PETROTEQ ACHIEVES HIGHER OIL QUALITY

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

Looks like Petroteq, the very small company using technology developed by Canadian oilmen and financed by a somewhat opaque oil deal/distributor in Ukraine, has finally achieved some sales of their oilsands product that they extract using a solvent recovery technique:

"Using oil sands ores mined or extracted from Utah’s Asphalt Ridge area, the Company has the ability – at its Asphalt Ridge facility – to produce a crude oil that can range between a heavier oil and a medium oil in its specific gravity (i.e. an API gravity of 11 to 30 degrees), depending on refiner crude slate requirements and the refined products (i.e. lighter gasolines, medium distillates such as diesel fuels, or heavier oil feedstocks) they plan to produce. In addition, even though the heavy oil and bitumen contained in Asphalt Ridge oil sands deposits have a relatively low sulfur content, the oil produced at the Company’s Asphalt Ridge facility has an even lower sulfur content when compared with WTI crude oil. Finally, the oil produced from the Company’s facility now yields a BS&W content of about .003%, a spec that is almost 40% lower than the BS&W specification required by many of Utah’s refiners, pipelines and custody transfer operations."

https://ir.petroteq.energy/press-releases/detail/335

I think the technology has promise, and might well turn out to be a serious blockbuster.  That said, whether or not this outfit, running on a shoestring, can achieve its audacious goals is yet another matter.  So far, the Ukrainian who has installed himself as the "President" seems to have engaged in financing contributions that do not inspire confidence. He has sold himself shares plus warrants for more shares, all at a discount to market. OK, so companies desperate for cash will do whatever it takes to get to where they need to go.  Meanwhile the Canadians on board have obvious technical expertise, and my guess is that the technology can be proven out.  Do the numbers work?  Well, that remains an imponderable. 

Still, the idea of being able to tap all that oil in all those oilsands is tantalizing.  If the extraction technique can scale up and it can be low-cost, then it becomes a serious blockbuster.  Hey, nature of the oil industry!

Edited October 29, 2019 by Jan van Eck
typing error

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

Ukraine  

Was Hunter Biden involved?

No matter, it just seems to be such a strange thing coming out of the blue. The tar sands haven't been very competitive lately . . . at least in Canada, and maybe that's the dispositive reason why this Canadian group in in Utah. 

To blend at the source is a novel idea. Lots of kerogen in Utah. From the Uinta all the way into Parachute. My guess would be that the region where several grades of feedstock oil come together would be quite small.

 

[Jabbar + 465]

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

Looks like Petroteq, the very small company using technology developed by Canadian oilmen and financed by a somewhat opaque oil deal/distributor in Ukraine, has finally achieved some sales of their oilsands product that they extract using a solvent recovery technique:

"Using oil sands ores mined or extracted from Utah’s Asphalt Ridge area, the Company has the ability – at its Asphalt Ridge facility – to produce a crude oil that can range between a heavier oil and a medium oil in its specific gravity (i.e. an API gravity of 11 to 30 degrees), depending on refiner crude slate requirements and the refined products (i.e. lighter gasolines, medium distillates such as diesel fuels, or heavier oil feedstocks) they plan to produce. In addition, even though the heavy oil and bitumen contained in Asphalt Ridge oil sands deposits have a relatively low sulfur content, the oil produced at the Company’s Asphalt Ridge facility has an even lower sulfur content when compared with WTI crude oil. Finally, the oil produced from the Company’s facility now yields a BS&W content of about .003%, a spec that is almost 40% lower than the BS&W specification required by many of Utah’s refiners, pipelines and custody transfer operations."

https://ir.petroteq.energy/press-releases/detail/335

I think the technology has promise, and might well turn out to be a serious blockbuster.  That said, whether or not this outfit, running on a shoestring, can achieve its audacious goals is yet another matter.  So far, the Ukrainian who has installed himself as the "President" seems to have engaged in financing contributions that do not inspire confidence. He has sold himself shares plus warrants for more shares, all at a discount to market. OK, so companies desperate for cash will do whatever it takes to get to where they need to go.  Meanwhile the Canadians on board have obvious technical expertise, and my guess is that the technology can be proven out.  Do the numbers work?  Well, that remains an imponderable. 

Still, the idea of being able to tap all that oil in all those oilsands is tantalizing.  If the extraction technique can scale up and it can be low-cost, then it becomes a serious blockbuster.  Hey, nature of the oil industry!

Penny Stock 

Pump and Dump

[PE Scott + 563]

2 minutes ago, Jabbar said:

Penny Stock 

Pump and Dump

Lol, you're abrasive just to be abrasive I guess? Why even comment if that's all you have to say?

[Jabbar + 465]

1 hour ago, PE Scott said:

Lol, you're abrasive just to be abrasive I guess? Why even comment if that's all you have to say?

It is . . . what it is .

Anyone that has an opinion that differs from your mutual admiration clique's opinion is abrasive ? Really ?

Discussion and debate of different views is healthy. 

People including employees of Oil Price have been 

Edited October 29, 2019 by Jabbar

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

56 minutes ago, PE Scott said:

Lol, you're abrasive just to be abrasive I guess? Why even comment if that's all you have to say?

I've had dealings with the company, unfortunately Jabbar is correct. 

Never believe a penny stock's press release is my motto. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 hour ago, Ward Smith said:

I've had dealings with the company, unfortunately Jabbar is correct. 

Ward, given that you have had direct dealings, we would delight in learning of how you have formed a negative opinion, assuming that your dealings were not covered by a confidentiality agreement  (or that you business judgment precludes your commenting).  

I would further observe that there are two parallel aspects to a new development in technology, such as here with Petroteq.  One is that the Originators are indeed doing some self-enrichment scheme, intending to inflate the stock price and then abandon it after selling the shares. The second is the underlying technology being developed, and its value independent of the company finances structure.

As to the finances:  I don't see the share value being "pumped," given the extensive potential and actual dilution of the shares and the issuance of those warrants.  the warrant overhang will act as a depressor to the share price as the exercise of those warrants will yield yet further dilution.  Presumably the market will take note of the warrants and discount the share value accordingly, which does not promote a pump and dump. 

As to the technology, it is entirely plausible that the technology itself has substantial promise.  In that case, the ultimate value of the Company may well be so, that it over-rides the initial inflation of share value by the pumpers.  Let us consider the possibility that the technology is sound, that oil can be extracted from oilsands at lower cost, and that the market is out there for the product, as feedstock for refineries in Sarnia for example. Then it becomes a costing game: can that oil, which right now is basically free in the ground, and requiring the costs of removal to establish a base cost, be sold for a sufficient gross margin?  Let us remember that Petroteq and others like it are "price takers," they will have to accept whatever price the market traders will offer for their grade of crude.  Assuming the grade offered has the specs now being postulated, there is a good shot at a decent price level.  Then the difference between WCS and WTI becomes the "additional value" there to be scooped up.  If that differential is large enough, then all bets are off, the technology will survive any exploitation in the initial phases, and become a wide-scale production.  It is a tantalizing possibility. 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

Wait, wait, wait, do they have ties to sleepy uncle Joe from Ukraine days? LOL

From my experience , the technology has potential for growth and actual commercial deployment but what the company is putting out is not very comforting. They are trying to hype up their tech., without providing any substantial tech data to independently verify the results. Maybe they can bring in reputable independent third parties to verify their claims.

I have invested heavily in several technologies/suite of technologies that can and are able to change the viscosity of heavy oil, remove sulphur etc and some of those technologies can be/could be synergistic to oil sands etc, but we havent tried that, as it was not our goal to pursue this.

I have seen several companies bring forth 'solvents & solvent technologies' that worked to an extent and then poof.

I am always open to new innovations and techs and procedures but I have not seen anything on this company that would lead me to have a lot of confidence to invest. I had a couple of our engineers get in touch with them some time ago but the response was not very promising on the direction they were headed to. If they needed equity investment and an extensive experienced team to help them, we were ready.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

1 minute ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Wait, wait, wait, do they have ties to sleepy uncle Joe from Ukraine days? LOL

From my experience , the technology has potential for growth and actual commercial deployment but what the company is putting out is not very comforting. They are trying to hype up their tech., without providing any substantial tech data to independently verify the results. Maybe they can bring in reputable independent third parties to verify their claims.

I have invested heavily in several technologies/suite of technologies that can and are able to change the viscosity of heavy oil, remove sulphur etc and some of those technologies can be/could be synergistic to oil sands etc, but we havent tried that, as it was not our goal to pursue this.

I have seen several companies bring forth 'solvents & solvent technologies' that worked to an extent and then poof.

I am always open to new innovations and techs and procedures but I have not seen anything on this company that would lead me to have a lot of confidence to invest. I had a couple of our engineers get in touch with them some time ago but the response was not very promising on the direction they were headed to. If they needed equity investment and an extensive experienced team to help them, we were ready. We can also provide very feasible terms of funding for further development and provide production based funding.

Interesting to see how they actually market their capabilities and technology and process and where they are within the next 6 months.

.

[Jabbar + 465]

1 hour ago, Jan van Eck said:

Ward, given that you have had direct dealings, we would delight in learning of how you have formed a negative opinion

Jan van Eck

The Oil Price website has written numerous articles on this dry oil sands technology startup ALONG WITH A SEC DISCLOSURE DISCLAIMER THAT SOME EMPLOYEES OWN SHARES.

In the name of FULL DISCLOSURE do you currently own any shares of this Penny Stock ?

Edited October 29, 2019 by Jabbar

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, Jabbar said:

Jan van Eck

The Oil Price website has written numerous articles on this dry oil sands technology startup ALONG WITH A SEC DISCLOSURE DISCLAIMER THAT SOME EMPLOYEES OWN SHARES.

In the name of FULL DISCLOSURE do you currently own any shares of this Penny Stock ?

Nope.

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

3 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

Interesting to see how they actually market their capabilities and technology and process and where they are within the next 6 months.

Yes, sure will be. we will see how it goes.

[Gerry Maddoux + 3,627]

Utah has always drawn innovative little companies from Canada. I have long been interested in Utah's Paradox Basin, which is chock full of oil but suffers from salt tectonics. EOG was interested for a long while. When there was a panic about lithium, the Paradox became more interesting because it is lithium-rich. That company was MGX, which has gone straight downhill. Developing oil viscosity/grade has promoted a global business in blending. It has by its sheer definition also made for a confusing time: for example, the IMO-2020 deal is going from 3.5% bunker fuel to <0.5%, which will prevent the release of a lot of sulfur oxides. That's a good thing, right? On the other hand, someone with a good grounding in volcanism recently posted that a medium-sized volcanic eruption will spew particles into the stratosphere, many of which carry sulfur oxides, and this actually shields the earth from the sun's rays and cools the earth. We're in an age of propaganda--maybe we've always been in such an age--and it is important to watch and learn. From a purely selfish standpoint, I wonder if the US won't more or less eliminate Saudi Arabia from the American import stream, as we may have all the sour and medium-grade oil feedstock that we need from domestic sources. The Saudis have to be thinking the same thing. When FDR met with the old Saudi king on an American destroyer in the Suez Canal in 1945 and offered him protection in return for unlimited purchase of oil, none of this stuff was even remotely feasible. Sixty-five years later, the KSA is becoming irrelevant, in part, and they're not reacting fast enough--the New World of oil and gas is changing at warp speed. And I'm not speaking entirely of shale. I personally think conventional wells like Ring Energy is drilling into the San Andrus, or the ones that Rich Kinder is drilling near Pecos, are the new new. Cheap drill, gentle frac, quick payout, amenable to later conversion to a horizontal. A good domestic source of sour oil is not a bad asset, right now, especially if it can be attenuated.

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

5 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

Ward, given that you have had direct dealings, we would delight in learning of how you have formed a negative opinion, assuming that your dealings were not covered by a confidentiality agreement  (or that you business judgment precludes your commenting).  

I would further observe that there are two parallel aspects to a new development in technology, such as here with Petroteq.  One is that the Originators are indeed doing some self-enrichment scheme, intending to inflate the stock price and then abandon it after selling the shares. The second is the underlying technology being developed, and its value independent of the company finances structure.

As to the finances:  I don't see the share value being "pumped," given the extensive potential and actual dilution of the shares and the issuance of those warrants.  the warrant overhang will act as a depressor to the share price as the exercise of those warrants will yield yet further dilution.  Presumably the market will take note of the warrants and discount the share value accordingly, which does not promote a pump and dump. 

As to the technology, it is entirely plausible that the technology itself has substantial promise.  In that case, the ultimate value of the Company may well be so, that it over-rides the initial inflation of share value by the pumpers.  Let us consider the possibility that the technology is sound, that oil can be extracted from oilsands at lower cost, and that the market is out there for the product, as feedstock for refineries in Sarnia for example. Then it becomes a costing game: can that oil, which right now is basically free in the ground, and requiring the costs of removal to establish a base cost, be sold for a sufficient gross margin?  Let us remember that Petroteq and others like it are "price takers," they will have to accept whatever price the market traders will offer for their grade of crude.  Assuming the grade offered has the specs now being postulated, there is a good shot at a decent price level.  Then the difference between WCS and WTI becomes the "additional value" there to be scooped up.  If that differential is large enough, then all bets are off, the technology will survive any exploitation in the initial phases, and become a wide-scale production.  It is a tantalizing possibility. 

Started to reply, then checked the NDA. Thought it would have expired by now but it hasn't. 

Won't talk about them, but notice similarities to This company

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

19 minutes ago, Ward Smith said:

Started to reply, then checked the NDA. Thought it would have expired by now but it hasn't. 

Won't talk about them, but notice similarities to This company

Fascinating!  

Looks like the predecessor in the general idea plain flat ran out of cash.  Interesting that the backers were unwilling to put up the additional $2 million after going as far as they did.  That would lend to speculation that the concept is not commercially viable. 

What this really needs is a very rich Prince, someone with lots and lots of cash, and ready to be the ultimate speculator.  Jeff Bezos, are you reading this? 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

6 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Fascinating!  

Looks like the predecessor in the general idea plain flat ran out of cash.  Interesting that the backers were unwilling to put up the additional $2 million after going as far as they did.  That would lend to speculation that the concept is not commercially viable. 

What this really needs is a very rich Prince, someone with lots and lots of cash, and ready to be the ultimate speculator.  Jeff Bezos, are you reading this? 

The problem lies in the solvent (more than likely), it is very expensive and , the post treatment recovery of the solvent is very low and the effectiveness of the solvent on any given batch of the oil sand is also very low, which probably makes an expensive cost of a barrel of liquid oil extracted.

It seems that PretoTeq and the company that Ward gave the link to have/share the same issues with the solvent and or the process.

I get hundreds of chemtech investment offers and have invested in many over the years and my experience is that maybe 1 out of 100 is viable commercially. I do a lot of intensive and extensive due diligence and pick the ones that past the various criteria.

Sometimes we can use the synergies of different techs and it gives us what we want and or modify things around to give is what we want.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, ceo_energemsier said:

It seems that PretoTeq and the company that Ward gave the link to have/share the same issues with the solvent and or the process.

I would hazard a guess that, eventually, someone is going to fine-tune this process and get it to work, and be able to scale it.  The question is:  who, and when. 

It is typical of new concepts that money is burned until the input components are finally figured out. the gamble is: can you do it before the cash runs out?  And, if you outlast the cash burn, will the final market price of crude be high enough to maintain a profit on operations?  And therein lies the rub: the technique may well end up perfected, but then the crash in oil prices ironically wrecks the enterprise, because you cannot sell the stuff! 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

I would mention one other element that I find discouraging.  This latest press release from Petroteq recites that the finished crude will have specifications allowing it to run "straight" as low-sulfur bunker in ocean freighter engines.  Yet, right now there is an abundance of LS bunker;  Singapore alone has some 30 tankers filled with bunker just idling in the port, waiting for IMO 2020 to kick in, in January. 

Why would you boast that you had this great compatible crude/bunker ready to go sell, when the market is currently flooded with the stuff?  And your product still requires rail transport to some bunkering port?   Can you really rail oil product for less than $10 a barrel?  Probably not. 

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

19 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

I would hazard a guess that, eventually, someone is going to fine-tune this process and get it to work, and be able to scale it.  The question is:  who, and when. 

It is typical of new concepts that money is burned until the input components are finally figured out. the gamble is: can you do it before the cash runs out?  And, if you outlast the cash burn, will the final market price of crude be high enough to maintain a profit on operations?  And therein lies the rub: the technique may well end up perfected, but then the crash in oil prices ironically wrecks the enterprise, because you cannot sell the stuff! 

True, but sometimes fine tuning does not work out well, if it has a lot of issues to begin with, but always there is a possibility that it can be combined with another product procedure to make it work. But then again yes @ what cost.

I have had several chemtechs and non chemtechs that when combined with another tech or process worked wonderfully and gave amazing results in the technical capabilities and commercial revenues and profits.

The one main driving factor is the price of the oil  and the demand and the logistics.

If the cost of production and process is low enough and the margins to the crude price is good enough, logistical hurdles can be overcome .

 

IMO2020 is throwing a lot of companies and people in for a loop. You are correct that there is more than enough floating storage of low sulphur fuels around in the major hubs and a lot of companies are ready to go with the compliance.