Fair enough John, but you must also realize that it's precisely this information vacuum which serves to drive this stock right now. Full disclosure of the 'facts' may not be in the best interests of the company at this time. We will see what this 'imminent' news release brings....
Meanwhile, this is an excerpt from a recent industry review article on Fischer Tropsch technology written by a senior analyst at Howard Weil (of course, all OILS investors know who THEY are):
"According to Rocco A. Fiato, Senior Engineering Associate with Exxon, Exxon has been involved in numerous patent interference actions with several companies including Shell—14 times in Europe over patent issues relating to FT in which Exxon prevailed 14 times. Exxon has also brought a suit, filed March 26, 1998, against the United States of America in the United States Court of Federal Appeals. Exxon alleges in this suit that the U.S., "through its Department of Energy…and DOEs authorized contractors and subcontractors, has used Exxon's patented [AGC-21] technology to make liquid hydrocarbons and further the economic interests of Exxon's competitors."
In summary, the background of this suit is that the DOE has an FT research facility at La Porte, Texas and DOE authorized Shell Synthetic Fuels, Inc., an operating unit of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies and Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., and others to "engage in gas-to-liquids conversion…using processes and techniques patented by Exxon."
The two specific patents Exxon alleges were infringed were patent No. 5,348,982 entitled "Slurry Bubble Column" and patent No. 5,292,705 entitled "Activation of Hydrocarbon Synthesis Catalyst." Exxon also says in the suit that perhaps more of its patents were infringed.
While Exxon will not generally comment on the specifics of pending legal actions, what we have been able to discern by talking to various industry players is that Exxon is seeking to protect its rights to its cobalt catalyst used in a slurry reactor.
While we have not been able to confirm this with Exxon, what we have been told by others in the FT field is that Exxon originally filed patent applications in Europe covering use of a slurry reactor and both cobalt and iron catalysts. While Exxon was granted the patents with respect to cobalt and the slurry reactor, it was denied the patent with respect to an iron catalyst and a slurry reactor. Further, when Exxon filed its patents in the United States, it did not receive patent protection on the use of an iron catalyst in a slurry reactor" (end)
If they don't use cobalt (ask SYNM how things are going with XON), then they must be using iron. Fine....let's then see what Sasol and/or TX/RNTK say when OILS begins construction on an iron slurry reactor.
Now....who wants to talk about front ends? |
