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.
Water Issues to Be Tackled
Major problems related to China's water resources are expected to be solved step by step in the next five years to improve the nation's water supply, flood-control, food security and ecosystem rehabilitation.
Water authorities have set a target for this sector during the period of the 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-10), Wang Shucheng, minister of water resources said recently.
He was optimistic about the further developments within the water resource sector.
The country faces five water-related challenges today worsening floods, droughts, water shortages, soil erosion, pollution and insufficient rural water infrastructure, he pointed out.
However, "further developments within the sector can back up the nation's efforts to build a well-off society by tackling water issues," he said this week in a speech for an ongoing international congress on irrigation and drainage.
By 2010, "we will reinforce institutional development and optimize water resource allocation throughout China by setting up a system of controlling water consumption with quota management," he said.
Top priority of water supply will be given to the security of drinking water. Ninety-eight per cent urban residents and 60 per cent of rural residents will get access to safe, clean water.
A decade-long water shortage has plagued major cities across North China and East China's Shandong Peninsula, this will be relieved once the first phase of the South-to-North Water Diversion Project is completed.
It is the most ambitious attempt yet by China to transport water from the Yangtze River in the south to the thirsty north.
"By then, we will settle the problem of drinking water security, an issue that has plunged 80 million rural people into chronic poverty in China's remote areas," the minister said.
To improve grain production capacity, water-saving irrigation will be increased on 10 million hectares of land with key large irrigation areas either renovated or upgraded.
He made it clear that China will realize a nil growth in water consumption for irrigation by increasing the efficiency of water used for agriculture.
Farming irrigation still consumes 66 per cent of China's total water supply due to backward irrigation techniques or equipment.
In the south, draining capacity of major grain-growing bases will be further improved to withstand the worst waterlog in three to five years.
Water quality in over 65 per cent of sections of major rivers and lakes serving as key water supply sources will be improved according to State criteria, with at least 95 per cent of headwater sites used for urban water supply to be kept unpolluted.
Furthermore, authorities will rehabilitate rivers with fragile ecosystems through controlling water and soil erosion.
In the following five years, the ministry will further reinforce flood-control systems with the operation of frequently used flood detention basins ensured either to mitigate damages or manage floodwaters to be used as resources.
(China Daily October 6, 2005)
http://www.china.org.cn/english/environment/144278.htm
.
Major Energy Pipelines
Major Pipelines to Ease Energy Shortage in Five Years:
China will build four major pipelines for oil and natural gas transport in the next five years, said a development blueprint submitted Sunday to the national legislature.
The trunk lines include two for petroleum transport, one from the west to the east and the other from north to south, said the draft plan of national economic and social development for the 2006-2010 period.
The country will also build a second west-east natural gas pipeline and a pipeline for oil and natural gas import into the country's inland areas, said the blueprint submitted for examination and approval by deputies to the National People's Congress (NPC).
China will develop its oil and natural gas transport network in the next five years to offset the energy disadvantage of some areas caused by imbalanced geographical distribution, the draft plan said.
The annual full session of the NPC opened in Beijing on Sunday morning, with the presence of more than 2900 deputies from all over the country.
(Xinhua News Agency March 6, 2006)
http://www.china.org.cn/english/BAT/160290.htm
.
Pipe Demand
For those of you unaware, the People's Republic of China (PRC) is managing the growth of China by a series of 5-Year plans. The PRC is currently in the 11th 5-year Plan (2006-2010). The Blueprint contains 2 items of special interest to TTCM and their investors.
* Major Pipelines to Ease Energy Shortage in Five Years.
* Tackle Water Issues. (Page 2)
When you look at China, common sense alone tells you that there is and will be huge demand for TTCM's pipes. The 11th 5-year Plan verifies and almost guarantees incredible growth for TTCM. During the 1st quarter of 2007 alone, the Company added $54 Million in new contracts to their backlog (currently about $117 M). TTCM should easily sign new contracts for an additional $100 to $200 Million per year, for at least the next 4 years.
Estimated Pipe Contracts: (Very rough estimate)
2006 Backlog $63M.
2007 1st Quarter $54M
2007 Remainder $50M
2008 $140M
2009 $120M
2010 $100M
Total $527M
Average Revenue $131M per year
2007 is a breakthrough year for TTCM.
11th 5-Year Plan:
http://www.china.org.cn/english/features/guideline/156532.htm
Prior Growth Strategies
Here is a PR from Late 2005 about TTCM's growth strategies. Any comments from a long time investor? 1.) Not sure they got a contract from Olympics, but they have backlog over $100 M, so they expanded water contracts. 2.) No evidence of expansion into gas and oil pipes. However negotiations on the Hami Prefecture's Potassic Salt Project is to transport potassic salt for the processing of fertilizer. 3.) They have not acquired any water companies.
There are interesting comments about sparks from current metal pipes causing deadly explosion or fire, also "In Northern China, water is more scarce and expensive than oil".
--------------------------------------------------------------
The focus in the short term will be in the following three major areas:
1. Continue to expand their water and sewer pipelines. Among many
projects, a bid for the 2008 Olympic infrastructure is a
sizeable project, including one requires 400 KM of water
pipelines with a budget of $182M. TTCM is one of the two
front-runners in the bidding.
2. Horizontal expansion of the gas and oil lines. The gas pipe
business has approved while the oil pipe is still being
certified. The urgent need is to replace the traditional metal
gas lines with TTCM's glass-reinforced pipes. Current findings
have shown that the traditional metal gas pipes generate a lot
of electrical static. A slight kick from a small nail on the
bottom of shoes will cause sparks, which usually trigger deadly
gas explosion or fire. TTCM's glass-reinforced plastic pipes
don't have electrical static, hence eliminate that critical
problem.
3. Vertical growth via acquisitions. In Northern China, water is
more scarce and expensive than oil. Some of TTCM's current
clients are water companies, and they are in discussions to
acquire water companies with water resource and rights. The
Company also plans to acquire additional mineral and coal
mining companies.
http://www.equitygroups.com/pinksheets/ttch/messages/20229.html
.
USSE Gets The Certs
"I could be wrong, but sstp is the green producer, so they get the green certs. That's why they spun them off."
I do believe you have it backwards. SSTP was spunoff so that USSE could focus on fuel production and remain eligle for the Green Certs.
.
USSE Gets The Green Certs
USSE gets the Green Certs and Biofuel Subsidy. The value of the Green Certs alone is 4 to 5 times higher than what SSTP gets from kilowat sales. Read the pro forma Financials in the Wall Street Resources Report. Page 29, I think.
http://www.wallstreetresources.net/pdf/fc/USSE.pdf
.
More Questions, Not Answers
Finally, some kind of a response from the Company, and it raise more questions than it answers. From the Company's own lips:
"1. It is my understanding that IR company is likely to be replaced by a much more sophisticated NY based IR firm that is perceived to be better positioned to represent the company to investors, particularly sophisticated financial institutions, through the company's next round of capital raising".
Ouch. Sounds like more Dilution is on the way. "through the company's next round of capital raising", how many more rounds of capital raising are there? They have little money, so how will they raise Capital? The answer is probably in the above paragraph. Even if they avoid Toxic Financing, how many more shares will be issued? Just be aware that there are already over 102 Million shares Outstanding (on a fully diluted basis), as the Preferred shares are each convertible into 5 shares of the Common stock.
Also, directly from PLRO:
"and definitive 14a is expected to be filed contemporaneous or just subsequent to ongoing disclosure filing. Once definitive is SEC approved, meeting will occur 5 days later, as per disclosure in interim 14a. All normal procedural stuff".
Normal procedure? Why was this whole Merger Agreement not completed and finalized 4 1/2 months ago when PLRO began trading publicly? Instead they leave investors hanging, with a Termination date looming. The CEO of North Tech is still the majority stockholder in this company!!
So, the March 1 Meeting never happened, or was for naught? What about the shareholders who went to the Meeting, took time off work, incurred travel and hotel expenses, all for nothing? The Company never even publicly announces such? Now, there has to be another definitive 14a filed? a financial disclosure and audit filed? the 14a approved by the SEC? Another Meeting? Another vote? What a quagmire!
The 8K that states "The Second Amending Agreement extends of the Outside Date of the Contribution Agreement to April 15, 2007, at which time the Contribution Agreement automatically terminates".
A month away, they have 21 business days to complete this mess.
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=17881566
IMHO
.
Just Keep It
"i wish i could sit back and take a hard look. unfortunately i own this crap and hate myself for it. don't tell me to sell it and move on".
Ok. Use a small fraction of your brain. Just keep the stock and shut up.
.
2007 Revenues
We do not know 2006 numbers yet, but 2004 and 2005 were under $10 M Revenues. TTCM currently has at least $117 M contract backlog. At $10 M a year that would take 11.7 years to complete the backlog. It would not be reasonable to wait 11 years, so $10M Revenue years will no longer cut it.
Revenues of $40 M for 2007 would complete the backlog in 2.9 years, much more practical (plus new contacts will be coming). Going from $10M to $40M Revenue in one year is asking a lot, so, TTCM 2007 Revenue of $30M is probably more realistic.
Can TTCM accomplish 2007 Revenue of $30M? Absolutely. It might require a different way of thinking and operations, they just have to execute. Each contract is basically a 3 step-process:
1.) Contract planning and bidding.
2.) Manufacturing the pipe.
3.) Installing the pipe.
As seen from the video, manufacturing the pipe can be time consuming, and should be the only bottleneck in the process. They probably now make the pipe as ordered. They might have to make batches of the most frequently used pipes and stockpile them, the plant does have acreage. Batch process the pipes and monitor the inventory. They can just take the correct pipe from piles as they need them. This should make the plant more efficient and productive as they reduce machine and computer re-setting times.
There are other options to increase capacity. Add a 2nd, or even 3rd shift of production, working Saturdays or even Sundays. They have been doing this for 11 years, they can adjust.
TTCM has the product, has the contracts, they just have to execute. Hopefully, we see 2007 Revenue of at least $30 million.
p.s.
We will have to find out the current plant utilization rate.
.
Mr. Choe Talk
Very good kazorchian, thanks for the info.
Getting the pipe approved in U.S, is no big deal right now, there is no hurry. They should have plenty of time to look into this. TTCM currently has a backlog of at least $117M, which will take at least several years to complete.
Thanks again
.
Train Wreck?
Is PLRO a train wreck waiting to happen? Who knows, but look at the facts.
PLRO supposedly did a Reverse Merger in November and started publicly trading. Normally, during a reverse merger the merger would have been done and finalized at that time. It has now been 4 1/2 months since that time and still no deal or official merger.
The March 1 Shareholder Meeting was supposed to finalize all this. PLRO stated in a SEC Document that they hoped to close 5 business days after the Vote (March 8). Instead PLRO files an 8K that states " The Second Amending Agreement extends of the Outside Date of the Contribution Agreement to April 15, 2007, at which time the Contribution Agreement automatically terminates".
PLRO never revealed the results of the shareholder vote. Personally, i feel that lack of a PR about the March 1 Meeting is a neglect of Fiduciary Responsibility. Now there are so many questions. What was the result of the vote? Was the vote denied? Does there need to be another vote? Does the Merger fall apart if not done by April 15? Will the stock shell revert back to North Tech? No one knows. The company is letting investors twist in the wind as PLRO and Investor Relations do not respond to any inquiries (there have been many).
The Research Works issued a new Stock Report on PLRO dated March 8. I skimmed the report, it looks about the same as December 2006 Report. The only difference and new info is on page 9, where it states that the Agreement deadline was extended until April 15 and then terminates (in the 8K). Sounds to me like PLRO is just covering their rear ends, for whatever reason. Why release a new report for just that (page 9)?
Try to contact PLRO (good luck) and keep records of your attempts, they may come in handy in the future.
IF this stock ever reverts back to North Tech, and becomes valued on North Tech, the share price could plunge into the pennies.
http://www.researchworksllc.com/Research/PLRO/plro.pdf
(December 6, 2006 Research Works Report)
http://www.hubbertmarketdigest.com/report.htm
Free access to PLRO SEC Documents:
http://www1.investorvillage.com/smbd.asp?mb=6922&clear=1&pt=m
.
Information Verification
The recent info about TTCH from the WallSt.net Interview is not necessarily to be taken as undisputable fact. All the info is taken from the Interviews of Mr. Won-Gil Choe, you can verify this from the links provided. IF you need absolutely certain proof of such info, perhaps you should contact Mr. Choe directly. I will say that he made the statements in an official capacity of a representative of TTCM, and should be held accountable as such.
Personally, I found the interviews very enlightening. I just simply get the impression that Mr. Choe is a very responsible, honest and hard working individual. My sense is that he is very credible.
TTCM does not exhibit any of the qualities of a less than honest company. They have never done a reverse split, do not have Authorized Shares of several billion, or Outstanding Shares of several Billion. No Preferred stock, or Options or Warrants. They do not issue fluff PR's, just to temporarily raise the stock price. They do not make wild and outlandish claims. Look at their Financials from 2004 and 2005. If they were to simply make up numbers to impress shareholders, they would surely come up with much greater numbers than the ones reported. They look like the Financials of a company struggling to establish their company and lay a foundation for future growth (growth that appears to be here).
It appears that a lot of investors here seem to be content with what little info is known about TTCM. That is just not me, I would rather research a company, than sit around and moan and groan about the unknown. I do have a small investment here, and will continue to dig and reveal information about TTCM. It is hoped that others will contribute, so that we can determine if TTCM is a credible company and therefore a worthwhile investment, or not. This info is just that, information. It is much better to have this info to research, than to simply just sit here and be in the dark about the company. Information that investors here should determine is fact or not. It is called Due Diligence.
Finally, if you sincerely can not or will not believe information that a company reveals, than by all means do not buy the stock, or sell what stock you do own. There are too many good stocks out there, to waste you time, energy, money and effort on such a company.
.
USSE Competitive Advantage
Comparing the attributes of USSE BioFuel vs Conventional Biodiesel.
Production Cost Per Gallon:
Biofuel $1.00
Biodiesel $2.50
Yield Per Bushel of Soybean:
Biofuel 5 Gallons
Biodiesel 1.5 Gallons
Production Time Per Gallon:
Biofuel 8 Minutes
Biodiesel 24 Hours
Energy Output (BTU's Per Gallon):
Biofuel 128,000
Biodiesel 118,000
.
WallSt.net Info
Here is some more TTCH info from the WallSt.net Interviews mostly (12-11-2006):
* Pipes range from 4 foot to 12 foot diameter.
* Fully Automated 100,000 Sq. Foot Manufacturing facility.
* 300 employees.
* ISO 9002 Certified Approved.
* 3 offices.
* Located in Tianjin, just outside Beijing.
* More than $32 Million in Assets.
* Shareholder Equity in excess of $10 Million.
* Credit Rating - AAA.
* Listed on Pinksheet, but BB Listing is a goal.
* Mentions need for working capital.
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?symbol=TTCH&id=2862
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?symbol=TTCH&id=2680
.
TTCM Contact:
http://www.ttcmchina.com/contact.html
Investor Relations:
http://www.ttcmchina.com/investor_relations.html
.
TTCH Video/Audio Links
Corporate Website:
http://www.ttcmchina.com
5 TTCH Corporate Videos:
http://www.ttcmchina.com/video.html
InvestSource, Inc. TTCH Profile and CEO Interview
http://investsourceinc.com/php/viewclient.php?id=109
WallSt.net TTCH Interview 12-11-2006
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?symbol=TTCH&id=2862
WallSt.net TTCH Interview 10-25-2006
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?symbol=TTCH&id=2680
.
WallSt.net- USSE Interview
The link does work. There is a quick commercial first. Give it a few seconds. If not work, then click on round circle at bottom left.
Mr Davis does an absolutely outstanding interview.
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?id=3149
WallSt.net-USSE Interview
U.S. Sustainable Energy
WallSt.net Audio
Robert Davis
Chief Executive Officer
http://www.wallst.net/audio/audio.asp?id=3149
(Currently the featured company, if not then go to Interviews)
.
Pinksheet Status
I hear you. My point was that all other companies have not filed Financials yet, and will not be until about March 31. Why would anyone expect TTCH to file before the other companies?
I am glad you posted this. I have only been here a week, and am not aware of their history. Enlighten me. I saw the 15-12G, I also know that the previous company filed with the SEC. I do not think that TTCH has ever filed an SEC Document. What is the history? Did TTCH reverse merge into a BB company, and then stopped filing SEC documents, thus went to Pinksheets? If so, that is a strange route.
I do know a year or two ago they were desperate for working capital. Maybe they stopped filing to divert the funds. Even though the company is in good shape now, I do not think that venture capital is readily available in China. That is why they Listed in United States.
Listing on the Pinksheets is not a good thing. TTCH has entered a new stage in their business. With their order backlog the future looks extremely bright. An appropriate step would be to become SEC Compliant and get Listed on BB. We need to develop a way to approach them about this.
.
TTCM Old Profile
Following is an old TTCM profile from 2005. The link to the research report no longer works. I think he had the right idea, his timing was just off. Timing is very critical in investing. 2007 sure looks like the Breakthrough for TCCM. The company has an order backlog of anywhere from $117M to $132M. This just gives us an amazing opportunity.
The profile:
CHINA!
Its Startling Economic Growth
= A BREAKTHROUGH
Opportunity for YOU
IF You Stick with the BASICS
And there’s nothing more basic than:
WATER.
Without water, you can’t grow.
China has a desperate water shortage.
It is nationwide.
Whatever else it does,
CHINA MUST HAVE WATER
My Basic Idea:
Invest in a company deeply involved in building
China’s water resources and infrastructure:
A company named
TTCM China, Inc.
(Trading Symbol: TTCH).
TTCH is the Chinese company that makes the HI-TECH PIPE necessary to build China’s water supply and resolve the nationwide shortage. The need is great. The need is urgent.
TTCH has already captured 30% of the HI-TECH PIPE MARKET in China, and grown at rate of 10% a year. Now, TTCH is ready to expand to the rest of the world, including the United States. Which means TTCH has the realistic potential to make you a FORTUNE ! Because this 9¢ stock is really a $4.15 stock…
Why? We’ll explain – in this FREE special issue of
Blockbuster
Discovery!
A Publication of Stock Trader News
Jack Burney, Editor in Chief
© 2005, Stock Trader News
CLICK HERE TO READ THE WHOLE ISSUE
(Link, no longer works)
http://www.arcknowledge.com/gmane.comp.freedesktop.intltool/2005-06/msg00053.html
(scroll down)
.
Superior Pipe
The superiority of TTCM's glass-reinforced plastic pipe was the result of a decade of research and invention, harnessing new material and production technologies to the demand of the 21st century. TTCM uses a proprietary manufacturing process based on micro-emulsification technology that was developed at Harbin Industrial University that produces products with strength to weight ratios at 1/4 the weight of equivalent metal products and 1/8 that of equivalent concrete products. The company revolutionized water systems with pipelines of high quality, long life cycle and efficiency. TTCM holds three patents on the pipe, and more are pending. The pipe boasts smooth inner walls that offer minimal resistance to liquid flow, reducing the energy cost of transmission to a level much lower than concrete and metallic piping. TTCM's pipes receive benefits from the company's unique wet sand inclusion technique, which resolves any problems of gumming and pollution, and all other types of problems that may be present. Its Nanotechnology increases the pipe's strength and helps prevent the breeding of bacteria. "TTCM'S technological inventions, in both material and production process, enable us to deliver superior products to our customers and ensure our solid market position in our space. Our product lines now can be used for much broader applications, such as gas lines and oil lines. We are committed to maintaining our technological advantage and competitive edge to allow us to grow in both vertical and horizontal markets," Wang said. "This is just the beginning!" the TTCM president states.
TTCM China Broadens Market, Makes Its Superior Water Pipe Available for Oil & Gas and Targets The Energy Industry in China and the World! TTCM China, Inc. (Pink Sheets:TTCH) developed a superior pipe for water systems, and swiftly captured 30% of the Chinese market. Now the company has perfected its patented pipes for use in oil and gas applications as well, broadening its market for pipes to at least double, according to Jiqun Wang, Chairman and President. "The fast-rising demand for energy in China has created an energy industry need for technologically advanced pipes that is virtually unlimited. Add to that need, the requirements of the mushrooming international energy industry, and what TTCM China will serve, is a vast untapped market of huge profitability," Wang said.
About TTCM CHINA. Founded in 1995, TTCM's core business is the production, processing and sales of glass- reinforced plastic pipes wrapped with sand inclusion and glass-reinforced plastic products. Its primary products include various types of regular and high-pressure pipes, fittings, round containers, cooling towers, and fans. The Company is also engaged in the development and production of new high polymer synthetic material.
http://www.equitygroups.com/pinksheets/ttch/messages/16965.html
.
TTCM China Inc: Company Report
618 Main Street
West Warwick RI 02893
* Phone: 401-8211700
* Fax: 401-6836606
* http://www.ttcmchina.com/
* Industry : Rubber & Plastics
* Employees : 178
* Exchange : Other OTC Issues
TTCM China Inc. (TTCM), formerly Quadrax Corporation, is a producer and supplier of glass-reinforced plastic pipes wrapped in sand-inclusion and other glass-reinforced plastic products. Its primary products include various types of regular and high-pressure pipes, fittings, round containers, cooling towers and fans. The Company is also engaged in the development and production of new high polymer synthetic material. The Company has established operations in various countries, including South Africa, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Singapore and Iraq. The Company was formed from a merger between Hebei Tianlian Business Company, Ltd. and Tianlian Business Company, Ltd. in 1995. On February 1, 2005, the Company acquired Tianjin Tianlian Composite Material Company, Ltd.
http://moneycentral.msn.com/companyreport?Symbol=TTCH
.
Potential Windfall
The China Tax Reform news is good and exciting news. If the new China Tax Reform Legislature is approved, that could be a nice windfall for TTCM. From the article: Under the current system, Chinese companies pay 33 percent of their profits in taxes. The new measure would set tax rates for most companies at 25 percent, with lower rates for high-technology development.
A potential savings of 8% on profits. That might not sound like much but look closer. Here is TTCM's numbers for 2004:
Revenue $9.7 M
Net Profit $497,530
Under the proposed Tax Reform, TTCM would of had profits of ($497,530 * 1.08) = $537,332, an increase to profits of $39,802.
That is looking back, looking ahead to 2007, TTCM needs to do at least $30 Million Revenue to keep up with their backlog. So ($39,802 * 3) = increase in profits of approximately $120,000. Effectively boosting their Profit Margins from 8.5% to 16.5% with everything else remaining the same.
I am not a CPA, but I do not see why the reduced tax rate would not go directly to the Corporate bottom line. Any comments?
If this is true, and the Tax Reform passes, Chinese stocks could (and should, this is almost free money) rally. TTCM is already so severely undervalued, that it could have a good rally.
It is very possible that TTCM might even have more savings from the Reform. Notice the article stated "The new measure would set tax rates for most companies at 25 percent, with lower rates for high-technology development" We are not sure if TTCM qualifies for the lower rate for being high-technology development, or not. I do know that China Natural Gas (CHNG) pays a lower tax rate than most other Chinese companies, because they supply infrastructure (service) that the Chinese government has deemed critical.
Also, higher rates for foreigners, means less foreign competition.
All very good news for TTCM.
.
China Tax Reform Said Ready for Vote
Tuesday March 13, 1:15 am ET
Leaders of China's Legislature Say Corporate Tax Reform Ready for Vote
BEIJING (AP) -- Leaders of China's legislature have finished revisions of a law to end three decades of blanket tax breaks for foreign companies and are sending the measure to lawmakers for a final vote, a state news agency reported.
The presidium of the National People's Congress issued the decision Monday after expanding deductions for environmental conservation and charitable donations in the proposed law, the Xinhua News Agency said.
The measure, which is expected to be passed this week, would unify tax rates for foreign and Chinese companies, raising the tax burden for many foreign enterprises.
Tax breaks have helped to attract nearly $700 billion in investment over the last two decades that has fueled China's economic boom. But Chinese companies complain they are at a disadvantage because foreign-financed competitors pay lower taxes.
The new measure would set tax rates for most companies at 25 percent, with lower rates for high-technology development.
The plan would raise the total annual tax bill for foreign investors by about 43 billion yuan ($5.5 billion), Finance Minister Jin Renqing said last week. The government also would lose about 100 billion yuan ($12.5 billion) due to lower tax payments from Chinese companies, he said.
Under the current system, Chinese companies pay 33 percent of their profits in taxes. Foreign companies are exempt from taxes for their first two years in China, then get a 50 percent reduction for three years and later can get breaks that keep their tax rates as low as 10 percent.
"If the draft is passed, we will finally be able to stand on a level playing field with our foreign counterparts," said Chen Guofeng, an NPC deputy who is chairman of a textile company, was quoted as saying.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070313/china_taxes.html?.v=3
.
Senate firmly behind climate-change bill
Brad Shannon
The Olympian
The state Senate overwhelmingly approved a climate-change bill Saturday that has won the embrace of utilities and environmental groups for curtailing the market for power produced by coal technologies.........
(Article continues)
http://www.theolympian.com/101/story/69746.html
.
Five states sign climate pact
By: DAVE DOWNEY - Staff Writer
California is no longer alone in its campaign against climate change. The nation's most populous state, after passing a landmark law last year to slash industrial greenhouse gas emissions 25 percent by 2020, has joined with Arizona, New Mexico, Oregon and Washington to address what some are calling one of the planet's most serious threats...........
(Article continues)
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007/03/11/news/top_stories/21_41_183_10_07.txt
.
Merger Details is Speculation
You guys can speculate all you want, but at this point that is all that it is, speculation. At this point in time, this USSE Board, Maximus, ONYI or even USSE do not know what the final details will be. You need to read the 8K:
"The Distribution Agreement also provides that upon the satisfaction of some key conditions precedent, the Company and USSE will begin negotiations towards reaching a stock purchase, merger or other reorganization transaction between the two companies. Those conditions include that USSE must have installed and have active four reactors in its facility for the production of biofuels and must have completed and delivered to the Company audited financial statements reasonably satisfactory to the Company".
It specifically states that AFTER key conditions are met, negotiations will begin. So nobody knows right now.
However, "the Company acquired the worldwide rights to distribute biofuels in the transportation industry. In consideration for these distribution rights, the Company agreed to issue and deliver to USSE a total of 900,000,000 shares of its common stock".
So, at MINIMUM, they appear to have a Licensing Agrerement.
AFTER certain conditions are met, negotiations will begin.
.
Bright Future
From RB, "IF the company can sustain profitability, AND keeps the contracts coming, AND completes them at a profit, AND gets a listing on a reputable exchange within a year or two, there's no telling how high the pps will go".
* IF the company can sustain profitability:
They should not just sustain profitability, they should increase profits, for several reasons. In 2007 they should be going from $10 M Revenue to hopefully $30 or $40 M Revenue. This alone will increase their economies of scale. They will also learn how to operate more efficiently. They will be spreading Fixed Costs over a greater Revenue Base. They have mentioned profit margin of 8.5%, that should increase greatly. They should get higher profit margins from installing pipe. Labor in China is extremely cheap (due to huge labor force). A Chinese company with labor intensive operations should be very profitable. Another company, China Natural Gas (CHNG) states this explicitly, I believe they had 85% Profit Margins on Operations from their installing gas lines in cities. Extremely profitable.
* AND keeps the contracts coming:
That should be no problem whatsoever. Their Chairman and Founder Wang JiQun, has been appointed as the Vice Chairman of the Board of the Greater TianJin BoHai Holding Company Group, Ltd., one of the largest privately owned development companies in China responsible for overseeing the construction and development of privately owned enterprises in three key major regions: TianJin and TangShan cities of HeBei Province (population 68+ million), the QingDao City region of Shandong Province (population 91+ million), and the DaLien City region of LiaoNing Province (population 40+ million). With the participation of the central government, TianJin BoHai Holding Company Group is making great contributions to the development of key regions in China. It is expected that TTCM China will be an integral part of these development projects. The signed contracts should keep coming, most likely at a faster pace. To put things in perspective, TTCM biggest year was $10M Revenue, TTCM currently has a signed contract backlog of at least $117 Million. At $10 M a year that would last 11.7 years! Contracts is not a problem.
* AND gets a listing on a reputable exchange within a year or two, there's no telling how high the pps will go":
Unfortunately they are now a Pinksheet. The expense of becoming SEC Compliant probably was not practical before. 2007 is obviously a breakout year for TTCM. TTCM has all the contracts that they can handle and more should be coming. They will have to transition from $10M a year Revenue to $30 or $40 M a year Revenue Company. They are in the Sweet Spot. They have the product, have the contracts, now TTCM just has to execute. Things have changed dramatically, they should be much more receptive to becoming SEC Compliant and getting Listed on BB. That is the next natural step.
TTCM has been working for this moment for 11 years. They have established a leading position in their Industry, surely they are prepared to seize this opportunity. The future for TTCM is very bright.
.
2006 Financials
I have seen several posters bemoan that the Financials are not out yet. Everyone needs to relax on the Financials. Even BB SEC compliant companies have not released any Financials yet. Most companies fiscal year ended Dec. 31, are preparing a 10K, that are not even due until March 31. To expect Financials before SEC compliant companies release theirs, is not even remotely practical.
.
Merger Deadline Extension
"Does anyone know the reason why the deadline for the reverse merger was extended to April 15th?"
About time somebody asked a good question. Does that not imply they did not get their required vote? So should one assume the March 1 vote was negative? Will another vote be required? No one knows, PLRO and their Investor Relations are no longer answering the stockholder inquiries.
The 8K says the Agreement expires on April 15, if it is not finalized by then. IF that happens, and the shell reverts back to North Tech, the share price will be valued on North Tech and probably be worth less than 0.10.
Do your DD.
China Infrastructure
Recently, I have researched many Chinese companies. The first thing you have to understand is that this is not an American company, they do the bulk of their business in China. Therefore, you have to think from a Chinese perspective.
The United States has had the majority of its infrastructure in place for many years, much of it well over 50 years ago. That is not the case in China. China is currently in the early stages of massive growth comparable to the past U.S. Industrial Revolution. Many peasants are leaving the countryside (some leaving behind families and wives) to venture into the growing cities so as to improve their lot in life and seek their fortunes. Much of the water supply (where there is water supply) in China is contaminated with animal and human wastes among other wastes. The demand for TTCH products is almost limitless.
If you have any doubt of the skyrocketing demand for infrastructure in China, take a look at a company called China Expert Technology (CXTI). They are listed on BB and have fewer Outstanding shares of about 29 Million. They recently has a string of signed Contracts from The Chinese Government (I think) for projects 2 or 3 times larger than the recent contracts of TTCH. Their share price is in the $5 range. Check out CXTI, because these 2 companies may be in slightly different stages, but they are in very similar situations.
Would'nt you have loved to get in CXTI at under $1?
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=CXTI.OB
.
German Listings
Thoughout the PLRO Website, in the upper right hand corner, you will see a German flag and the word Deutsche (not during the intro). Click on Deutsche and PLRO Website converts to German.
http://www.techrobond.de/home.htm
Over a month ago, I Emailed PLRO Investor Relations with this very question:
"I notice on the PLRO website there is an option to view the site in German. Do they have any plans to list their stock in Germany (Berlin)?? I sure hope not, that could be the death-knell for their stock. It is well known that BB stocks that list in Germany are scams that can be naked shorted over there and is VERY BAD for the company stock price. There are many, many articles and news sources on this. IF they have any plans for a German Listing, please ask them to research this and reconsider. This is very important. Personally, with such news, I would probably be forced to sell my shares in PLRO. It is that bad".
Here is the word for word response, from PLRO Inestor Relations:
"Let me first of all address the mechanics of a German listing. Such a listing is called a ‘compliance listing’, because the Company’s shares are already listed on another primary market, and the German listing is just a reflection of that initial listing that requires no extensive listing process. Listed status is granted based on the fact that the Company is deemed to be compliant in its natural jurisdiction.
This type of listing is generally not something that a US listed company chooses or applies to do – it is something that is done by a German market specialist. A German specialist is like a market maker, but when they initiate a compliance listing, they are the only market maker, and their function is to match buy orders and sell orders, and then arbitrage out the difference into the US market. They make a profit by taking a spread on the buys and sells, and trading with the general direction of the market. As a market professional with certain privileges under the German system, they are able to hold an un-arbitraged long or short position for a period of time, and this is where the abuse generally occurs. A market specialist (usually with the backing of short selling consortium) uses this privilege to go short a stock, without being subject to US buy-in or borrow regulations.
Keep in mind, however, that they are subject to capital requirement and net free cash rules that limit their ability to extend the short position beyond a certain level, or to hold it for too long. As such, and as with the US markets, when someone decides to take a short position it is often very tough on the market, but once the position is taken, the tendency of the short seller to want to cover at a profit actually puts buying pressure on the market, and acts as support on any price dips. Ultimately, any share sold short must be eventually covered – either at a profit, or at a loss.
PLRO is currently listed on Frankfurt, Berlin, and Stuttgart, under the symbol PWL. This has been the case since mid-November. Although we have seen a good amount of selling pressure come in through the German markets, it has clearly not had an overwhelmingly negative effect on the stock price. It is difficult to see how that might suddenly change".
-------------------------------------------------------
Be advised that their response was on 1-29-2007. I ignored this for a while, however the evidence is now too overwhelming to ignore. We do not know if PLRO still has this belief, since during the last few weeks, PLRO or their Investor Relations does NOT respond to this or any other topic from investors.
Do your own DD and make your own conclusions.
.
Zero Credibility
Murphy89
I hate to be the bearer of bad news bub, but when it comes to the topic of USSE and/or Maximus Communications, you already have ZERO CREDIBILTY on this Board. Anybody here that does more than 10 minutes of DD, already understands your vicious, self-serving agenda and dismisses your posts for what they are, unsubstantiated garbage and meaningless.
You and your group of other misguided posters also have another ugly quality. You are ANTI- AMERICAN. There is a technology here that can benefit and improve the lifes of every American citizen and our children. Your feable attempts at destructive fabrications to such an honorable company, should make you labeled as a Traitor to America. SHAME ON YOU!!!
Grow up.
.
Hami Contract
"Hami Perfecture contract is being negotiated it's not finalized you have to deduct 15.4 mil from those figures".
That is not real clear to me, but you have been here longer than me and know more. The tally is not an official figure anyway, just a means of giving us an idea where TTCM stands.
So, the figure is reduced to $116.9 Million. This all misses some very significant points.
1.) TTCM biggest revenue year was $10 M. At this rate, even the reduced figure of $116.9 M would take 11.7 years to complete. Customers are not going to wait this long. So, TCCM must be ramping up their production abilities, and therefore profitability.
2.) Most pinksheet stocks do not even have contracts and would rally on a signed $1 million contract news. TCCM has orders to last for their foreseeable future. They can sell all the pipe they can produce and install.
.
2007: Renewable Energy Gets Real, Part Two
Chris Nelder2007-01-18
By Chris Nelder
Last week we covered the 2007 outlook for renewables in detail. This week, we step back a bit and look at the big picture, because that’s what affects the price of oil, and the price of oil, along with global warming, is one of the twin engines driving the renewables industry’s awesome growth.
Supply Stays Tight
According to the IEA, in 2007 the supply growth outside of OPEC should roughly balance out the demand growth, which it will have to do, because OPEC production remains flat at 28.8 mbpd. Many peakers have observed that OPEC’s announced production cuts, particularly Saudi Arabia’s, may be simply a way to hide the fact that they’re in terminal decline and can’t do much about it.
As for the price, one analyst I respect, Tim Guinness of Guinness Atkinson Funds, puts the 2007 probabilities for the price of WTI (West Texas Intermediate crude) as follows: 10% for under $50, 40% $50–60, 40% $60–80, and 10% over 80. Based in his predictive track record, I think these estimates are a bit on the conservative side, and we should see $80 oil this year, no problem. One factor that I don’t think he, or most other analysts, has taken into account is the price increases that will likely be the result of all the pressures I’ve described on the oil business as a whole.
As for natural gas, our number-one source of imports, Canada, may have 10% less to sell us in 2007, due to reduced drilling (in turn due to higher costs) and the increased consumption of gas by the tar sands boom. Since North America is past the peak of gas production and the hope of increasing imports in the form of LNG from places like Qatar is still several years off, this means that a suddenly cold winter could leave poorer customers in the cold, or that a hot summer could cause more major grid failures.
But supply and demand issues aside, the oil and gas picture is considerably worse once you factor in the geopolitics. With Russia, Venezuela and Bolivia all making bold moves to renationalize their oil and gas assets in 2006, kicking out the Western oil majors, there is no reason to think that they’re going to be any nicer this year—or that other countries that have enough military might to defend themselves might not try to follow suit. Russia really has Europe by the short hairs, especially in the icy grip of winter, and Venezuela has become a stone in the shoe for the U.S., because we can’t live without its imports—not with Canada and Mexico both on the downslope. The biggest sticks on the block, the U.S. and the U.K., are increasingly vulnerable to geopolitical disturbances to their supplies of fossil fuels. I think it’s safe to expect that terrorist attacks on facilities in Nigeria and Angola will continue in 2007, because they were remarkably successful in 2006. And let’s not forget that Africa is one of the two places in the world that has any hope of seriously increasing its exports of oil and gas right now, since the world’s major producers are all past the peak (or likely so).
States Step into the Breach
Hydrocarbon fuels are increasingly under attack for their greenhouse gas emissions. While President Bush buries his head in the sand, still refusing to admit that global warming is man-made and breaking his campaign pledge to regulate C02, the states and cities have stepped into the leadership void and taken action:
By the end of the year, we should have at least a dozen states with laws intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Twenty states already have portfolio standards that require their utilities to produce some percentage of their power from renewable sources.
In his State of the State address last week, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that he will order, by executive decree, a 10% cut in motor vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases. (Under state law, the governor has the authority to regulate fuel content.) A 10% cut in emissions will translate to a 20% drop in gasoline consumption and more than triple the size of the state’s renewable-fuels market, because burning biofuels produces less carbon than oil. This will offer some much-needed confidence for biofuel manufacturers, particularly Pacific Ethanol, the largest independent marketer of ethanol in the West. “The opportunity is there, not just for us but for others to see a critical path to additional production of renewable fuels for the California market,” said Bill Jones, chairman. “That’s very important for financing additional plants and the long-term viability of an emerging industry.”
From a global warming perspective, the latest statistics show that 2006 was the hottest year yet, and 2007 is “set to be the hottest on record worldwide due to global warming and the El Nino weather phenomenon,” according to the British Meteorological Office. “This new information represents another warning that climate change is happening around the world,” the office said.
In terms of public opinion on global warming, Big Oil just took another big hit with the publication of a report last week by the Union of Concerned Scientists showing that Exxon has “funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.” The campaign has deliberately distorted global warming research and attacked state and local actions to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. And that $16 million is just from Exxon; we don’t yet know how much has been spent on disinformation by the oil industry as a whole. So that cat’s out of the bag. Now that the public has proof that Big Oil is trying to confuse them and stymie the debate, it won’t be quite as easy to mislead the public about global warming anymore.
The Chinese Threat
Beyond public opinion and policy, the global warming threat is bigger than ever in real terms. We have new reports that in China the emissions from increased burning of coal are suffocating and killing people. Those emissions are also killing trees in California and rendering fish stocks around the world even more unsafe to eat—due to the increased levels of mercury that bioaccumulate in fish after being expelled into the atmosphere by coal plants.
Sounds bad, but how bad is it?
Really bad.
China only recently learned that some ten new coal plants—8.5 gigawatts’ worth!—had been built in Mongolia without its knowledge or permission. They join 2,000 older, very dirty plants, and another 500 more coal-fired power stations that are on the way. China’s coal output has doubled over the last five years, and they are on course to overtake the U.S. in coal consumption within two years.
After years of resisting any caps on their greenhouse gas emissions, China now has goals to curb their emissions and reduce their energy consumption by 20% per unit of national income by 2010. But, as the world’s second largest energy consumer, with an economic growth rate of some 10%, they are a major (and opaque) factor in any global effort to get climate change under control.
Take vehicles, for example. The number of vehicles in China is expected to explode from 25 million today to 175 million by 2020. They now have one car per 280 people, but they are industrializing rapidly and they want to live like us—with one car for every two people. From an energy standpoint, as the U.S. industrialized we went from oil consumption of about one barrel per person per year in 1900 to 27 barrels in 1970. China now consumes about 1.3 barrels per person per year. To put all of that in perspective, let’s not forget that China has five times the U.S. population at about 1.5 billion.
Other Renewables & Solutions
Ethanol and biodiesel may be getting a disproportionate share of the spotlight given the urgency of the liquid fuels issue, but all other solutions and forms of renewable energy are also set for explosive growth. Senator Harry Reid, the new Senate majority leader, is coming out strongly in support of solar, wind, geothermal, biomass and nuclear power. “We can’t do it overnight but I think we have to set goals,” he says, indicating that we can expect much more along these lines.
There is even a growing coalition of bipartisan support for raising the fuel economy standards, joined by Senator Reid and Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK). As any peak observer can tell you, raising these standards is by far the lowest of the low-hanging fruit for dealing with an impending shortage in liquid fuels. It’s a no-brainer, and pays off immediately.
The outlook for solar and wind is nothing but rosy. The annual growth rate for solar photovoltaics is estimated at 11.2% in the EIA’s 2007 outlook, implying that the PV market will double in about six years. For wind, their projected growth rate is 5.2%, which seems on the low side given other available projections.
Even geothermal energy, once an all-but-forgotten part of the energy mix, is getting goosed with federal and state incentives.
It’s Hip to be Green
Everywhere I turn, I am getting media messages about reducing my energy load and my carbon footprint. By the end of 2007, I predict that a sizable number of Americans will take concrete measures to do their bit, be it simply replacing some light bulbs with LEDs or compact fluorescents, or buying carbon credits to offset their last vacation, or buying a hybrid, or putting solar thermal and solar PV panels on their roofs. It’s not quite hip to be green just yet, but by the end of the year it will be.
Plug-in hybrids may be the biggest winner of all, with their potential to displace some of our imported oil with domestically produced electricity, particularly electricity produced by clean, green sources, and at a lower cost than gasoline to boot. I read somewhere that Toyota originally made the Prius with a plug-in option for the European market, which was removed for the U.S. market. I’m not sure under what sort of rationale that dubious decision was made, but when that option is restored for cars in the U.S., hopefully in at least some models before the end of the year, I predict a boom in their sales. Again: it’s a no-brainer!
But I think the most profitable RE investments in 2007 will be the least-noticed players, tiny little off-the-radar companies that are quietly figuring out how to squeeze a little more utility out of the energy that goes into all sorts of devices, from small battery powered gadgets to passenger cars. More efficient engines, LED lights, buildings that turn off their own lights at night, more energy efficient computers and displays, smarter thermostats . . . the list is virtually endless. In a post-peak world, we will have to find ways to do more with less, all across the board. We have an entire infrastructure to replace! This is going to be a huge growth sector in 2007, despite its lack of sex appeal.
In sum, I think the time has finally arrived when it’s no longer political suicide to talk about energy conservation. And as Sen. Obama has observed, the lack of political will has been the primary reason for our lack of motivation to deal with these problems—problems that we’ve known about for decades. The CFR has given the all-clear , and now it’s safe to be green . . . and well on its way to being cool.
.
2007: Renewable Energy Gets Real, Part One
Chris Nelder2007-01-11
By Chris Nelder
In my earlier article, “2006: A Time of Transition ,” I looked back at some of the major changes and trends of the last year. The most obvious to me were 1) a major change in public consciousness about global warming and our vulnerability in oil and gas supply, 2) confirmation of peak oil theory in the data from last year’s supply and demand, and 3) some very weighty changes in the geopolitical balances of power, as influenced by oil and gas. Now let’s take a look at how those trends will develop in 2007.
RE Explodes
First and foremost, I think it’s clear that 2007 is the year when renewable energy finally gets real. That is, it will make sense as an investment just on the return alone, no matter what your politics or your view on climate change may be. This tipping point for RE has been awaited for so long that the veterans in the wind and solar businesses (especially) have grown gray and wrinkled, waiting at the altar with a handful of long-dried brown flowers while their beards grew to the floor. But no more. This is it, baby!
Let’s take a look at just a small selection of the positive indicators.
The Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Annual Energy Outlook 2007 projects major growth in all forms of RE: more biofuels, more CTL capacity, more alternative forms of transportation, more nuclear generation, more coal use, and an acceleration in the adoption of energy efficiency measures. In fact, the biggest growth sector in their projections through 2030, at 6.8% annually, is “Other,” a category that “includes liquid hydrogen, methanol, and some domestic inputs to refineries.” Their projected annual growth rate for ethanol? A stunning 11.8%!
Bellying Up to Ethanol
In the ethanol sector, 2006 saw a few darlings turned demons and some IPOs that went south so fast you’d think it was a migration of falcons. So should ethanol still be unloved? Not at all.
As any observer who is up-to-date on peak oil knows, the most pressing problem right now isn’t a need for greener electricity, but for liquid fuels. Solar and wind and other forms of RE are great, and clean, and we continue to love them, but they make electricity. What we need most urgently is a replacement for liquid fuels, particularly diesel and gasoline. As I will explain next week, there are some inherent limits to biodiesel production, primarily that it’s mostly made from corn in the U.S. and therefore quickly cuts into food supply. While ethanol is also mostly made from corn today, it can be made from a variety of waste products as well.
Ethanol production in the U.S. is set to double over the next 18 months and increase as much as 15-fold by 2030. Now that’s a growth story! So much so that Thomas Weisel Partners analyst Kevin Monroe wrote in his January 5 note to clients that the latter part of 2007 may see an oversupply of ethanol—although he primarily blames the demand side, calling for greater discretionary spending and higher Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) for ethanol.
Other Liquid Fuel Alternatives
Other than ethanol, the only liquid fuel alternatives are biodiesel, methanol, and various technologies for converting coal, natural gas, wood and other less energy-dense (and therefore less desirable) energy feedstocks into liquid fuels—at high production costs, both in dollars and energy. Let’s run down the numbers:
* Like ethanol, biodiesel production is also set to explode in a 16-fold increase from 25 million gallons in 2005 to 400 million gallons in 2030.
* Methanol has some good potential in specific applications, but as an industry it’s still very much in its infancy and has negligible production.
* Coal-to-liquids, or CTL, which uses the Fischer-Tropsch process originally developed by the Nazis to synthesize liquid fuels from coal, is a promising direction. We have relatively large supplies of coal (never mind the “200 years’ worth” estimate, by the time it gets used for everybody’s Plan B, it will be closer to 80 years’ worth), and if some of the new “in-situ” recovery techniques prove economical and practical, such that you can get the hydrocarbons out without destroying entire landscapes, it might not be all that horrible as a substitute. But the EIA anticipates only 5.7 billion gallons of CTL production by 2030, equivalent to about 8% of the production we anticipate from biodiesel and ethanol by then. And other methods for converting less preferential feedstocks, such as gasifying oil shale and wood and then turning that gas into a liquid, are not yet production-scale technologies.
* Demonstrating their serious intent in Congress, Sen. Barack Obama and other Midwest senators have already offered the Biofuels Security Act, which would require the United States to use 60 billion gallons of ethanol and biodiesel a year by 2030. Along with Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY), he also introduced the Coal-to-Liquid Fuel Promotion Act of 2007, a package of loan guarantees and tax credits that would promote large-scale production of CTL fuels. Other Congressmen are offering their own energy solutions, such as Rep. Roscoe Bartlett’s Energy Farm Bill, which would offer federal R&D support to make farms “net positive” in both food and energy.
Hard Times for Hydrocarbons
Not only is the Democratic majority leading the way in Congress to push for alternative fuels, but they’re also gunning for Big Oil. It looks likely that they will repeal some of the 2004 tax cuts for oil and gas companies, to the tune of $5 billion. Not only that, they are making a concerted effort to collect royalties on drilling leases, which went unpaid under the Bush administration due to a clerical error. Add another $9 to $11 billion for that. And where will that money go? Into a new fund to promote conservation and help develop renewable energy. Compared to the dearth of investment in renewables under the last six years of leadership by Big Oil cronies, that’s a HUGE shot in the arm for renewables.
Further, the oil industry can expect a new attempt at passing a federal law against price gouging by oil companies and the elimination of another set of tax breaks that weren’t intended for them, but that have benefited them anyway—“a break they didn’t earn, deserve or need” says Rep. Jim McDermott, D-WA.
But the biggest potential new cost—untold billions more—may come from another proposal that would raise taxes on oil inventories. “That would significantly raise the cost of holding inventory” and “prices will go through the roof,” causing oil companies to reduce their stores, according to Red Cavaney, president of the American Petroleum Institute. This is very bad news indeed for a country increasingly dependent on imports.
The Peak Comes Into View
The oil industry isn’t going to like 2007 for another reason: the peak of global production. As I mentioned in my 2006 wrap-up, it appears that we may have reached the global peak of crude oil production in 2006, including the unconventional types that were expected to increase overall production for another few years. We already hit the conventional oil peak in 2005.
The outlook for oil production in 2007 isn’t promising. Exploration for oil fields is coming up with gas more often than oil, reflecting the reality that we’ve already plucked the low-hanging fruit and we’re now getting into the iffy prospects. Oil companies are reducing their exploration budgets, preferring to prospect on Wall Street for M&A targets than to risk drilling yet another dry hole. Dry holes are now outnumbering wet ones by about four to one.
It also appears that previous forecasts were overly optimistic, both for growth in reserves and growth in new oil and gas fields. “An Evaluation of the USGS World Petroleum Assessment 2000,” a 2005 paper from the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, compared a 30-year forecast by the USGS (US Geological Survey) from 1995 with the actual additions that materialized in the world through 2003. They discovered that in the intervening eight years, or 27% of the forecast span, “only about 11% of the estimated undiscovered oil and about 10% of the estimated undiscovered gas resources were discovered.” This is not an encouraging revelation given how often these USGS surveys are cited as if they were biblical truth. The only “growth” that was more or less on target was the growth in reserves estimates, which are, as any peak oil student knows, notoriously unreliable and politically skewed.
Unfortunately, the “Invisible Hand” isn’t showing itself yet to correct the supply issue via higher prices. For a multiplicity of reasons, not the least of which is futures speculation, crude and gas prices remain low relative to the recent past, with light sweet crude now at an 18-month low. Consequently, expansion plans are being tabled, particularly for some of the more exotic (though eagerly anticipated) sources like the tar sands of Alberta.
In some cases, ironically, the price of oil itself is stifling oil projects. For example, at Shell’s Alberta oil sands project, the cost of producing a barrel of oil after a planned 100,000 b/d expansion will be six times higher than the cost of a barrel when the project first started!
Let’s take another example: offshore oil production. Just Saudi Arabia’s efforts alone to offset the depletion of their major fields and increase their “spare” production capacity have drawn some 58 offshore drilling rigs away from the Gulf of Mexico. That’s over a third of the 148 rigs that we had in the Gulf in 2001. This competition from the Saudis has caused the cost of renting the rigs to skyrocket from about $190,000 per day last year, to $520,000 per day this year. That pushes them out of the feasibility zone for some of the mature, marginal wells in the Gulf. All of which adds up to less domestic production of oil and a greater reliance on imports.
In dollar terms, it adds up to about $20 trillion in new investment over the next 25 years just to keep supplies up with demand, according to a recent IEA estimate. But as frightening as that number is, following the lessons of the examples we just discussed, we should expect that number to be even higher when the day arrives. Much higher!
Higher Prices, More Attacks Ahead
All of this has prompted some observers to note that we seem to be setting ourselves up for another crisis and a serious price spike, when (not if) the next major shortage event occurs (another bad hurricane season, a successful terrorist attack on a Saudi oil facility, Iran blocking the Strait of Hormuz, Russia playing hardball . . . pick your poison).
Stay tuned for more next week on the big picture for 2007.
.
TTCM Growth in Perspective
2004
Revenue $9.7 M
Net Profit $497,530
2005
Revenue $6.9 M
Net Profit $578,598
(The Company's revenues decreased in 2005 due to a working capital shortage).
2006
Not Reported yet.
Contracts for at least $63 M.
2007
First 2 months, Contracts of additional $69.3 M
$132.3 Million of Contracts (minimum) yet to be accounted for in TTCM Financials.
http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=TTCH&read=5649&submit=Go
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=17766244
.
TTCM Contracts Backlog
Looks like the 4th Quarter 0f 2006, TTCM has entered a period of Phenomenal Growth. I do not know the first 3 Quarter numbers, but in Oct. they had 8 small projects that totaled $25.5 M. 2006 had $63 M in Contracts that we know of. The first 2 months of 2007 has Contracts of additional $63.9 M. WOW!!.
Oct. 2, 2006
8 Projects Total: $25.5 M
Oct. 12, 2006
Phase 2 in Liao Ning Province. $12.9 M
Nov. 13, 2006
GwangXi and FuJian $12 M
Nov. 29, 2006
GwangZhou $12.6 M
---------------------------------------------------------
Jan. 8, 2007
Dong-Wan City $15.4 M
Jan. 12, 2007
Cuong-Dong Jhe-Nan $12.8 M
Jan. 17, 2007
GuiDongNan $12.9 M
Jan. 30, 2007
Hami Prefecture's Potassic $15.4 M
Feb. 15, 2007
LiaoNan $12.8 M
2006 Oct. thru Dec. $63 Million
2007 Jan. thru $69.3 Million
Total $132.3 Million
.
Renewable Energy Set to Explode...with Government Backing
Chris Nelder2006-12-28
By Chris Nelder
A bomb went off in the renewable energy world two months ago, but almost nobody heard it. It has stunning implications for the energy business, both the traditional hydrocarbon side and the renewable side.
Maybe it’s because it was in the form of a 90-page policy paper from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)—the kind of stuff that makes a normal person’s mind wander and eyes glaze over after a few minutes.
Well, I’m not a normal person (ask anybody!). Despite its pedantic prose and lugubrious language that only a policy wonk could love, I read it.
And after reading it, you could have pushed me over with a feather. This is HUGELY significant stuff. And yet, even today, two months after it was published, a Google search on the title of the report yields a mere 300 references to it—all of them, it seems, from peak oil blogs and related sites.
I found not one mention from a single recognized media source. Newspaper, TV, major news sites . . . nada.
The report is entitled “National Security Consequences of Oil Dependency” and was written by a special task force of the CFR. Now, if you don’t know much about the CFR, you should stop and Google them right now, because they are part of the cabal that, literally, runs the world. The elite of the elite. The power center of government and business everywhere.
To demonstrate the seriousness of the report, the task force was chaired by two former CIA directors, James Schlesinger and John Deutch. (You may have come across similar efforts by another former CIA Director, James Woolsey, who has also made national energy security his personal ambition.)
Here are just a few choice excerpts from the report (emphases mine):
* The U.S. government has failed to pay sufficient attention to energy in its conduct of foreign policy or to adopt a consistent approach to energy issues.
* The issues at stake intimately affect U.S. foreign policy, as well as the strength of the American economy and the state of the global environment. But most of the leverage potentially available to the United States is through domestic policy. Thus, the Independent Task Force devotes considerable attention to how oil consumption (or at least the growth in consumption) can be reduced and why and how energy issues must become better integrated with other aspects of U.S. foreign policy.
* The challenge over the next several decades is . . . to begin the transition to an economy that relies less on petroleum. The longer the delay, the greater will be the subsequent trauma. For the United States, with 4.6 percent of the world’s population using 25 percent of the world’s oil, the transition could be especially disruptive.
* The voices that espouse ‘‘energy independence’’ are doing the nation a disservice by focusing on a goal that is unachievable.
* The central task for the next two decades must be to manage the consequences of dependence on oil, not to pretend the United States can eliminate it.
* While reducing U.S. oil imports is desirable, the underlying problem is the high and growing demand for oil worldwide.
They then spend considerable time debunking these widely-held “myths” about energy:
Myth #1: The United States can be energy independent.
Myth #2: Cutting oil imports will lower fuel prices.
Myth #3: Large Western companies like Exxon Mobil, BP, Shell, and Chevron control the price of oil.
Myth #4: There’s plenty of low-cost oil ready to be tapped.
Myth #5: Renewable energy and nuclear power can quickly reduce dependence on oil and gas.
And finally, they gave some policy objectives:
• Increase efficiency of oil and gas use;
• Switch from oil-derived products to alternatives;
• Encourage supply of oil from sources outside the Persian Gulf;
• Make the oil and gas infrastructure more efficient and secure; and
• Increase investment in new energy technologies.
They go on to call specifically for increased government R&D backing of new energy technologies, including higher fuel efficiency innovations, plug-in hybrids, ethanol, synfuels, and advanced nuclear designs.
Wow. What a bunch of tree-huggers those CIA guys are, huh?
In short, this policy paper is an unequivocal affirmation of the reality and the significance of peak oil. It is a sharp critique of hypocritical U.S. foreign policy that pretends to be about freedom while deploying its troops not where freedom is threatened, but where there is oil.
And best of all, it is a stirring call to action for the government to invest a lot of R&D money, without regard for return on the investment, in all kinds of fundamental energy alternatives and efficiency technologies.
As a guy in the renewable energy investing business, well, I could scarcely imagine a better Christmas present.
But the CFR isn’t the only organization that’s (finally) on point about energy policy. Here are a couple of other news bites you might have missed:
* Eighty House Members signed a letter to President Bush seeking substantially higher funding for renewable energy and energy efficiency in the White House’s 2008 budget request. Meanwhile, energy consumers and producers, including six oil and gas trade associations, have formed “a coalition of coalitions,” called the “Energy Initiative,” to develop national energy policy recommendations.
* A panel of U.S. renewable energy industry experts recently estimated that the U.S. could produce, at a minimum, 25% of the country’s electrical energy requirement with renewable energy by 2025, making the “25X25 proposal feasible, reasonable, and doable.”
* The European Commission will nearly double its target [to 20%] for the adoption of renewable energy in 2020, versus its [12%] goal for 2010.
To top it all off, just the other day, on the front page of the Wall Street Journal, there was a story entitled “Choke Points—As Threats to Oil Supply Grow, A General Says U.S. Isn’t Ready,” wherein a former Air Force general who was the deputy commander of U.S. forces in Europe, Central Asia and Africa was interviewed about his continuing efforts to secure the supply lines of oil from the Caspian Basin and the African coast. How’s this for a startler:
Back in Washington, Gen. Wald has joined forces with a movement that some are calling the “green hawks.” Prominent former policy makers and retired armed-forces officers, they argue that a tough military and foreign policy won’t be enough to ensure energy security, and the only real solution lies in changing consumption at home.
If the major policymakers and military men in the U.S. are agreed that reducing domestic consumption is the only solution, then surely even the knuckleheads in the Congress and the White House can’t be too far behind. It’s past time to consign Cheney’s derision of energy conservation to the dustbin of history and start making some tracks to the future.
Finally, the time has arrived to get our foreign policy objectives aligned with our energy policy objectives and come clean about our reasons for being in the Middle East. Let’s face it, their main export isn’t broccoli, and when the CFR says it’s OK to admit that, it’s OK.
Finally, the government seems ready to step up to the renewable energy challenge and deliver. Almost exactly one year ago, the U.S. government laid off a substantial fraction of the workforce at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, citing budgetary constraints. Perhaps now we can put such idiocy behind us for good.
Finally, we can come clean about our hidden subsidies to the traditional hydrocarbon industries and start encouraging the right solutions rather than the wrong ones. Big Oil doesn’t need tax relief—even Bush has admitted that. It’s time to let the Invisible Hand go to work on the real solutions we need.
I’m so excited about the future of renewable energy, I can hardly sit still long enough to type this. A new day is dawning. Let’s roll!
.