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.
Or the date it's pulled off the newsstand?
Ralph
From ONYI's 14C/A filed on 1/30/07:
This information Statement is being furnished by the Board of Directors of Originally New York, Inc. (the “Company”) to the stockholders of record of the Company’s common stock at the close of business on February 9, 2007 (the “Record Date”), and is being sent to you to inform you of action which has been approved by the holders of at least a majority of the voting power of the Company outstanding on the Record Date, by written consents without holding a meeting of stockholders. By such written consents, such stockholders approved the following action:
1. To amend our Articles of Incorporation to effect an increase in the Company’s authorized shares of common stock to two (2) billion shares and authorized shares of preferred stock to ten (10) million shares, and
2. To change the name of the Company to United Ethanol Group, Inc. (the “Amendment”).
Today is the "Record Date". I think the symbol stays the same
but the name will show United Ethanol Group, Inc, starting
Monday.
Ralph
Is this carbon monoxide high?
CO 4.6 mg/MJ
NOx 88mg/MJ
Nitrogen oxides, or NOx, is the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases, all of which contain nitrogen and oxygen in varying amounts. Many of the nitrogen oxides are colorless and odorless. However, one common pollutant, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) along with particles in the air can often be seen as a reddish-brown layer over many urban areas.
Nitrogen oxides form when fuel is burned at high temperatures, as in a combustion process. The primary manmade sources of NOx are motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fuels. NOx can also be formed naturally.
See previous post.
Ralph
Pyrolysis Oil Combustion tests in an industrial boiler
Combustion Tests
The combustion properties of various pyrolysis oils derived from biomass have been studied at Oilon’s R&D Centre in Lahti, Finland. Oilon is the biggest burner manufacturer in Finland and is interested in boiler applications in the burner size class of 350 kW - 45 MW. The dimensions, operating parameters and characteristics of pyrolysis oils were tested and compared, and emissions were measured for each test.
Figure 1: Picture of the test boiler at Oilon R&D Centre
There were clear differences in combustibility and in particular in emissions for different oil grades. The most important parameters for pyrolysis oil combustion are viscosity, water and particulates content, amount of methanol addition, bio-oil raw material and bio-oil age. There are clear differences in combustion between good and poor oils. Modifications to the burner and boiler improve the combustion result but cannot help much if the oil quality is poor.
When optimising combustion conditions for the test oils, the following effects of oil quality were found:
feedstock and/or pyrolysis process yields various reactivities of oil components, which may cause blockages in the feed line,
oil age and/or inhomogeneity gives uneven combustion,
methanol addition homogenises poor-quality pyrolysis oil and improves its combustion,
solids content affects mainly the amount of incombustibles,
an increase in water content reduces NOx emissions and increases particle and soot emissions.
Concerning equipment modifications and adjustments, the following factors improved combustion and flame:
clean nozzle,
strong swirl,
intense symmetrical flame,
pressure air atomisation (compared to steam),
increase of air coefficient and combustion power (having enough residence time though),
suitable atomisation viscosity (abt 15 - 20 cSt).
At the optimum adjustments of this combustion system, the mean combustion results and emission values of typical pyrolysis oils were as follows:
O2 3.5 vol%,
NOx 88mg/MJ,
CO 4.6 mg/MJ,
hydrocarbons 0.1 mg/MJ,
soot 2.4 Bac.,
particles 86mg/MJ.
In addition to the characteristics of pyrolysis oils and burner settings, different furnace constructions were compared in the test runs. By insulating the front of the furnace, the mean temperature levels of the flame were increased and hence combustion was improved. Results
The main results of the combustion tests are:
Pyrolysis oils can be burned relatively well in conventional furnaces and boilers. Boilers and oil burners may require small modifications or additions. The flame is larger and combustion takes a longer time than with mineral oils,
Handling and pumping of pyrolysis oil should be performed according to exact recommendations of equipment providers,
Support fuel is required at the start of combustion and possibly in the combustion of pyrolysis oil of poor quality to maintain good and stable combustion,
The nozzles should be kept clean and in good conditions. Extra cooling air for the nozzle could be useful during combustion,
Emissions from combustion are in general between those from light fuel oil and the lightest heavy oil, but the particulate content is higher. There are no SOx and net CO2 emissions,
Quality specifications should be defined for pyrolysis oil, especially water and solids contents. The viscosity range is significant for good atomisation. The quality of pyrolysis oil has a strong effect on emissions. A high solids content in pyrolysis oil yields high particulate emissions, hence solids removal from pyrolysis vapours or oil is highly recommended. High (above 30 wt%) water contents also give high particulate emissions. These emissions can be reduced to a certain extent by using a support fuel and optimizing the atomization viscosity. Methanol addition (up to a maximum of 10 wt%) homogenizes inferior quality oils and decreases particulate emissions. The costs for methanol addition and oil combustion in a commercial boiler are most probably lower than those of incinerating poor-quality oil in a special incineration plant for hazardous wastes,
Further research is required on combustion properties of different commercial pyrolysis oils in order to identify the reasons for emission behaviour, nozzle blockages and related phenomena. For further information contact
Ms Anja Oasmaa, VTT Energy, PO Box 1601, 02044 VTT, Finland.
Tel: +358 9 456 5594 Fax: +358 9 460 493 Email: Anja.Oasmaa@vtt.fi
OR
Mr Matti Kytö, Oilon Oy, PO Box 5, 15801 Lahti, Finland.
Tel: +358 3 85 761 Fax: +358 3 857 6239 Email: matti.kyto@oilon.fi
http://www.pyne.co.uk/?_id=4
Looks like the gunk has uses, Ralph
I need help!
Where did Diversified Ethanol and their technology ("ultrasonic low frequency") come from? Looking at ONYI's
SEC filings starting with the 10Q for the quarter ending
9/30/06, they stated:
We will now undertake the business of developing, manufacturing and selling ethanol plants.
Future revenues are significantly dependent upon the sales of ethanol plants. To lessen dependency on the sales of these plants, the Company plans to establish and operate plants for ethanol production. We have not experienced any revenues from the sale of ethanol plants. The first plant is intended to be used for demonstration, customer training, research, and development. We expect to incur fees for the continued construction of ethanol plants. No assurance can be given that the Company will be successful in the endeavors.
I looked at ALL subsequent filings and there is NO MENTION
of bringing Diversified Ethanol to the party.
Someone please tell me the evolution of Diversified Ethanol
and it's value to USSE, other than being a proper reporting
company (from sporting goods days) and a pipeline for USSE's
biofuel enabeling the collection of green credits etc.
Ralph
You'r welcome!
My order for 1500 at 10 cents moved the share price.
Ralph, a USSE holder.
I get LII on Power Etrade Pro for USSE. I noticed those sizable trades above Ask also. Currently the MM ETRD is
.34 Bid and .38 Ask (out of the action).
Don't you get the current bid/ask when you place an order?
I think a market order would be better than a guess at the
current ask. Your broker should get you or whoever the best
price at all times.
Ralph
USSE must be showing financial clout, if they can gain 60% of
ACMG by showing they can invest $280 mil in ACMG's business.
Again USSE is not paying $280 mil for ACMG's shares.
Ralph
Redwood should know because they also consult for ACMG, but
things change.
The $280 mil is going to be invested in plant and equipment,
not to buy 60% of the outstanding shares. For this investment
(which USSE will own 60% of), USSE will get 60% of outstanding
shares and controlling interest.
This deal is probably affecting today's USSE share price.
It's all good!
that's my take, Ralph
I'm not bashing. I'm longer USSE than I should be, but!
How do you know there is no current debt?
Where has funding come from to date? It costs $5,000,000 to
build the first four reactors. How much did the plant cost?
JR has said that it costs about $600,000 to analize the
exhaust from the fule oil and hasn't proceeded with these
tests.
There will be MAJOR DILUTION with this latest deal going
from about 200,000,000 shares to 700,000,000 shares. Who
owns the restricted 500,000,000 shares? JR said that all
future expansion would be via debt and not dilution (after
this).
Being on the pink sheets is no excuse for not filing 8-K's to
advise the investing puplic, if their plans are to move to a
major exchange. When major financing is done either via debt
or sale of shares an 8-K is required!
I haven't read the last 200 posts (I plan to), maybe some of
the above has been discussed.
Ralph
In the new share structure of USSE, who owns the 500,000,000
restricted shares? Has this been disclosed by the Company and
discussed here?
Ralph
I'm new here but the stated purpose of the "Freeus" fuel is:
"The City of Vidalia, LS is currently slated to have a power generating plant that uses this fuel.
8. Pending approval of codes/plans, etc. the time to setup a 50MegaWatt power station is 20-30 days. (The short time frame is because this is Pratt and Whitney's state of the art modular construction.)"
Ralph
If SEO is holding out for $X and someone is about to buy,
look for a rapid increase to SEO's asking price before a buyout is announced. Why wouldn't a buyer get all the shares he could in the open market before closing the deal with SEO? SEO must currently control more than 50%, otherwise an unfrendly takeover would be possible. I think the buyer would want 51%.
Current shareholders would make out ok, but once the new
owner is in, he could be pretty harsh on the remaining
shareholders.
Like said here before, be careful what you wish for.
Ralph
Anadarko, our operator/partner in Block 4, has one of the best
deepwater rig positions in the industry. They also share an
interest in the rest of the JDZ because of it's proximity.
My guess is, that if the Belford Dolphin is going to be shared, Block 4 will be polked first.
Ralph
I don't think the participation agreements would allow an
operator to give away a percentage of equity and charge all
future oil revenue from that percentage as "cost oil" taking
this revenue from ERHE and the JDA. The operator, or any
other participant, can give away their own percentage (with JDA approval) but all participants have an interest in "cost
oil".
Not an expert and open to correction, Ralph
'Something big' is in pipeline for BP, Sinopec
Last Updated(Beijing Time):2005-10-14 09:35
Britain-based BP, Europe's largest oil company, is in regular contact with Chinese oil firms and a deal could be afoot.
"We have kept close contact with the country's major oil companies such as Sinopec and China National Offshore Oil Corp (CNOOC) for further co-operation, and senior officials from both sides have exchanged visits regularly," said a BP spokesman yesterday in Beijing.
An industry source close to BP's China activities yesterday said BP is planning "something big" for China, but everything is at the preliminary stage.
The source said BP Chief Executive John Browne would visit Beijing at the end of this month for an annual meeting held in Tsinghua University, and would meet high-level Chinese officials.
A report in the Financial Times yesterday said BP has held talks with Chinese officials about a possible partnership with Sinopec, Asia's top oil refiner, which could be as ambitious as BP's US$14 billion partnership with Russia's TNK in 2003.
Negotiations would focus on what stake in Sinopec BP would receive in return for injecting assets - presumably oil or gas fields - and expertise into a joint venture, the newspaper said, citing sources close to the talks.
A deal with Sinopec would give BP unparalleled access to the world's second largest oil consumer and the most important growing market in the world. Meanwhile the Beijing-based State-owned refiner would benefit from BP's upstream exploration activities, the paper said.
Chen Ge, Sinopec spokesman, yesterday told China Daily he was not aware of talks with BP, and described market speculation as "rumours."
Since its initial thrust in the 1970s, BP has a total investment in China of more than US$3 billion in commercial projects.
The company aims to accelerate growth here to cash in on surging energy demands as the nation's economy continues to speed along.
Analysts have expressed doubt about a large-scale partnership between BP and Sinopec which might involve stake sales.
They say that as BP is looking for incremental investment opportunities in the Chinese downstream oil market such as in refining and petrochemicals, deals as big as the TNK-BP partnership could be seen as increasing BP's risk profile too much.
BP already has retail joint ventures with Sinopec and PetroChina in South China, and a petrochemicals joint venture with Sinopec and Shanghai Petroleum.
Sinopec shares yesterday rose 0.746 per cent in Hong Kong.
Source:China Daily
http://en.ce.cn/Business/Enterprise/200510/14/t20051014_4918793.shtml
Some deepwater help?
Ralph
Sinopec is the operator of Block 2 with 35.7% interest.
ONGC has about 6%. ONGC has already partnered with Sinopec in
the JDZ. ("ONGC Videsh has tied up with China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation (Sinopec) for the exploration of oil in the joint development zone (JDZ) in Nigeria, ONGC Videsh Managing Director R S Butola said. ")
The tie-in with Block 3 is Anadarko's contract for
the Belford Dolphin for the next three years, immediately
following ONGC's contract. Anadarko has no interest in Block 2 unless they recently negotiated a percentage for the use of
the BD, they have about 51% interest and are the operator of
Block 3.
Ralph
The Belford Dolphin:
Dolphin Drilling has received a Letter of Award from Anadarko Petroleum Corporation for a three year contract for the deepwater drillship Belford Dolphin for operations in the US Gulf of Mexico.
Estimated contract value is US $459 million. The award which is subject to agreement on contract terms will follow in direct continuation from the present Belford Dolphin contract with ONGC India which is scheduled to be completed end 2006.
indianpetro.com
Belford Dolphin's stay in Indian Offshore extended by 100 days ... 2006, but the extension will now guarantee the drill ship's services till February, 2007
"ONGC Videsh has tied up with China Petroleum & Chemical Corporation (Sinopec) for the exploration of oil in the joint development zone (JDZ) in Nigeria, ONGC Videsh Managing Director R S Butola said. "
And of course, Anadarko is the operator of Block 3. My guess
is that Anadarko is getting a percentage of Block 2 for use
of the BD.
Ralph
The .0025% interest was given up since 9/26/06 date of this report:
Joint Development Zone Block 2
On 14th March 2006 the Company signed a PSC for Block 2 in the Joint Development Zone
between Nigeria and São Tomé & Príncipe. Equator’s original allocation of a net 6% equity interest
has since been increased to 9% by a farm-in to the interest of another participant. Block 2, which is
operated by Sinopec of China, is adjacent to Block OPL 246 which hosts the large Akpo field
operated by Total. Recent drilling activity in the region has increased our confidence that Block 2
has the potential to contain significant reserves. The Company has posted a guarantee for its share
of one obligation well in the first 5 year exploration phase of the PSC.
And as of 12/7/06 they still had 9%:
http://www.equatorexploration.com/investors/details.aspx
Ralph
It looks like this report shows 1.349 billion BBL's oil and
1,869 BCF gas "Best Estimate Prospective Resources" in Block 2.
I see the 352 and 553 numbers as earlier reported in the
total line.
Interesting that EEL's bid/ask 4% spread is about the same as ERHE's currently (to discourage daytrading?).
Defenitely not an expert, Ralph
gary, yes, RISK FREE is a better term than COST FREE, making
their percentage worth more.
When comparing participating percentages, realize that ERHE's portion is COST FREE, making ERHE's actual net
proceeds higher.
Ralph
ETrade breaks my trades in 500 then bal for ERHE when the
trade is within the bid/ask.
Ralph
My commment was ment to indicate the high prices being paid
for old equipment. What a scramble going on!
Ralph
Gee, I figure $450,000 per day for this rig built in 1988:
http://www.rigzone.com/data/rig_detail.asp?rig_id=1098
Ralph
ONGC has the BD until about mid March '07 and if they are
moving it to the JDZ I'm sure they're not waisting any time.
CAG remark forces ONGC to ensure all rig transportation is conducted through turnkey contracts
Jan. 8: Following a rap on the knuckles from the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) over losses due to delays in transportation of a rig under a rate contract from Rajasthan to Mehsana, ONGC has undertaken to award all contracts for rig transportation on a turnkey basis from now on. The decision stems from a CAG audit of the exploration and production major's books, wherein it emerged that idling of a desert rig -- E760 XIII -- in 2003 resulted in a loss of Rs 3.92 crore due to an 84-day delay in transportation of the rig under a rate contract. The work order was initially issued in July, 2003, to two work contractors -- who were unwilling to carry out the job under the prevailing annual rate contract -- and subsequently to another contractor in September, 2003. The contractor apparently dismantled the rig in a haphazard manner and carried it piecemeal. The unloading of the rig was done at the Mehsana end by ONGC, leading to much confusion. The unloading was completed only in January, 2004. Pertinently, the CAG agreed to drop the audit clause following representation from ONGC that the delay did not harm the company, taking into consideration the fact that the rig would have been ordered to be dismantled and transported only after completion of the foundation works at the drill site at Mehsana on November 18, 2003. The company has learnt its lesson though and, in future, all rig transportation would be undertaken through turnkey contract only.
I hoped this three weeks ago and showed my evidence:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15552143
What's your evidence to hope for this now, or are you just
connecting dots too?
Ralph
In Nigeria, the door is always open to offor:
"bidding rounds to include: the open bid arrangement where prospective investors jostle for operatorship licenses of oil blocks in an open and fair manner and the local content vehicle initiative aimed at encouraging indigenous participation in the petroleum industry."
Ralph
ONGC is currently using the Belford Dolphin until April 2007,
when it becomes Anadarko's for the next three years.
"Dolphin Drilling has received a Letter of Award from Anadarko Petroleum Corporation for a three year contract for the deepwater drillship Belford Dolphin for operations in the US Gulf of Mexico.
Estimated contract value is US $459 million. The award which is subject to agreement on contract terms will follow in direct continuation from the present Belford Dolphin contract with ONGC India which is scheduled to be completed end 2006."
It may too much to hope that ONGC's (new ties w/Sinopec) would
move the Belford to block 2, then Anadarko move her to block 3
before moving the drillship to the Gulf of Mexico.
In Anadarko's recent investor's conference, they said that
they intend to poke a hole in the JDZ in 2007 then have a
semi-submersible in West Africa in 2008.
Ralph
According to the most recent 10-K, ERHE has its "Original
Working Interest Percentage" of 15% in block 9 with a note
that no contracts have been entered into as of the date
hereof (09/30/06).
The website table was as of April 2004 before further contracts were negotiated, etc.
Ralph
My level II on ETrade shows price, time and quantities on all
trades but the MM section identifying the players is blank
most of the time. The current bid and ask are always shown.
Once in a while the MMID section populates showing from a
few to many MM's. Strange.
ABLE just showed up with a bid of .42 (in the hunt) and ask of
.46. They have an order at .42, the same as the unnamed
MM who is bidding .42 and askking .43.
Ralph
Anadarko claimed (in recent investor's conference) that they
currently have ten deepwater drillships in operation. They
don't have the Belford Dolphin yet.
Ralph
Ready to move to the JDZ now?
http://www.southasianmedia.net/cnn.cfm?id=347837&category=Development&Country=INDIA
Ralph
I've spent my nine years with AVNR (see Yahoo board). I know your feelings. Only here a year. Hope to recover with ERHE. Good luck to us all.
Ralph
Just connecting the dots:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15552143
We won't KNOW anything until news is released.
Just for fun in the meantime.
Every possibility has been guessed on this board:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=9480432
Some of it is going to stick!
Ralph
Yes, 17.7% is for block 4 per recent 10-K which shows their
rights and how they were obtained for all their assets. I
thought the detail in this 10-K was extreme, setting the
record straight for the next steps? Anyone new to this stock
(I'm fairly new) should read this 10-K cover to cover.
Ralph
My notes show (anyone feel free to correct)in block 2:
Sinopec(operator)/ERHE/ADDAX have 65% of which 22% is ERHE's
EEL/ONGC Videsh have 15% of which 6% is ONGC's
Others 20%
I beleive ERHE's interest is the only one with free carry
making the value much greater than the percentage shown.
Sinopec's only interest in the JDZ is in block 2. They must
have given part of their % to ONGC, possibly to obtain the
Belford Dolphin for the next 100 days?
Only congestion, I mean conjecture.
With the flu, Ralph
Not to mention another Mellenium team member: ex Vice Chairman of Chevron Corp and current Member of the Board of Lukoil who I imagin knows what CVX knows about OBO-1 if Brandhuber didn't. This group is focusing on the JDZ and ERHE
as one of their first ventures? How ironic, another team
player is Spencer Abraham – ex Secretary of Energy in the U.S. Government.
Let's see how fast the SEC and DOJ back off if a Millennium deal
is done!
Ralph
Listening to the Anadarko Analyst Conference, they acknowledged
drilling in the JDZ in 2007 and contracted the Homer Ferrington
for all of 2008 to carry on in West Africa and specifically
mentioned the JDZ again.
http://www.rigzone.com/news/article.asp?a_id=18453
Anadarko presently has 10 deepwater rigs in operation.
Ralph
If it's not someone within the block then EO's shares would
be a financial investment. Millennium has big money behind
them and a "US oil player" would probably be a financial
investor, not an oil production entity. ERHE and anyone who buys them will sit and collect the golden eggs. It's a long
term investment.
Ralph