Let's be real. You cannot talk about reducing additives in oil just to lower emissions or to reduce cat killing, and ignore what oil is used for in the first place...lubrication.
If oil does not protect for a reasonable time, then it is WORTHLESS..no matter how "clean" it is.
I need to clarify my statement that "we should not talk about overall oil quality comparison...". Or at least I should have add : "in automotive industry" (which is a main target of PLRO).
The point is that automotive (and petroleum) industry is happy enough with quality of current lubricants. What you will hear if you tell big auto guys that you have a superb lubricant that will make a life of an engine 2 years longer? They will say "no thank you". Simply because they do not want to extend a life of engines they make. They want to sell more engines but you claim that your product will do quite opposite. Same with petroleum. Telling them that your lubricant will save 10% of fuel consumed is like telling that they will sell 10% less of their main product. (It is like to offer big tobacco guys a solution that will increase cigarette burning time.) They will not be interested in your product unless there is a regulation (like the one with catalytic converters). Then you hit a jackpot. Of course you might want to use heavy weight players to push a product; that is one of the reasons why PLRO has such big players on their Board.
It is not a surprise to see first PLRO commercial product in railroad industry. They protect THEIR equipment. I will not be surprised to see PLRO's next commercial move towards aviation industry. Automotive is quite a different story. That is why I said that "The major player here is a pollution factor".
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
