I WANT YOU TO SWAP OUT OF ARCHER DANIELS MIDLAND (ADM), INTO A WHOLE NEW HOUSE OF PLEASURE, AND IT'S CALLED ANDERSONS (ANDE). THAT'S IF YOU WANT TO TRY TO MAKE SOME HARD-EARNED ETHANOL MONEY.
ANDE - IT'S SMALLER, IT'S FASTER, IT'S CHEAPER THAN ADM. THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO DO A 'MON-BACK.
I THINK THAT ANDE WAS THE PUNCHLINE THAT THE NEW YORK TIMES LEFT OUT OF THIS ARTICLE.
ALL RIGHT, HOW ABOUT SOME CAVEATS? I NEED TO BE UP FRONT. THIS IS A RISKIER PLAY. WHY? BECAUSE THE VOLUME ON ANDE - HOW MUCH THE STOCK TRADES - IS ON THE LOW SIDE.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN YOU CAN'T INVEST IN IT. IT DOES MEAN YOU MUST USE LIMIT ORDERS! IT DOES MEAN YOU MUST PROCEED WITH CAUTION, BECAUSE STOCKS WITH LOW VOLUME COULD BE BID UP QUICKLY, FOR THOSE WHO DON'T LISTEN.
NOW, THESE GUYS DON'T JUST GROW CORN; THEY DON'T PROCESS ETHANOL. MAN, THEY'RE IN A BUSINESS THAT I THOUGHT WENT AWAY FRANKLY. THEY OPERATE GRAIN ELEVATORS.
BILL GATES (WHO INVESTED $84 MILLION IN PACIFIC ETHANOL - PEIX) IS RIGHT ABOUT THE BIG IDEA, BUT WRONG ABOUT THE COMPANY - SELL, SELL, SELL!
PUT YOUR MONEY HERE, INTO ANDE!
HOW DOES THIS WORK? IF WE'RE GOING TO BE USING MORE ETHANOL, THEN WE NEED SOMEPLACE TO STORE CORN! CORN IS STILL THE CHEAPEST WAY TO MAKE ETHANOL, DESPITE ALL THE SPECULATIVE TECHNOLOGY THAT THE TIMES TELLS US ABOUT.
RIGHT NOW, MOST CARS CAN RUN ON FUEL THAT'S 10% ETHANOL. IT ONLY COSTS $100 PER AUTO TO BUILD THIS INTO CARS. SO, CONVERTING INTO MOSTLY ETHANOL FUEL WILL NOT BE TOO EXPENSIVE.
BUT, ONCE THAT HAPPENS, WE NEED THE GAS STATIONS TO STOCK ETHANOL FUEL. AND WE NEED TO BE GROWING AND STORING MORE CORN TO PRODUCE THE FUEL.
THAT'S WHY I THINK ANDE WILL BE RAKING IT IN WITH THEIR GRAIN OPERATORS. THEIR ELEVATORS ARE GOING TO BE CHOCK FULL.
RIGHT NOW, WE'RE IN PLANTING SEASON. COME HARVEST TIME, I THINK THIS STOCK MAKES YOU SOME MAD MONEY.
THERE'S REALLY NO WAY AROUND THIS. YOU GROW A LOT OF GRAIN, YOU END UP PAYING TO STORE IT, OR YOU SELL IT TO THE CO. THAT OPERATES THE GRAIN ELEVATOR FOR A LOWER PRICE. BECAUSE THERE'S JUST SO MUCH DARN GRAIN. EITHER WAY, ANDE GETS ITS CUT!
THEY'RE NOT JUST AN OPERATOR OF GRAIN OPERATORS. JUST LAST MONTH, THEY ANNOUNCED THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BUILD THE LARGEST ETHANOL PLANT EAST OF THE MISSISSIPPI! 110 MILLION GALLONS OF ETHANOL A YEAR. HEY, THAT'S BETTER THAN A SHARP STICK IN THE EYE.
PLUS, THEY'VE ALSO GOT A GREAT RAIL BUSINESS. REMEMBER, WE'VE GOT ONE NIFTY BULL MARKET FOR THE RAILROADS. THAT'S WHY I LIKED THE KOPPERS (KOP) LAST WEEK FOR THE CREOSOTE. HEY, TWO THUMBS UP, WAY UP.
THE BOTTOM LINE!: ANDE IS THE KING OF OFFBEAT BULL MARKETS IN ETHANOL AND RAILROAD CARS. I THINK THAT MAKES IT - BUY, BUY, BUY! - A TRIPLE BUY!
thanks Technoman
I think the fundamentals will play out in our favor. Like I said before, I expect the price to jump when it does.
Meanwhile, I may have another chance to add more shares.
Some posters here seem very well connected
and become targets for sharing information
And you wonder why some don't post at all...
The Ethanol market is HOT
At some point, NSOL/FFI will be recognized as a REAL player by the market. I have my shares ready for that event, for when it does happen, it will go up fast.
I do wish FFI would put up their website and include things like how many employess they already have.
BTW, anybody live close enough to Toms River? Maybe take some digital pictures for all to see? That would show real progress.
On the Ethanol Bandwagon, Big Names and Big Risks
Peter DaSilva for The New York TimesVinod Khosla, one of the founders of Sun Microsystems, now invests in ethanol. The flex-fuel Chevy Tahoe next to him can run on gasoline and ethanol.
By NORM ALSTER
Published: March 26, 2006
VINOD KHOSLA was a founder of Sun Microsystems and then, as a partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, the Silicon Valley venture capital firm, he helped a host of technology companies get off the ground.
These days, Mr. Khosla, 51, is still investing in technology, but much of it has nothing to do with the world of network computing in which he made his name. He is particularly excited about new ways of producing ethanol — the plant-derived fuel that, he says, could rapidly displace gasoline. "I am convinced we can replace a majority of petroleum used for cars and light trucks with ethanol within 25 years," he said. He has already invested "tens of millions of dollars," he said, in private companies that are developing methods to produce ethanol using plant sources other than corn.
Mr. Khosla isn't the only big-name entrepreneur to embrace ethanol. Sir Richard Branson, chairman of the Virgin Group, plans to invest $300 million to $400 million to produce and market ethanol made from corn and other sources, said Will Whitehorn, a director of the company. Virgin expects to announce soon the site of its first production facility, probably in the eastern United States, with a second one likely to follow in the West, Mr. Whitehorn said.
Bill Gates has also made a move into the ethanol market. Cascade Investment, Mr. Gates's private investment firm, has declared its intention to buy $84 million in newly issued preferred convertible securities in Pacific Ethanol, according to William Langley, its chief financial officer. The company, which is based in Fresno, Calif., and is publicly traded, says it hopes to become the leader in the production and distribution of ethanol in the Western states.
Ethanol derived from corn now accounts for 3 percent of the American automotive fuel market. Most cars in the United States can already handle fuel that is up to 10 percent ethanol, and as many as five million are so-called flex-fuel vehicles that can use a fuel called E85, which is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline.
The current excitement over ethanol derives from research that has cut the cost of converting nonfood plant matter like grasses and wood chips into alcohol. Mr. Khosla says he believes that such ethanol, called cellulosic ethanol, will eventually be cheaper to produce than both gasoline and corn-derived ethanol.
Can investors whose pockets are not as deep jump into the ethanol market? Yes, but they are taking a big risk. Picking long-term winners among the companies that make ethanol — or, for that matter, develop other alternative energy technologies — is a very uncertain business. The few public companies that focus on ethanol are typically unprofitable. Pacific Ethanol, for example, has not yet had a profitable quarter and will not until at least the fourth quarter, when its first plant is scheduled to begin production, Mr. Langley said.
Few mutual funds focus on alternative energy companies. "We are not going to start a dedicated alternative energy fund, period," said Wenhua Zhang, a technology analyst at T. Rowe Price. The company is avoiding the sector "for the same reason we didn't start an Internet fund in 2000: a dedicated very narrow sector fund with a single focus typically has a much higher risk."
Some publicly traded companies with operations linked to ethanol include Novozymes and Danisco, both based in Denmark, and Diversa of San Diego; all three have said they have made major gains in reducing the cost of the enzymes needed to produce ethanol from cellulose. Bigger, more diversified companies like Archer Daniels Midland and Monsanto have ethanol operations, too, though ethanol is but one of many businesses for these giants.
Two mutual funds that focus on alternative energy include some ethanol companies among their holdings. The New Alternatives fund holds shares of Abengoa and Acciona Energía, two Spanish companies investing in ethanol production. Another option is the PowerShares WilderHill Clean Energy Portfolio, an exchange-traded fund that tracks a basket of 40 alternative energy companies. Robert Wilder, who created the index on which the fund is based, said that it currently includes just two companies with significant ethanol interests: Pacific Ethanol and MGP Ingredients, an ethanol producer in Atchison, Kan.
Mr. Wilder said he expects to add other companies involved with ethanol. "It's very elegant," he said. "We can take an agricultural waste product we currently pay to get rid of and convert it into fuel."
But many ethanol companies are privately held, making them inaccessible to most investors. And there is certainly room for skepticism about ethanol's future. After all, corn ethanol has been around for years, and even with a current spike in demand, the industry commands only a 3 percent share of the market. Mr. Khosla counters that soaring energy prices have made corn-based ethanol more competitive, while research advances in breaking down cellulose into simple sugars have cut the cost of making ethanol from other sources.
"Ethanol is cheaper to produce, unsubsidized, than gasoline today," he said. "As these technologies ramp up, they will be cheaper — unsubsidized — than gasoline even if petroleum drops to $35 a barrel."
Brazil has proved that ethanol can be made competitively from sugar, said Daniel M. Kammen, a professor in the energy and resources group at the University of California, Berkeley. He estimates the cost of producing ethanol from sugar — including raw materials and processing — at $6 to $7 per gigajoule (a unit of energy) versus $14 a gigajoule for gasoline. In Brazil, roughly 70 percent of new vehicles are equipped to handle ethanol, and the country has been able to curb its dependence on foreign oil and turn ethanol into a growing export industry.
But cellulosic ethanol, the kind produced from nonfood plant matter, has some advantages over food-based ethanol. Because cellulosic ethanol is derived from plant waste, wood chips or wild grasses like miscanthus and switchgrass, it would not require costly cultivation; that would mean savings on labor, pesticides, fertilizers and irrigation.
And it is superior to corn-derived ethanol in reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Professor Kammen said. He expects cellulosic ethanol to catch on quickly. "I think you can really see ethanol comprising 25 to 30 percent of gasoline consumption within 10 years," he said.
FOR that to happen, automakers would need to build more flex-fuel cars. The cost of adding this capability to new cars has been estimated at roughly $100 a vehicle. And ethanol would need to be much more readily available at gas stations. Mr. Khosla has been lobbying in Washington for government help in both areas.
Smaller investors may be advised to just sit back and study developing opportunities. "This is an area where investors have to be patient and build up slowly," Mr. Khosla said.
But he said the potential payoff justifies his own aggressive bets. And ethanol's success, he said, would mean that more energy spending would flow to rural America. "You get a fuel that's cheaper and greener than gasoline," he said. "It gives us energy security."
Another good sign...
Average volume picking up
5 Day Average Daily Volume 372,270
10 Day Average Daily Volume 251,917
20 Day Average Daily Volume 186,434
30 Day Average Daily Volume 167,625
For those of you that follow charts ;)
They stated this in previous press release...
"When further details of FFI's technological process are unveiled in the near term, look also for the release of FFI's official Web site."
Since they may want to make a "press release" first out of information that will be found on the website, its possible the website would be delayed.
Who knows, its all good, lots of data to be released no matter how its done.
Who put that out?
I have a lot of stock now, but I don't like hype or bashing, which all it is without facts.
It dropped on low volume
and then jumped back up again. Thats a good sign.
GLTA
FFI reduces barrier to coal gasification??
Seems the articles I have been reading indicate it costs 1-2 Billion dollars for coal gasification plant. Quite a barrier to entry!
With FFI's existing technology, they should be able to profitably make coal gasification a reality without the need for billion dollar plants. In fact, it could be one of the many "by-product" successes of the first waste-to-ethanol facility.
There's a lot this first facility will prove, and if it does, FFI will be a monster.
BTW, google "coal gasification", huge interest in this field.
here's link to one of the coal gasification articles
http://www.upi.com/Energy/view.php?StoryID=20060308-121500-2043r
Why do you worry about what others do?
The only person you can control is yourself :)
Good Luck to you too Gateway
If you are afraid, then either educate yourself some more or reduce your stock exposure. I am sure these are things you already know!
As far as me, I always love a bargain, so I still have some dry powder for such occassions
Commercializing "proven" technology is even better!
You know how they say not to fall in love with a stock?
I think it's too late for me!...lol
Keeping my fingers crossed on FFI/NSOL.
I love the idea of commercializing new technology that can make the world a better place and decrease our dependance on foreign oil...call me a dreamer
I am impressed with the methodical execution by management, step by step, to insure a solid foundation and eventual success. They are gaining my confidence even if the market doesn't recognize it yet.
Anytime you do something innovative like this, there will be resistance and disbelief. I've had a fair share of that myself, but I am coming around :)
FOB FFI Plant, Technoman, you were right...
FFI did save a bundle by not having to worry about transporting ethanol. Smart move!
See excerpt from GPRE press release...
$3.5 million dollars was paid to BNSF by GPRE to have a rail line renovated. With said renovation, GPRE will be able to transport its ethanol and distillers grains to markets across the country.
from the following release...
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. ("GPRE") closes on debt funding to build a 50 million gallon fuel grade ethanol plant in Shenandoah, Iowa.
Las Vegas, NV, February 14, 2006. Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. today announced that on February 6, 2006, the Company closed on debt financing for a 50 million gallon per year ethanol plant that it intends to build in Shenandoah, Iowa. Co Bank and Farm Credit Services of America have agreed to loan GPRE $47 million dollars to complete the construction of a 50 million gallon per year fuel grade ethanol plant. The President of GPRE said, "We would like to express our appreciation to Co Bank and Farm Credit for assisting us with the project." An 8-K was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission immediately thereafter. That filing can be read in its entirety at the SEC's website: www.sec.gov by doing a company search for Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc.
Fagen, Inc. of Granite Falls, MN will be the Design Builder of the plant and ICM of Colwich, KS will be the process engineers. GPRE entered into a Design Build contract with Fagen, Inc. and ICM to build the Plant in the later part of January. An 8-K was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission immediately thereafter concerning this action also. That filing can be read in its entirety at the SEC's website, referenced above.
On January 23, 2006, GPRE entered into an agreement with the BNSF Railway Company to have a 20 mile spur running from Red Oak, Iowa to Shenandoah, Iowa upgraded to meet HAZMAT (Hazardous Materials) Standards. $3.5 million dollars was paid to BNSF by GPRE to have the line renovated. With said renovation, GPRE will be able to transport its ethanol and distillers grains to markets across the country once the plant and the renovation to the rail has been completed. BNSF has indicated to GPRE that it is BNSF's intention to have said renovation completed by the end of September 2006, which should be in time for this year's harvest of corn and soy beans. The President of GPRE stated, "We hope the renovation of this line will be of benefit to the local elevators and the farming community of SW Iowa."
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to vary materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. GPRE may experience significant fluctuations in future operating results due to a number of economic conditions, competition in the ethanol industry, risks associated with plant construction and technology development, and other risk factors detailed in GPRE's SEC filings. These factors and others could cause operating results to vary significantly from those in prior periods and those projected in forward-looking statements. Additional information with respect to these and other factors, which could materially affect GPRE and its operations, are included on certain forms GPRE has filed with the SEC. GPRE assumes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
People that believe in FFI's future will buy in, and people who can't or won't wait will buy out.
IMO FFI will wind up with a stronger base of investors that believe.
Unfortunately, the ship will also always have rats that jump in and out...lol
Ethanol fuel from Tires...
Hellloooooooooooooooooo, is ANYONE ELSE talking about this???
This truely IS a technological mindshift.
AND its already has PROVEN research. Now its time for DEVELOPMENT.
Gawd I love investing in companies that will make a difference!!!
Let's reduce our dependence on Middle East Oil and make money at the same time! :)
Technoman, FFI is a start-up, not some fortune 500 stock.
Its got great risk/reward potential, but still unproven.
So looking forward two years only makes sense if you TOTALLY believe FFI will succeed.
Just remember,
We know where the price will go if/when FFI starts producing ethanol. But, it certainly won't be a straight line between here and there...lol enjoy the rollercoaster ride!
Expect supportive statements from traders when they are long, and BS statements when they are not!
FFI intends to build several strategically located waste-to-ethanol plants in the United States and is in preliminary discussions to secure additional sites in the Northeast Corridor, Midwest and the West Coast. Details on additional proposed plants will be announced upon signing of each site agreement.
....from Dec 5th press release...
now we could use a press release on bond status...can't be far away...
Technoman, shouldn't everything IR tells you be in the public domain?
Technoman, let me clarify...
If the market thought it was a "slam dunk" we would be at a much higher price.
Since the market doesn't yet know/understand/believe... we are where we are.
Fishy, at first pass, I could see how one would think that.
Dig deeper and let us know what you come up with.
I have my reasons for investing here, but I certainly could be wrong (but hope not)
If it was a "slam dunk" it wouldn't be at this price, no doubt.
GLTA
With disclosure of the technology
you have to assume everything else has already been lined up.
IMO, I would expect a series of news releases from here out.