Replies to post #19946 on QS Energy Inc (QSEP)

[zerosum]

SRI is a lab, and if you had done some easy homework you would see that. You can't fit a 30,000 pound piece of equipment in a lab, and there is no live size working pipeline to scale for the AOT to be tested on at the SRI lab. That's obvious. Your claim that STWA is now losing revenue because the life size AOT is being moved to Alabama is preposterous. They are testing this in a controlled lab setting, not unlike how I imagine Temple does their tests. With a lab version, or a scaled down version of the AOT. The big difference is that this is with SRI and not Temple.

The final Phase of testing, Phase II, will measure viscosity reduction of condensate in a closed-loop system utilizing AOT.

The testing in Texas is proceeding as dictated within the 10Q. Installation in May, and testing in June. No revenue is being lost, and no time is being lost. the tests with SRI are completely separate, and additional to all the tests done on condensate in the lab by Temple and on the live condensate line in Texas.

So I did, "read it again pal," in fact I read it the first time.

I hope it occurs to everyone how important it is to have the gold standard of the oil industry, which is SRI, to be backing the safety and efficacy that Temple and Tao and ATS Rheo Systems claimed. If you were a potential buyer of this technology wouldn't that make you more comfortable to have SRI come out and say this is safe on top of Temple/Tao/ATS? Read this for what it is, for the industry benefit only, not that now all of a sudden AOT is safe, that's not what they're saying. AOT has been proven safe and viable for years by the RMOTC, China, and most recently ATS on a live line. Today is simply verification publicly from SRI to the industry and that is worth it's weight in gold. Trying to connect the timing of this PR with what is happening with the live test is reading too much into it. Stick to simply what the PR says, because I think the test at SRI was done before the KM test.

[PumpersExposed]

Ya it's hilarious... The KM testing should validate this, so really whats the need for the other testing? Again as well, it's a closed loop which is hardly indicative of a live line to test how long this effect would last...etc.. IF it even worked.

My bet is you will never see the report, just more adjectives to describe how it went "as expected" or had "similar results to" or "met expectations"...etc..