Replies to post #4245 on Bluefire Renewables, Inc. (fka BFRE)

[spec machine]

Unfortunately, the facts that are available to the public clearly indicate your statement is false.

The use of very low cost raw materials gives the cellulosic producers an economic edge over those using corn or sugarcane(Brazil). I see the main issue for new producers like Bluefire is initial financing. It is likely, once initial financing is secured, they will make decent profits to repay loans and finance additional plants, as long as ethanol prices and usage remain adequate.

The current cost to produce cellulosic ethanol is 40% higher than producing from starch (such as corn)

Note that the data comes from actual production as new commercial cellulosic plants are coming online which still have substantial reliance on government subsidy. Also not that NONE of the plants that have been able to raise funds for construction and operation (either by public or private equity) have chosen acid hydrolysis, or the Arkenol variant of it, as their conversion pathway.

even the optimistic leaning sources see the hurdles

http://about.bnef.com/press-releases/cellulosic-ethanol-heads-for-cost-competitiveness-by-2016/

http://e360.yale.edu/feature/for_cellulosic_ethanol_makers_the_road_ahead_is_still_uphill/2821/

So where does this leave BFRE?

- unable to compete (if built) against other cellulosic producers
- selling stock to fund payroll

That's why the financing never happens and each potential partner walks away after completing their technical analysis of BFRE's design and data from the bench scale and pilot scale runs

.01 or lower till it becomes BFREQ or grey sheet

spec