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.
Post Unavailable
Additional Information
Not too sure about the competence of...
...HKBV's legal advisers.
Although they did what it is their job to do... analyze the facts and circumstances regarding the situation and offer legal advice based on that, the recommendation to sue CFA was clearly error on their part.
Attorneys analyze the situation and offer legal advice. The client makes the final decision whether or not to act on such advice. Here, Sender made the right decision and the legal team came up short.
The company could very well have sued (you can pretty much sue anyone for anything), but they would have suffered a summary judgment against them because the complaint would be "without merit." So even though you CAN sue anyone for anything, it isn't a good idea unless you have a strong "meritorious" case.
Hat Trick's argument would be that there was a breach of contract and that the company suffered economic damage thereby. Not only is there no breach of contract in this situation, but Hat Trick would be hard-pressed to prove any sort of actual monetary damages (assuming CFA returned the membership fees.)
Contract Law:
A valid contract requires an offer, acceptance of that offer by the offeree and the exchange of valuable consideration (either an exchange of promises or a legal detriment on the part of one or both of the contracting parties). Although there are also substitutes for consideration, this situation does not involve such.
Hat Trick's argument:
Before CFA's first email, Hat Trick obviously contacted them and inquired as to whether they could register for the trade show. This was not an offer, but merely an inquiry.
However, Hat Trick will argue that CFA responded with terms and conditions specific enough to render CFA's response an offer... the email contained such terms as the cost of membership, the performance necessary on the part of Hat Trick (pay the required fees and apply by such and such deadline), the time required for such performance, CFA's return performance (giving Hat Trick a CFA membership, allowing them to participate in the trade show and assigning them a proper space in which to display their wares), etc.
The kind of contract that would be created here is known as a unilateral contract because Hat Trick could accept CFA's offer by performing (i.e., returning the membership application and required fees before the deadline.)
When Hat Trick submitted the membership application and paid the required fees, it accepted (by performance) CFA's offer, thus creating a legally-binding unilateral contract.
Hat Trick will argue that when CFA then emailed the second time, attempting to modify the terms of the contract, it effectively breached because a legally-binding contract had already come into existence at the time of Hat Trick's initial performance.
However, the situation is not so clear cut.
CFA's required return performance at that point was NOT to accept Hat Trick's request for membership or to guarantee them a trade show space, but merely to evaluate their application for membership. Which they did. CFA would only breach the contract as it existed at that point by refusing to evaluate Hat Trick's membership application but keeping the fees they paid.
So, CFA's first email was actually an invitation to Hat Trick to make an offer, not an actual offer itself. Hat Trick's submission of the membership application and required fees was actually the formal offer to contract with CFA. CFA then had the right to reject that offer after evaluating Tango Cafe and the products/services proposed to be exhibited at the trade show, which CFA did. Of course, they would also be required to return the fees paid by Hat Trick by rejecting their offer to contract.
This is where the potentially improper conduct was engaged in by CFA.
They didn't immediately return the fees to Hat Trick, but instead presumably made some sort of counter-offer which entailed an undesirable trade show floor location. This doesn't fully make sense.
If CFA rejected Hat Trick's application and stated that "Tango Cafe may not exhibit at this weekend's show" then how and why would CFA then offer to let them set up in some other "inconspicuous" location. If they are not eligible to exhibit, then they can't exhibit AT ALL. Letting Tango exhibit in some out-of-the-way, undesirable location IS STILL exhibiting, and is an implicitly admission by CFA that Tango IS ELIGIBLE to exhibit. If they only offer spaces to eligible vendors and they offered Tango a space (albeit an undesirable one), then the implication is that Tango is an eligible vendor.
It seems clear that this was an attempt by CFA to avoid returning the fees paid by Hat Trick. They were going to break their own rules and make an exception by allowing Tango to exhibit when they were not actually "eligible" by CFA's standard rules.
Of course, we know that Sender rejected this counter-offer, so that is really the end of the matter. So long as CFA returns the application and membership fees paid by Hat Trick, there is no actionable wrong here. There are, however, questionable internal policies and ethical considerations regarding CFA's unattractive counter-offer when they stated clearly that Tango was ineligible to exhibit, but that, in itself, is not actionable conduct.
The Hat Trick legal team just fudged the analysis on this one.
Yep, that looks like the case...
Vertroleum is NOT named after John Rivera.
Where would you even get such a crazy idea?
It's not "Johntroleum" or "Rivertroleum." It's "Vertroleum."
I don't see anything similar to either "John" or "Rivera" in the word "Vertroleum."
Maybe you assumed it was his middle name? John Verty Rivera?
Not.
"Vertroleum" is a combination of the Spanish word "verde" meaning "green" and "petroleum" which I will presume you already understand.
Thermal Imaging competition...
Forgive the double negative, but I don't think it is absolutely correct to say that there is "no competition."
Even a quick Google search turns up several other companies that produce thermal imaging cameras. Among them are FLIR, Fluke, ExTech, Wahl, Compix, Texas Instruments/DRS, Raytheon, AIM, Jenoptik, Bullard, ETI, NEC, Radiance, etc...
Now, whether these companies are targeting the Medical Imaging field is another question. Many seem to be focused on military/security applications. Others lean toward scientific testing and still others concentrate on industrial "diagnosis."
However, I have found at least one other manufacturer that has products specifically aimed at the medical field:
the ETI P-series Medical Imaging Infrared Camera
http://www.infraredcamerasinc.com/
So, maybe Wellstar's advantage is simply that they are one of only a couple of manufacturers that are specifically targeting the medical arena. But even this can be enough to grow the company so long as sales start to flow. The Duke study (assuming a glowing final report) will presumably help to cement Wellstar's place as the number one choice for medical thermographic devices and jump-start the sales of their imaging systems.
Let's go!
That's true, there are still obstacles.
Jr's recent legal troubles and the lack of solid and consistent sales are the reason this is still a two cent stock and not a multi-dollar stock.
Other posters have mentioned, and I agree with the proposition, that Jr's legal troubles will not ultimately determine the company's viability. Sales of Vertroleum and/or the licensing and franchising of "the Rivera Process," sales of reactor systems, etc. are key.
When that starts happening, we will see profits.
Thank you BarretJet!
I could only be MORE convinced if I witnessed the process firsthand.
To all of you nay-sayers that think this is just a big scam, I respectfully disagree.
From the looks of all that equipment, if this is a scam, it's the most elaborate and expensive one I've ever been duped by. I just don't believe it would be worth the trouble to "fake" everything I've seen via BarretJet's pictures and the various videos online. Besides, con-men don't invite the general public to witness their scams, take pictures and record video, or ask questions about the process.
Hopefully, the market will start to see the real potential here. Not only can Sustainable's technology create clean fuel, but it can help eliminate the need for landfills and waste dumps. It's a Double Bonus!
I wonder why the are not releasing the study...
...until the market improves.
Any ideas as to why that is?
Do they even have the final analysis from Duke yet?
Had a buy in at $.01 for days... no luck.
Have increased it to the $.013 base and hope it fills before more news drops.
UBSS- Yeah, I see that...
What does it mean?
They're buying blocks of 5000 shares at $.013 and selling blocks of 5000 shares for $.022?
I don't understand what this means for either the current or future state of the PPS. Do you understand it?
I see that others are buying at the same range too (VFIN @ $.013 and NITE @ $.01) and selling about as high or even higher (VFIN again and PERT @ $.024)!
Does this bode well for the future of the "street-level" PPS for common shmoes like us?
Their ASK is almost double, so that seems to me to be a good thing?
Can this be used to predict the near-future PPS?
When I take a look at the same data for another stock, let's just pick one at random... how about VCSY... I get similar results... actually even more dramatic price disparity.
While UBSS's prices are pretty standard (BID $.05, ASK $.06), some MM's bids are crazy low ($.01 and even $.001), and some of the asks are pretty crazy as well ($.129 and $1.01)!
So, again... I need to understand this phenomenon better.
Importance of Duke Study...
The bottom line for me (and the PPS) is whether successful results and the subsequent glowing final report from the Duke study will lead to sales of the infrared imaging system.
Given the well-respected reputation of Duke, as well as that of the recently-appointed Ms. Atwater, RN, it looks like only a matter of time for Wellstar.
There is chatter that infrared "thermal" imaging will be "THE" diagnostic tool of choice (replacing mammograms) for early detection of things like breast cancer in a few years.
Check these news videos:
http://www.thermographyclinic.com/braodcast6/breast_thermography.html
http://www.thermographyclinic.com/broadcast7/Beating%20Breast%20Cancer%20with%20Thermography.html
Article links on this page:
http://www.breastcheckup.com/InTheNews.html
This all sounds good for Wellstar.
My pleasure, Ski.
I almost didn't post the link to I-Hub on RB, thinking that anyone who would be interested would already know to look here.
I found I-Hub and several other stock forums by using this stock "portal" site:
http://www.tradingday.com/cgi-bin/stock_quotes_charts.cgi
Just enter a ticker symbol and it will return a page with direct links to many sites (including several forums) with info about that particular stock.
Two Doji, one of them a "Graveyard" Doji...
Text below taken from:
http://stockcharts.com/school/doku.php?id=chart_school:chart_analysis:introduction_to_candlesticks
"The relevance of a doji depends on the preceding trend or preceding candlesticks. After an advance, or long white candlestick, a doji signals that the buying pressure is starting to weaken. After a decline, or long black candlestick, a doji signals that selling pressure is starting to diminish. Doji indicate that the forces of supply and demand are becoming more evenly matched and a change in trend may be near. Doji alone are not enough to mark a reversal and further confirmation may be warranted."
So, does this mean that the recent run-up that started on sept. 22, 2008 is reversing? Maybe.
"Gravestone doji form when the open, low and close are equal and the high creates a long upper shadow. The resulting candlestick looks like an upside down "T" with a long upper shadow and no lower shadow. Gravestone doji indicate that buyers dominated trading and drove prices higher during the session. However, by the end of the session, sellers resurfaced and pushed prices back to the opening level and the session low.
As with the dragon fly doji and other candlesticks, the reversal implications of gravestone doji depend on previous price action and future confirmation. Even though the long upper shadow indicates a failed rally, the intraday high provides evidence of some buying pressure. After a long downtrend, long black candlestick, or at support, focus turns to the evidence of buying pressure and a potential bullish reversal. After a long uptrend, long white candlestick or at resistance, focus turns to the failed rally and a potential bearish reversal. Bearish or bullish confirmation is required for both situations."
So, we wait for confirmation.
More news from Duke would be ideal.
Duke Study Recruitment Materials
Please scroll down for link...
http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00664235?spons=%22Trillennium+Medical+Imaging%2C+Inc.%22&spons_ex=Y&rank=1
A little insight into what they were doing exactly.
There is also contact information if anybody is feeling frisky.
The cancer research walk must have changed dates..
http://www.beachcalifornia.com/california/sandiego-walk-hope.html
Location: University of San Diego Campus, 5998 Alcalá Park , San Diego , CA 92110
Time: 7:45 am - 12:00 pm
Website: http://www.cityofhope.org/WalkforHope/sandiego/
Price: Adults $30; Children $20; USD Students $20 (with valid student id)
san francisco walk for hope
SAN FRANCISCO - Walk for Hope 2008. Date
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Location: Justin Herman Plaza, 1 Market Street, San Francisco, CA 94105
Registration Fee $30
Call: 415-369-0370 or 800-732-7140
That post came from a corporate representative?
It sounds like it was written by the retarded kid sitting on the porch playing the banjo in the movie Deliverance. Was his name Travis too?
"I seen you ordered?" You mean "saw" maybe?
"have not changed are store" You mean "our" maybe?
"we can just do the order over the phone" "Do" an order? You mean, "place" or "take" the order, maybe?
Not very professional to say the least. In fact, Travis borders on illiterate.
And that email address: "livnitup46@aol.com" Living it up alright, on our shareholder dollars, the bastards. It's not even a corporate email address.
If this thing goes back to a half a cent, I'm O.U.T.
Post Unavailable
Additional Information
Hi-Health Contract on PinkSheets
"The issuer hat Trick Beverages affirms and confirms to its shareholders that this contract in fact exists and is in a good and valid state. The issuer will be filing a true copy of an e-mail exchange between the corporate advisor and the issuer which is self explanatory on Pink Sheets."
This begs the question why this wasn't done at the time of contract signing instead of waiting until we had to go and call Hi-Health to try to verify the relationship for ourselves?
Ok, Gotcha.
Hmmm. that does initially seem disappointing then. Is it possible however that Fry's will account for the remainder of that 500 store equation then?
According to Hi-Health's website, there are only 57 stores in their entire chain in Arizona.
http://www.hihealth.com/about/locations.aspx
Fry's, being a subsidiary of The Kroger Corp., undoubtedly has hundreds of stores, so that must account for the difference. I presume Hat Trick is still in negotiations with Fry's and hasn't yet formalized the deal or shipped product?
Xilo, you misunderstand.
The 52 Hi-Health stores deal are not part of the "major retailer" deal involving 300 stores. That is still ongoing. This is a separate, extra deal that is a complete surprise. More like icing than cake.
This deal AND the major retailer deal AND the merger deal should see this thing moving along nicely.
Patience.
Regional Managers making the decision is reasonable.
It makes sense that those in control in particular regions (with that region's particular demographics, climate and weather, etc.) would be empowered to make the purchasing decisions. They are in a better position to know what will and will not sell in their particular areas than national or corporate headquarters-level executives.
Even though all Wal-marts, Costcos, Targets, etc. carry MANY of the same products, they do not carry ALL of the same products. It seems to me, foods and beverages, especially unique items like sports drinks would sell well in certain regions and not as well in others. Regional managers have discretion to make those decisions about whether to carry such items or not.
I don't see anything peculiar about this at all.
The possible magnitude of the Trial Sales...
24 unit cases of product results in approximately 1296 bottles per pallet of 54 cases.
The PR said 2 pallets per store on the low end, and possibly up to 4 on the high end.
The PR also states that the sales trials could take place in up to 300 stores...
So, the math (at the theoretical max of 300 stores):
(Pallets per store X No. of stores = Total pallets sold)
(Total pallets sold X 1296 (bottles per pallet) = Total bottles sold)
2 pallets per store = 600 pallets = 777,600 bottles
3 pallets per store = 900 pallets = 1,166,400 bottles
4 pallets per store = 1200 pallets = 1,555,200 bottles
I'm not in the drink distribution business, but that sounds like a lot any way you cut it.
Does anyone have any idea what this trial sales run will mean in terms of actual sales revenue for Hat Trick? I assume they are selling them cheap since the arrangement can be seen as something of a "favor" to the company, in exposing our products to the world.
These types of drinks sell for about $1.75-$2.50 each, so the retail revenue should be substantial (assuming they DO sell), but I don't know how to figure Hat Trick's "cut" of that.
Does anyone have a better understanding of this industry and these types of deals?
Naked Shorting Tutorial...
The link below takes you to an audio slideshow presentation by Dr. Patrick Byrne, CEO of Overstock.com, and anti-naked-shorting warrior, entitled "The Dark Side of the Looking Glass: The Corruption of Our Capital Markets."
It takes about an hour and is worth every second...
http://www.businessjive.com/
More info on Dr. Byrne and his fight, which likely resulted in today's new SEC rules, can be found here:
http://www.overstock.com/Patrick-Byrne-and-naked-short-selling.html
ENJOY!
Sender Vaiser Interview from August 29, 2008
http://www.tradersnation.com/hkbv.shtml
Other information:
Hat Trick Beverages Inc. (otc: HKBV)
*Shares O/S: 1,405,000,000 as of Apr 28, 2008
*Float: 505,000,000 as of May 23, 2008
*52-week Range: $.0005 - $.011
* http://pinksheets.com
CONTACT INFORMATION:
UNITED STATES
Local Line: 1-416-849-2867
Toll Free Tel: 1-800-394-3905
CANADA
Local Line: 1-416-849-2867
Toll Free Tel: 1-800-394-3905
Email: tango@tangocafe.com
Hat Trick Beverages, Inc.
449 Santa Fe Dr.
Encinitas, CA 92024
Telephone: (760) 613-8828
Fax: (760) 683-3240
Email: corporate@hattrickdrinks.com
Website: http://www.hattrickdrinks.com
Website: http://tangocafe.com
He meant long-TERM short.
Definitely a larger store...
A pallet of 20oz plastic bottles contains 54 cases of 24 bottles each.
That's 1296 bottles at the 20oz size.
If HKs bottles are bigger this number will be a little smaller, but still very substantial.
The PR said a minimum of two pallets per store, so that's quite a few, at least 2000 even if the bottles are a lot bigger.
You could stock a Mom & Pop corner market all year with those numbers.
Which merger?
I have been reading references to TWO DIFFERENT MERGERS:
The July 23rd announcement about HKBV's "merger" with the Chinese company, 3 Swordsman Milk Company...
and the most recent Sept. 5th announcement about a merger porposal from "The As Yet Unnamed Italian Company."
I'm no corporate structure wizard, but I'm pretty sure that a single company cannot merge with TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES IN TWO DIFFERENT COUNTRIES!
So which is it?
Is the Italian merger for real? If so, then what happened with the Chinese merger and why has there been no word from HKBV regarding the decision not to pursue the Chinese merger? Or was the Chinese merger news simply a part of a scam that the Italian merger news is simply a continuation of?
If merger negotiations broke down with the Chinese company, why didn't HKBV at least mention that fact in the announcement of the Italian merger, so that I wouldn't have to ask these damned obvious questions?
Visiting this Board for the First Time...
No offense, but man, I really like that weird camper/trailer community setup better than the stuck-up, snooty mansion. But, I'm an artist and that kind of stuff is just cool. But, I still like making money with stocks, even if I'd rather live in some weird art-project.
Where is that anyway? I want to visit.
Keep up the good work, but maybe change the top graphic to something that is actually unattractive.
Larry Twombly IS NOT CEO of HKBV.
Sender Vaiser was appointed CEO by the BoD in April 2008.
Get your facts straight.
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS92180+29-Apr-2008+PRN20080429
Agreed.
Maybe they keep all the good stuff in the warehouse.
No, it's not an empty yard, but...
It's not a very substantial-looking business either.
One building, but with admittedly large garage doors, one semi truck, a couple of flatbed trailers and what looks like a few (three) industrial generators sitting "out back" to the right of the semi.
You can't really see the rest of the lot because of a storage container blocking the camera, but if you go down the street a bit (to 7938 Rand St), you can look into the back lot a little better. There's another semi truck, a few pieces of industrial "earth-moving" equipment and a couple random vehicles sitting around.
It looks more like a junk yard than a working business.
Their website is defunct as well...
"Firefox can't find the server at www.texaspowersystems.com"
This is not the first Merger to be announced...
Whatever happened to this merger with the Chinese company?
https://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews+articleid_2425098.html
Wednesday, July 23, 2008 7:50 AM
BEIJING, July 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ - www.hattrickdrinks.com Pink Sheets HKBV the company is pleased to announce that it has negotiated a preliminary merger agreement with 3 Swordsman Milk Company. Originally both sides were looking at a joint venture deal, however it became clear that a merger would suit both candidates best. Hat Trick management and its advisors will now begin the process of compiling statements and assets lists from the 3 Swordsman Milk Company.
Ms Janne Liu the company promotional advisor said '3 Swordsman Milk Company is a large production plant of various dairy products. The company has assets well over 10 million dollars and revenues in the 3 million dollar range. This merger would allow Hat Trick to gain a foothold in China markets with their Hot and Cold Beverage drinks.'
The issuer plans on making further announcements and filings shortly.
The issuer has retained the services of the large Chinese based law firm, Guanche Lawfirm and the services of Mr.Frank Shi to assist it in this merger and to interact with the Chinese laws.
The common shares of the Company are currently dually listed in the USA Pink Sheets (symbol HKBV.PK)
Safe Harbor statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: Certain forward information contained in this release contains forward-looking statements that involve risk and uncertainties, including but not limited to, those relating to development and expansion activities, domestic and global conditions, and market competition. CONTACT www.minamargroup.com/helpdesk SOURCE Good Life China Corporation The above news release has been provided by the above company via the OTC Disclosure and News Service. Issuers of news releases and not Pink OTC Markets Inc. are solely responsible for the accuracy of such news releases.
CONTACT: www.minamargroup.com/helpdesk
SOURCE Hat Trick Beverages, Inc.
One last IKE post...
FYI, the hurricane is approximately 500 miles wide, with hurricane force winds extending out about 120 miles from the center and tropical storm force winds extending out the rest of the 500 mile width.
This storm, as far as actual physical dimensions go, is larger than Katrina, taking up about half of the Gulf of Mexico.
See:
http://www.weather.com/multimedia/videoplayer.html?clip=12045
So it seems to me, if the actual point of landfall (as measured from the "eye" of the storm) is at Freeport as expected and Baytown is approximately 80 linear miles away (well within the hurricane force radius), and on the windy side of the storm, it (along with Galveston, Pasadena/Houston) will suffer the most "direct" hit of all affected areas. This is especially true since the predictions are that this exact area will suffer the highest storm surges as well, with 10-15, even 20 feet surges expected. Galveston will likely be submerged again as it was when Katrina wreaked havoc on the area in 2005. Of course, the major path of destruction then was around the New Orleans area, so this could be bad.
In this sense "direct" doesn't mean where the eye will cross land. "Direct" is necessarily off center when it comes to hurricanes. It is where the most damage will be sustained, that is, on the east (windy) side of the storm (since the winds are blowing counterclockwise), and within the hurricane force radius (120 miles), precisely where Baytown will be if the current projections prove accurate.
Thanks for the report from ground zero. Keep us posted.
It's still almost 1000 miles from making landfall (more than half a day after my original post) and the possible path projection is over 300 miles wide, with Corpus Christi being at the very southern EDGE of the path projection and Baytown/Galveston being almost dead in the middle.
Point being: You have no idea and clearly didn't do your research.
Looks like Baytown TX may be lining up for a direct hit with IKE.
More delays on the way, I guess...
Maybe SSTP's recent delays are legitimate...
In that last article, "Boosting Cellulosic Biofuels" Mark Jones, the technology strategy development scientist with Dow stated that "the challenging part is scaling up production... There are all kinds of variables that can change when the size of a production line is increased, such as heat rates, the design of equipment, and dealing with contaminants..."
So, maybe I'm just gullible, but I read that sentence from a presumably competent and trustworthy DOW scientist to lend some degree of legitimacy to the production delays obstructing progress at Baytown. If SSTP is scaling up production and there are inherent challenges in equipment design and maintaining the necessary heat rates at the larger scale, then maybe, just maybe such delays are honest. I mean, what reason would this guy have to lie?
If this was happening at another "start-up" company without the shady and unsavory history and past misconduct of JR, et al., there would be no question that the delays are legit. However, history being what it is, whether these particular delays being experienced with SSTP's production ramp-up are legit or just more BS is still a serious and pressing concern.
One Catalyst to Rule Them All...
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/21134/
Boosting Cellulosic Biofuels
A catalytic process could improve thermochemical routes to ethanol.
The Department of Energy's National Renewable Energy Laboratories (NREL) is to begin work testing a catalyst developed by Dow Chemical, the industrial giant based in Midland, MI, to see if it can be used to massively boost the production of ethanol made from biomass.
The partnership will attempt ways to make ethanol biofuel from cellulosic biomass, such as waste from corn or wood, using thermochemical processes. Specifically, NREL is looking to use a Dow catalyst to convert syngas--a mix of hydrogen and carbon dioxide made from the gasification of the biomass--into a mixture of alcohols, including ethanol. The joint agreement calls for the partners to demonstrate the process on a pilot scale and evaluate the feasibility of an integrated commercial-scale facility.
The hope is that a molybdenum sulphate catalyst developed by Dow in the 1980s will improve the syngas-conversion process. If successful, a catalytic process could theoretically achieve production rates of 130 gallons of alcohol per ton of biomass, a significant improvement on the 60-to-80-gallon yields produced by existing biochemical fermentation plants, says Mark Jones, a technology strategy development scientist with Dow.
NREL is already developing thermochemical reactions, such as gasification, to make ethanol from biomass. Compared with biochemical ethanol fermentation plants, thermochemical production is much faster, says Stephen Gorin, a senior scientist with NREL, in Golden, CO. "The throughput is very high," he says. "Front to back, you're talking orders of seconds as opposed to five to six days using biochemical production."
The high temperatures used in gasification can break down just about any form of biomass and easily handles the high lignin content that can make up as much as 25 percent of many forms of biomass. This means that nonedible feedstocks, such as wood waste and the stalks and leaves from crops, can be used.
But one problem with thermochemical production lies in the final stages of the synthesis, where catalysts are used to convert the syngas into a mixed blend of alcohols containing ethanol. NREL wants to make the process more selective for the synthesis of ethanol and increase the yields.
It makes sense for NREL to join forces with Dow, says Gorin, because the chemical company has had a long track record of knowing how to produce the catalyst, as well as expertise in scaling up industrial processes to sizes necessary for commercial production.
Dow has been working on its catalyst for quite some time, says Paul Dauenhauer, a chemical engineer at the University of Minnesota, in Minneapolis. With the thermochemical approach to making biofuel, the catalytic step converting syngas into alcohols is the limiting factor in terms of cost and design, he says. The other limiting factor is scaling. It is far from straightforward taking a pilot plant and trying to get the same results on an industrial scale, says Dauenhauer.
Dow is confident that the catalyst will achieve the yields that NREL needs, but the challenging part is scaling up production, says Jones. There are all kinds of variables that can change when the size of a production line is increased, such as heat rates, the design of equipment, and dealing with contaminants, he says. "Dow has already scaled up complete production for the molybdenum sulphate catalyst," says Jones. And Dow has demonstrated ethanol production using one-ton quantities of biomass.
In return for its contribution, Dow gets NREL's expertise in large-scale gasification. Dow's interest in ethanol production lies not in developing transportation fuels, but rather in reducing its own dependence on oil, says Jones. The petrochemical industry only accounts for about 1 percent of total oil consumption, but it nevertheless needs it as a feedstock to produce the vast range of materials. "Our goal is to try to improve our feedstock position," says Jones.
In particular, "ethanol is a very nice precursor for getting to ethylene," he says. Ethylene is a basic building block for many chemicals and plastics. Feedstocks and energy costs currently account for just under half of Dow's total production and operating costs. In 2007, Dow spent $24 billion in purchasing feedstock and energy.
The aim of the partnership is to begin testing and trying to improve the performance of the catalyst as early as October, says Gorin. But the precise details of the three-year partnership have yet to be fleshed out, and the performance targets for the catalyst remain proprietary.
The Entrepreneurial Spirit
That "Oil From Wood" article is cool. It even hints at a new agri-service business in the last sentence, "You want to preprocess [the biomass] at the farm and then ship a high-density, high-energy intermediate to processing plants."
It's a new business! A mobile pre-processing service that crushes, compacts and condenses the biomass material, bundles or bails it into super-dense units and ships it to the bicrude plant for further processing.
It's kinda like when my grandpa (who owned one of the few tractors in our little rural hometown) would go around to neighboring farms and cut and bail their hayfields. This is a kind of "mega-bailer" that gets the bundles as dense as possible in order to maximize the amount of biomass that can be shipped in any one container, offsetting the transportation costs.
I like it!
A process for creating "biocrude" directly from biomass.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/19694/page1/
Looks like the secret is out... since Nov. 2007.
This group even has their own "proprietary catalysts" just like JR. I keep thinking that these super-secret, need-to-know basis, "very clever proprietary catalytic approaches" are probably something mundane and commonplace but totally off the wall, like ketchup or marshmallows or something, haha. Maybe they're using all the cat hair and dust bunnies that accumulate under their couches and beds. Who knows...
But, all kidding aside, this really is a great article for understanding the big picture of biocrude production... If JR has NOT figured it out yet, I think he should at least hire a corporate spy or two to find out how this group is proceeding. They anticipate large scale integration into the world's fuel supply by 2010.
Text copied below for your convenience...
__________________________________________________
Dutch biofuels startup Bioecon and Khosla Ventures have launched a joint venture called Kior, which will commercialize Bioecon's process for converting agricultural waste directly into "biocrude," a mixture of small hydrocarbon molecules that can be processed into fuels such as gasoline or diesel in existing oil refineries. The process, Kior claims, boasts numerous advantages over other methods of producing biofuels: it could prove relatively cheap, relies on a nontoxic catalyst, taps into the present fuel-refining and transportation infrastructure, and produces clean-burning fuels that can be used in existing engines.
Biofuels are widely seen as a key stepping-stone on the path from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources, particularly for transportation. Their use could also reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. But ethanol, the most widely produced biofuel, contains little energy compared with gasoline or diesel. And a great deal of energy goes into its production: growing the grain from which it is fermented, distilling it, and transporting it. Many biofuels boosters have pinned their hopes on finding ways to produce ethanol from cellulose, the tough polymer that makes up much of plant stems and wood. In practice, though, cellulose must be broken down into simple sugars before it can be fermented into ethanol or converted into synthetic gas and turned into fuels. Despite three decades of research, these remain difficult, expensive, and energy-intensive processes that are not yet commercially viable. Additionally, recent research shows that ethanol, which is highly volatile, may actually exacerbate smog problems when it evaporates directly into the air instead of burning in vehicle engines.
The way to make cellulosic biofuels viable, says Bioecon's founder, Paul O'Connor, is to use catalysts to convert biomass into a hydrocarbon biocrude that can be processed into gasoline and diesel in existing petroleum refineries. After decades developing catalysts for the petroleum industry, O'Connor started Bioecon in early 2006 to develop methods for converting biomass directly into biofuels. His first success is a catalytic process that can convert cellulosic biomass into short-chain hydrocarbons about six to thirteen carbon atoms long. Khosla Ventures agreed to provide an undisclosed amount of series A funding to spinoff Kior in order to commercialize the process. Vinod Khosla, founder of the venture fund, believes that converting biomass into liquid transportation fuels is key to decreasing greenhouse-gas emissions and compensating for dwindling petroleum reserves. Khosla is funding a number of biofuels startups with competing technologies and says that Kior's approach is unique. "They have some very clever proprietary catalytic approaches that are pretty compelling," he says. "They can produce relatively cheap crude oil--that's attractive."
The most effective method of converting biomass into fuel is to subject it to high temperatures and high pressure to produce synthetic gas, or syngas. In the presence of a catalyst, the syngas reacts to produce fuels such as ethanol or methanol (used as an additive in biodiesel). But this is a costly process, and catalysts able to withstand the high temperature of the syngas are expensive and frequently toxic.
Attempts to produce fuel by directly exposing agricultural cellulose to a catalyst have had little success because most of the cellulose is trapped inside plant stems and stalks. O'Connor says that while the Bioecon researchers are developing new catalysts, their "biomass cracking" process is the real breakthrough. Using proprietary methods, they have been able to insert a catalyst inside the structure of the biomass, improving the contact between the materials and increasing the efficiency of the process. While O'Connor won't go into details, he says that the most basic version of the technique might involve impregnating the biomass with a solution containing the catalyst; the catalyst would then be recrystallized. "What we're doing now is improving the method to make it easier and cheaper," O'Connor says.
Such a method would eliminate the need for the superhigh temperatures and toxic catalysts used in other thermochemical methods for cellulosic-biofuel production. While O'Connor says that he is still improving Kior's catalyst, his first versions are different kinds of modified clays, which are both cheap and environmentally friendly. The product is high quality as well, containing less acid, oxygen, and water. These characteristics make it suitable for burning as heating oil or for use in petroleum refineries, which can use existing processes and equipment to convert it into the longer hydrocarbon chains of gasoline and diesel fuel.
Bioecon has produced lab-scale quantities of its biocrude, a few grams at a time, from materials such as wood shavings, sugarcane waste, and various grasses. While the input material affects the yield somewhat, O'Connor says that the output is "all very similar, so we do not have a real preference." This means that the process can work around the world, with whatever biomass is locally available, almost year-round.
Kior is already in talks with at least two oil companies to establish partnerships to further develop the technology. It is starting a pilot plant with one company that should produce around 20 kilograms of biocrude a day within six to twelve months, says Kior CEO Rob van der Meij. If all goes well, the process could scale up to production of hundreds of kilos per day by 2009, and refined versions of Kior's biocrude might be blended into gasoline or diesel by 2010. In addition to being renewable, these fuels would have lower sulfur and nitrogen content, which should decrease smog in cities such as Los Angeles and Houston.
Because of its ability to slide into the existing petroleum refining and delivery infrastructure, the technology has a huge cost advantage, says O'Connor. It could also be adopted much more rapidly, according to Khosla. "If you can do a solution that's compatible with the oil companies and their current refineries, it becomes much easier for them to get comfortable with it," he says. "Getting them into the game would be a big addition."
Steve Deutch, a senior research scientist at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, says that the little information Kior has released about its process is plausible enough, but that until the details are available, the company's claims are "not really possible to evaluate." The main challenge for Kior, or anyone working on cellulosic fuels, Deutch says, is to develop a process simple enough to bring close to the sources of biomass--farms. "Collecting biomass and getting enough of it in one place to make a difference is a problem in the biomass world," Deutch says. "Trucking costs can become exorbitant. You want to preprocess it at the farm and then ship a high-density, high-energy intermediate to processing plants."