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.
You've no idea the power and reach of geopolitics....
SEC Rules 45 days prior....
Trump will be in Davos - and I'm sure the message is America First and some mention of clean coal...don't forget the #SOTU.....
This one - it's now under company news:
http://www.cleancoaltechnologiesinc.com/clean-coal-set-to-make-wyoming-move/
Ok - I am familiar with that group; I left it after I got attacked for posting an article that outlined the new administration's coal friendly energy policy. The article was deleted and I was told not post that fascist garbage on his page - or words to that effect.
Who is the admin on the FB page, pls?
http://www.atimes.com/india-wind-leading-aseans-clean-coal-charge/
India could wind up leading ASEAN’s clean coal charge
Jon ConnarsBy JON CONNARS, Independent Risk Analyst and Researcher JANUARY 16, 2018 11:49 AM (UTC+8) 13,091 3
Anniversaries are always a time for both reflection and preparation, and India’s 69th Republic Day will be no different. On January 26, all 10 ASEAN members will attend a major summit in New Delhi to celebrate seven decades of Indian constitutional democracy. All sides will, of course, celebrate that past with one eye firmly set on their own present and future interests.
For India, the decision to invite the whole of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations falls squarely within its “Act East” Policy of expanded economic ties, security cooperation, and regional integration. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has ample reason to focus on deepening India’s economic connections to the ASEAN group.
Bucking the trends of unprecedented political uncertainty and lackluster economic performance in the West, average annual growth across the ASEAN region surged to 5.1% (a four-year high) in 2017. Strong demand, planned infrastructure projects, and economic reforms mean that growth shows no sign of slowing down.
Not that GDP growth figures tell the whole story of a country’s economic health. India’s own projections for 2018 stand at what may seem like an impressive 6.5% growth in gross domestic product, but that pace fails to represent the serious “jobs problem” weighing on Modi’s economic policies and electoral chances.
Indian and ASEAN leaders will discuss a range of joint issues at the summit (such as handling an increasingly assertive China), but one major challenge both sides face is the energy demands that could throttle their breakneck economic expansion.
Energy poverty in India, ASEAN
The scale of those needs is daunting. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that India alone will account for nearly 30% of the entire global increase in energy demand through 2040. India’s share of worldwide energy use in 2040 (11%) will still not have caught up with its projected 18% share of the overall global population.
The IEA also projects strong growth in energy demand in Southeast Asia over the same period, with the size of the regional economy tripling over the next 22 years.
For all that growth, both sides will continue to struggle to overcome energy poverty. A total of 240 million people in India and 65 million people in Southeast Asia currently do not have access to electricity. Renewables-focused schemes like Modi’s use of solar panels to electrify remote villages have failed to solve the problem.
That helps explain why both Indian and ASEAN officials are so candid about their long-term intentions to rely on coal and fossil fuels to ensure a reliable supply. India plans to double coal production to 1.5 billion tons by 2020. Between now and 2022, the electricity India generates from coal is expected to grow by nearly 4% annually. “Coal is at the center of everything,” stresses Partha Bhattacharya, former chairman of Coal India Ltd. “You can’t live without coal.”
Indonesia also aims to add 35 gigawatts of energy capacity by 2020, with 70% of the increase to come from coal-fired energy. Taking the whole of ASEAN into consideration, soaring consumption means demand for coal is projected to account for some 34% of total primary energy demand by 2040. To meet that demand, ASEAN’s imports of fossil fuels will grow across the board. Despite substantial coal production in Indonesia, the region will actually become a net importer of coal.
While environmental campaigners debate the impact of those trends on global climate efforts, regional leaders are more immediately concerned with lagging electrification. India has set a target of 100% electrification by December this year, and Indian officials have expressed skepticism over the ability of renewable energy sources to meet such a target.
The government’s chief economic adviser, Arvind Subramanian, has described moves to phase out the country’s chief source of energy “unconscionable.” As a result, existing power plants have received a nudge to boost output from existing capacity.
Within ASEAN, four member states account for 95% of those still left off the grid: the Philippines, Myanmar, Cambodia and Indonesia. In 2020, only 71% of Myanmar’s populace will have electricity. In 2030, that number should rise to 97%.
Clean coal alliance
The leaders gathering in New Delhi are thus counting on coal to achieve universal access while holding to their obligations to reduce carbon emissions. This helps explain why India has become one of the world’s most active proponents of the US-sponsored “clean coal alliance” to promote the use of clean coal technologies (CCT) like carbon capture and storage (CCS) or utilization (CCU). The alliance spans six continents and seeks to render cutting-edge technology more affordable to coal’s main consumers.
For India’s heavily polluted major cities, the need to reduce emissions from coal energy is urgent. Indian coal-fired plants are some of the most inefficient and polluting in the world; 80% of them are on obsolete technology. The adoption of high-efficiency low-emission (HELE) technology has been suggested as something of a middle ground for Indian policymakers. The IEA, for its part, insists that CCU and CCS need to be made urgent priorities.
In either case, ASEAN ministers will make natural allies in the Asia-wide clean-coal movement that seems to be taking shape. Last year, the bloc issued a statement to promote CCT use, acknowledging the “continued role of coal” in shoring up energy security, economic competitiveness and environmental sustainability throughout the region.
As one of the continent’s two emerging economic heavyweights and a key economic partner for the whole of ASEAN, Indian support of CCT could exercise considerable influence over ASEAN’s energy policies and the makeup for its energy mix moving forward.
Even as the global energy debate focuses on Donald Trump and the United States, the leaders of the world’s fastest-growing economies will shake hands this month having already embraced an enduring role for coal and other fossil fuels.
How exactly they choose to translate those decisions into reality will have an immense impact on the future of the agreement arising from the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) and the long-term outlook for global emissions.
http://cajnewsafrica.com/2018/01/09/energy-clean-coal-set-to-be-catch-cry-of-2018/
....and at one time CCTI was in talks with Egypt...
...lest we forget that plants thrive with CO2;
Indeed, developing nations are not giving up coal; the US is amongst the cleanest of nations for energy (with the exception of the occasional, errant spill; to which, said company should be penalized heavily and not just a slap on the wrist).
The CO2 carbon capture is just another means to tax the majority, while the minority 1% continue jetting about with their personal massive carbon footprint. It's an agenda to de-industrialize first world nations. I'm not suggesting that we shouldn't be pursuing other alternative means of energy, however, this is in your face an agenda to tax the average working man to death and keep the poor, poor.
Real clean coal, which the CCTI process addresses removes real pollutants and volatiles like SO2.
Lastly, those electric cars are re-charged with what in the majority of instances? Oh...that's right: Coal produced energy.
Exactly - and we need the continuation of these favorable energy policies to see ultimate fruition.
University of Queensland and Newcastle both interested in the Coal to Liquid process;
I am happy to hear this - for this is the original Pristine process, utilizing the petroleum byproducts (waste) for a (potential) secondary revenue stream.
It was a nice find!
The latest International Energy Agency projections confirm coal will still be king in 2040
Terry McCrann, Herald Sun
November 15, 2017 5:00am
Subscriber only
COAL, glorious coal: the rest of the world is going to use more and more of it even as Australia embarks on the suicidal stupidity of closing down and — especially in Jay Weather-dill’s North Korean-style ‘paradise’ — blowing up coal-fired power stations.
The latest projections from the Paris-based International Energy Agency confirm that coal will remain the single biggest source of electricity generation in the world as far out as 2040.
This is despite the claims that China, the biggest generator and user of electricity in the world, is going all ‘renewables clean’. In a word, it isn’t.
The IEA projections show coal-fired power still generating 26 per cent of global electricity in 2040. ‘Renewables’ are supposed to be generating as much as 40 per cent by then. But that includes all forms of renewables, including the hydro power that green fanatics now regard as ‘dirty’.
Take them out and wind and solar will be — let’s play along with the IEA fantasy — ‘generating’ just a little bit less in total over the 2040 year than its forecast for coal.
The other big — projected — growth will be in that other ‘dirty’ fuel, with nuclear energy increasing to provide around 10 per cent of the global total.
Interestingly — ha-ha — the IEA does not give figures for how many millions of birds will be sliced and fried each year by 2040 if we actually got not a doubling or a quadrupling but more like a ten to fifteen fold increase in the number of landscape-occupying and polluting wind turbines and solar panels.
I will point out, as the IEA doesn’t and wouldn’t, that to actually get to a point where actual wind and solar generation got to approximately equal coal-fired output, you would have to build:
ABOUT double rated capacity, if batteries were included.
ABOUT quadruple, if batteries were not included.
You know, to cover for that awkward design feature of when ‘the wind don’t blow and the sun don’t shine’.
Now there are two critically important things to understand about the IEA and its forecasts.
First, institutionally it has well and truly now overdosed — after initially been force-fed — on the Climate Apocalypse Kool-Aid. It has long since utterly shredded any intellectual and analytical credibility it used to have.
It’s now just an embarrassing shill for the climate change lies and the renewable energy fantasists and main-chancers seeking to enrich themselves on the taxpayer and the consumer dime. Did I write dime? You’ve got to be kidding; try, ever-increasing trillions.
That is to say, the IEA is exactly what BHP and Rio Tinto want to turn the Minerals Council (to which I am indebted for bringing the IEA projections to my notice) into: a down under shill for energy political correctness, in the hope that they’ll get a pass from the green fanatics.
Well, my advice to the rationalists in the mining industry is to let BHP and Rio have the — shell of the — MCA all to themselves. The rationalists should start their own council to exist in the world of reason and civilisation.
The second point about the IEA and its projections is that it just takes the individual country forecasts — actually, those promises, more accurately described as feel-good fantasies — made under the Fake Paris Accord; and taken them as guaranteed for delivery.
It then just adds them up to get to bottom-line numbers, which are thus worth four-fifths of five-eighths of very little.
The coal-fired Hazelwood power station, which closed in March 2017. Picture: AAP
So just let that sink in: these IEA ‘projections’ are based on taking as delivered all the completely irrational utterly impossible promises of the Fake Paris Accord on how much coal-fired power generation will be shut down and all replaced by wind and solar, and yet more wind and solar.
But even on those utterly ludicrous 150-proof Climate Kool-Aid Blue-Sky projections, the total amount of installed coal-fired power generation will still increase between now and 2040.
Over that period installed net global coal-fired generation will increase by “only” — the IEA’s word — 400GW. Doesn’t sound much? It’s only — my word — eight times Australia’s entire coal-fired power generation.
That is to say, we can close down our all our coal-fired stations — and in the process, kill tens of thousands more of the old, the sick and the poor, as well as the birds and the bats — and it wouldn’t make the slightest difference to global emissions of carbon dioxide.
And all that’s on the ‘optimistic’ — a more accurate word would be ‘fantasy’ — projections of the IEA.
The reality is that while, yes, China will make a huge investment in wind and solar — to sell the turbines and panels to idiot westerners; it will be going gangbusters to build new, really clean, coal-fired stations to not only replace the old, really dirty, ones but to add to generation.
Then add on India, Indonesia and the rest — including even a Europe which has essentially reached the end of the road on its Fake post-Cold War emission-cutting — and actual additional coal-fired generation by 2040 will be many times the IEA forecast.
Are we as a country going to prove to the entire world that we really are as dumb as the political and media class — with very few exceptions — are?
WEATHER-DILL’S BANK TAX DUMP
Perhaps it’s a bit like a stopped clock (or for that matter, a stopped wind turbine): the aforementioned Premier Weather-dill actually got it half-right with his state bank tax, now never to see the light of day.
The actual beauty of it was that it wasn’t going to be paid by South Australians but by especially people in Victoria and NSW.
That’s a bit — actually, a lot — like the way they sponge off Victoria’s coal-fired power.
That was a big part of why it was important for the banks to head it off at the pass. Head-off successful.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/terry-mccrann/the-latest-international-energy-agency-projections-confirm-coal-will-still-be-king-in-2040/news-story/1377b92383495fba7ad8b2034c08c561
I share your opinion; but then again, I have always been a believer in the technology -
Way cool to see how the technology has evolved; in a sense, they've incorporated the original Pristine process with Pristine M; the one thing that Pristine had going for it was capturing all the volatiles and creating a secondary revenue stream.....
thanks, BBB
Very accurate scenario.
I was lambasted on another sight and called toxic (or words to that effect)for merely suggesting that DJT's coal policy would be beneficial to the fruition of commercialization of the technology.
I, along with other believers, in the CCTI tech, experienced first-hand what a destructive coal policy did to hamper the progress of the company. Recall BHO saying, "If you want to build that coal plant, it's going to cost you." That statement was a pretty good deathnail in the coffin of progress. Eves said as much in shareholder meetings. The only option was to pursue overseas opportunities, which as we know, has been very cumbersome and slow-going.
This is correct and I recall the 5/fs quite well! Thank you for this....
I have my original restricted shares, as well as otc.
There were many private transactions of restricted shares back in the day.
I will have to dig, but I started out as a Restricted shareholder and I recall the 20/1 FS (when it was Riverside Technologies), and there was another FS in there, too - -I'll reach out to the other RS that are current on the board and see if they remember the date...
The reason I remember this so well, is that this was also around the time of the Evergreen Rule for restricted shareholders (and SEC filing compliance rules); there was contention from exec mgmt (Larry Hunt, et al) when the restriction could be lifted; the point being, they screwed the shareholders, didn't lift the legend and we lost out being able to profit - hence the slew of lawsuits. In a meeting I had with the SEC, it was clarified that the hold time for restricted shares starts running when the shares are originally issued - not when they are transferred/sold to a second or third party.
CCTI did indeed hit $70//it was soon after the forward split and around the time of the announcement of the Shanxi Poar MOU.
On October 10, the Environmental Protection Agency ordered the Obama-era Clean Power Plan (CPP) repealed. The CPP was massive regulation, established during the Obama administration for the purpose of reducing emissions from coal-fired power plants to 32 percent by 2030, compared 2005 levels. The CPP would have put strict limits the emissions from some 600 coal-fired plants, located mainly in the Midwest and the east, and by forcing states to adopt renewable energy projects. To get a sense of perspective, 120 coal-fired power plants have closed since 2015 because of cost increases from previous regulations, including one of the nation’s biggest.
The decision will not become effective for some time, as a public notice must be published by EPA in the Federal Register, for which the public has 60 days to comment. A replacement rule would then have to drafted and reviewed. The CPP had been put on a hold status by the U.S. Supreme Court after 28 states attorneys general and many in the industry went to court. Trump ordered the EPA to review the plan in March. Secretary Scott Pruitt’s assessment of the plan was that it was an unlawful expansion of the agency’s authority under the Clean Air Act.
The EPA estimates that repealing the rule could avoid approximately $33 billion per year in compliance costs. Had it gone into effect, the regulation would also have weakened the nation’s power grid, because coal is most reliable fuel source. The wind does not blow all the time; solar is reliable at most one-half the time; and there can be issues with delivery of natural gas. These have been suggested as alternatives to coal. Despite substantial growth in wind and solar energy, they still represent only about 7 percent of the power Americans use.
Coal is just too cheap and too plentiful.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/10/epa_repeals_clean_power_plan.html
Hiya, Beebs! - been a long haul, eh?
If there is anyone on this board who is privy and/or has first hand knowledge to how federal funding/grants/clearances and the Department of Energy works, please share.
Any funding/partnering for this company can be considered significant.
Hi, White Coal - I've been at this since 1995; I have always believed in the CCTI process. I have watched the original Pristine evolve from a horizontal device to a vertical employment, utilizing gravity, and barometrically controlled chambers, to capture the real pollutants (with the potential for a secondary income stream from the petroleum by-products).
With #POTUS45 complimentary energy policies, I believe we are on a very bright path to successful commercialization.
Just a little background on how federal funding works:
CCTI's partnership with UW has allowed CCTI to take advantage of both Federal Grants from the DoED and the DoE, and simultaneously State grants. In essence, they found a way to legally get mega-funding with no questions asked. E.g., Caltech received $15M from the DoE for solar research.
Now that being said, to have the expanded testing moved to an educational institution that is set up for intensive experimentation/testing, is huge. This project will have special clearances just to get into the lab because the technology is proprietary. DoE clearances are very rare, and very hard to come by....
June 2016//LARAMIE, Wyo. — The University of Wyoming and seven other institutions have formed a coalition with financial backing from the U.S. Energy Department to investigate the future of fossil energy.
The Energy Department recently contributed $20 million toward the effort by the University Coalition for Fossil Energy Research, which also includes the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University and Texas A&M University.
"The three originating areas to focus on all relate to carbon management, carbon storage and coal conversion," said Richard Horner, deputy director of emerging projects and technology at the UW School of Energy Resources.
Being included in the coalition with such prestigious universities shows UW is a national leader in the fossil fuel research, said Michael Pishko, dean of the College of Engineering and Applied Science.
"It's an important national effort, and UW is a critical part of that coalition," Pishko said.
Wyoming also is the nation's leading coal producing state and has much at stake in ensuring that coal has a future in the U.S. economy.
A coalition board selects which projects are deemed most important to fulfilling the key goals of the group, Pishko said.
"Right now, the coalition is in the process of defining specific research teams and research projects," he said.
Currently, several research groups on the UW campus are preparing proposals to submit to the coalition board. The projects will be in competition with the other universities' ideas.
Horner said one advantage UW has over other institutions is state-of-the-art equipment that allows researchers to investigate and use computer models in a unique way.
"It allows us to walk into a 3-D model and comprehend what's going on if made in the real world," he said. "It gives us a competitive advantage compared to these other universities."
http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/wyoming/uw-enters-million-coalition-for-fossil-fuel-research/article_3f79b243-81e2-5f12-9315-23377bded39d.html
The very special thing about the original process, is its ability to capture the real toxic pollutants, convert them into petroleum by-products, and hence, create a secondary income stream.
Regrettably, geopolitics had a huge influence in getting Pristine off the ground; Pristine M, being the lowest hanging fruit on the bush, made more sense as those countries not involved in the politics of the Paris or Tokyo agreements, were only concerned with shipping costs and stability of product.
Either way, we are progressing......
Indeed, the reputation took a beating over the years to get legitimate funding. It's been a long climb, and I hope current energy policies stay in place or even expand to support the prospective growth. Never underestimate the influence of geopolitics....
The sky is the limit with this technology. I have been involved and invested since 1995. The technology works (the original process Pristine). Period. And anyone who is still buying into the bogus CO2 junk science needs their head examined. Without going off on a tangent, the original Pristine process removes voluminous amounts of SO2, mercury, and other pollutants from the coal, captures them, which can then be sold on the secondary petroleum based market (think DuPont products).
What the company has been up against since inception, are rogue former (and now deceased) directors who were more interested in the hustle (hence the many lawsuits) and massive geopolitical influence from BigOil to either buy and shelve the technology, or just let it wallow.
The original Shanxi Poar deal did not come to fruition (when it hit $70/share) because the land allocated for the plant was across the street from the main power plant, that was essentially a marsh. Shanxi Poar wanted CCTI/SAIC to remediate the land and build the plant, which killed the deal. All the other MOUs were well intended but at a cost to essentially high-jack the technology.
We are now on a path, with a supportive energy policy, to see success.
It has come full circle; Wyoming, where it all started...
kassir? jordan?
Pristine M now more than ever....70% of Illinois coal is shipped off to China.
Former "executive" management were cads, no doubt. Larry was only ever about the con. But that being said, the Chinese were only ever about stealing the technology - both times: Shanxi POAR and Inner Mongolia.
The thing is, this technology transcends any personality. While I am aware of the challenges Eves had on his plate, I am grateful he persevered. I queried how information was disseminated to the market, but in retrospect, I don't think even he knew what a moving target this company was and all the negative karma attached. Seriously....it has been daunting.
Love him or hate, Eves is the one who has brought it to market. And that will be his legacy. I expect this technology and the ensuing contracts to exceed all our expectations.
There were only MOUs for China and India. The original Shanxi Poar deal got nixed by SAID bc the Chinese wanted CCTI to remediate swamp land and front the cost of everything.
There have never,ever,ever been any operational devices outside of the original table top device and the plant in OK.
There was never a plant in China;
The company moved from FLA to NYC because no one involved in the company is in Florida - previously, Hunt & Douglas both had residences there. Hunt's dead and I hope CJ Douglas, too has met his karma in hell;
There has never been a plant in India.
The device in OK is the first ever commercialized prototype. The only other prototype, was a table top version, designed specifically for the original patented process. It was about 6' long and lay horizontally.
We're back where we started years ago, with the Wyoming Operation. Life always comes full circle, eh?