Blue Biofuels Inc (BIOF)

[Magmar]

Independent review of mechanochemical process using biomass

I found this presentation by someone at Georgia Institute of Technology, a school for chemical and biomolecular engineering. I hope that this means they are smart enough to be believed by some who doubt. Reason it came up is I did a Google search on the patent 8062048 that CEO says this licensing is built around; the CTS technology. I was curious to see if anyone did a peer review or independent testing of their claims to see if what they say is accurate.

http://rbi1.gatech.edu/sites/default/files/documents/Presentations/sievers_rbi-2015.pdf

While it's hard to dissiminate what the author may have been presenting while he was showing, there are a couple of slides that are very telling...and in my opinion,harmful to what CEO says how fast this process works. You don't need all of the slides, just a couple to see;

slides 11 & 12:
Slide 11 references Dr. Blair and patent and the graph on the left should look familiar as it is the same Dr. Blair submitted in the patent. It shows the efficiency of Kaolin solubilizing cellulose material. Again...this is on HAY, not trees. Plus it was dried before milling. None of which will be utilized at the Florida plant. The graph SHOWS it takes ~ 3 hours to hydrolize HAY to roughly 70-75% efficiency...3 hours for hay! How long would a harder material like trees take?

Slide 12... the smoking gun...the graph on the left is a side by side performance comparison of using just kaolinite with the cellulose versus adding mild and strong acids to cellulose. Assume the control is using hay as the biomass. This graph shows you why the rest of the industry uses acids (or enzymes) to break apart the biomass so it can be hydrolyzed. In this study, he found that Kaolinite alone took 10 hours to reach 70% soluble product, whereas adding hydrochloric acid (HCL) or sulfuric acid H2SO4) reached ~100% solubility in 2 hours! That is 1/5 the time or 20% less time than kaolin alone, which is what CEO is going to do. I am sure smart business men have seen this and did a financial cost comparison and determined that the proven acid/enzyme method is more sound, quicker and just as economical, especially when ALLM doesn't have anything to prove their claims in the real world. We still have yet to see proof of where his numbers came from.

Slide 14 & 16;
Slide 14; The author tested the efficiency of breaking down lignin from biomass material. He states that high temps are needed to "crack" or break open lignin". That's like 600-700F! Do you see any type of heating device on the process flow diagram that ALLM shows for the process?? I don't. Also says you need a strong base (corrosive Sodium hydroxide) to help break apart the lignin structure. So... this educated, intelligent person in his study is telling us that you need heat and caustic material to further treat biomass if you want to release more sugars. Hmmm. CEO says you don't need that. BTW...all the other stuff I shared in previous posts about the difficulty of breaking down lignin corroborate what this guy says.

Slide 16... he tells you that the amount of Sodium hydroxide - caustic material needed to do this efficiently is not economical. More studies are needed. CEO is telling you non of this! His doesn't need any of this.

If you were a major investor and saw this side by side test of kaolin (ALLM process) versus acid or enzyme (the rest of the world)... which would you choose? Something that has been proven, or something that hasn't?

Better yet...who would you trust?