First American Scientific Corp. (fka FASC)

[ptrey]

TRCPA...Here is a snip to back up what you said about a Coal fired plant being retrofitted to co-fire with biomass is inexpensive:

Sorry the snip is from a Mitsui Babcock PDF file: [Still wondering why MITSUI is interested in our little company....Maybe it's the KDS???]

http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/developep/mitsui_babcock_energy_ltd.pdf

Mitsui Babcock Response to Energy Policy Consultation
9
4. RENEWABLES (ref para 2.9)
4.1 Biomass
It was previously forecast that biomass should supply half of the anticipated
renewables share of the power generation portfolio. Mitsui Babcock is
seeking to develop its business in Biomass generation, but continues to find
that project development is hindered by issues of economic viability, long
planning approval timescales, uncertainty of fuel supplies and poor
performance of flagship projects such as ARBRE. Biomass needs a long-term
commitment and adequate subsidy and assurance on the supply of energy
crops.
Cofiring of biomass with coal in large power plants can achieve up to 20%
reduction in CO2 emissions per MW generated. The technology is relatively
inexpensive to install. The restriction on this market is the price and availability
of fuel. There is a current problem that under the Renewables Obligation, from
2006, 75% of the biomass fuel must come from energy crops (as opposed to
waste woodchips etc.). Because there is no certainty of availability of energy
crops in sufficient quantities at acceptable prices generators must justify the
economics over the period from plant start-up to 2006 and this is increasingly
difficult as time passes and the deadline approaches.

http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/developep/mitsui_babcock_energy_ltd.pdf