Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Plastic2Oil, Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: scion who wrote (31)	3/4/2010 9:26:11 PM
From: scion	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 621

JBII - JBII.OB one to watch for shorting. 01/04/2010 07:04 PM by avoidthegarbage Was looking at JBII awhile back when it was around $1 and decided to pass on it going long. The reasons were many including not thinking this company can do anything close to what many are speculating it can do with plastic to oil financially. I personally feel their customers could do better financially just selling the plastic to a recycler than convert it to oil. I'll get to that later. There are many plastic to oil firms already working but I can't find a single one that is self-sufficient highly profitable. Many of them claim to be able to produce about 1 liter of oil/liquid hydrocarbons from 1 kilogram of plastic. They then look to sell the liquid portion and use the gas portion to feed the energy needs of the facility/processor. JBII is claiming it can do pretty much the same thing as these nonprofitable companies(produce about 1 liter of oil per kg of plastic). But JBII is also restricting itself to 'cleaner' plastics in doing so, so I don't see any major advantage they have to unprofitable competition. In fact this IMO is a big disadvantage for JBII's customers since the plastic would have to be sorted beforehand and that's expensive. There's a catch to P2O in general IMO. There are 'clean' plastics and 'dirty' plastics in the process. the dirty plastics contain elements that may easily react to form acids when plastic is reverted back to more basic polymers (example PVC with chlorine) and/or are lower in efficiency of converting back to liquid hydrocarbons (example PET plastics- liquid hydrocarbon yield is low). So any kind of plastic to energy using these 'dirty' plastics containing chlorine and/or bromine has to deal with potential high corrosion probs IMO so usually these halogen elements need to be separated out from the finished liquid product for companies using these dirty plastics. The advantage a plastic to fuel firm has with accepting these 'dirty' plastics is it helps eliminate a very costly step at landfills/places of plastic collection and that is not doing sorting of plastics into difft categories. If a plastic to oil firm accepts all plastics, there is the big time and cost saving to landfills of not having to manually sort all that plastic. But JBII is not able to accept all plastics apparently for this so landfills signing up for a JBII processor will still be stuck having to dispose of or recycle much plastic including PET (like beverage bottels), PVC (like for plumbing in houses), and bromium-containig plastics such as household plastic appliances and insulative cover for wiring- (bromium is used as a flame retardant and, like chlorine in PVC, is a halogen so very reactive to form acid compounds such as bromic acid ) IMO. Not only that, the landfills will have to do the expensive, time-consuming sorting of the plastic to ensure the above plastics do not contaminate the potential liquid hydrocarbon mixture. So IMO JBII is hitting the landfills negatively in two ways compared to some competition. One, only certain plastics will be accepted (chemically 'cleaner' plastics like HDPE, LDPE, PS, PP) so landfills will still have much plastic to be disposed of (the 'dirtier' plastics). Two, sorting still has to happen to ensure the right kind of plastics are used. JBII has made the choice and said they will not include such plastics as PVC and PET. So this leads me to wonder what is their advantage over companies that are already proving not to be profitable with similar conversion plastic to liquid hydrocarbon results? Now let's look at what a landfill might fetch for recycled 'clean' plastic like HDPE. For instance, check this page: polychange.com For HDPE I saw one of the cheaper buyers at $300/ metric ton. That's $300/2204 lbs. That's about 13.6 cents a pound. With 160 kg plastic for 1 barrel oil ( 1 barrel oil = 42 gallons= about 160 liters and per JBII they are doing about 1 liter liquid fuel per 1 kg plastic so 160 liters for 1 barrel oil = about 160 kg plastic per barrel) we get $.136 cents/lbs x x 2.2 lbs/kg x 160 kg = about $48/bbl This is a BUYER for plastic not a seller, so considering other buyers were willing to pay more I would think a landfill might be able to fetch more by recycling HDPE. There were other buyers willing to pay around 20 cents/pound (and more) for used recycled HDPE. If a landfill can get 20 cents per pound for their sorted HDPE, by just recycling it looks like they could get 20 cents/lbs x 2.2 lbs/kg x 1kg/1 liter liquid fuel x 160 liters liquid fuel /barrel liquid fuel= $70 equivalent per barrel! Why would a landfill go thru all the fuss/expense of handling/storing oil (liability?), buying a processor, maintaining the equipment, paying for its operation/upkeep, and paying a royalty to JBII and have all those charges AFTER getting $70/ barrel roughly from a refiner when they could clear $70 just by handing off the plastic to a recycler ? The landfills doing Plastic to oil after all those charges would likely only clear a fraction of the $70 IMO... Plus it was stated that it costs about 410/barrel to process. So in this example the landfill would start at $60/barrel then deduct upkeep expense, payment for processor and chemicals, pay for royalty, payment for temporary storage of fuel and pay potential liability costs associated with keeping fuel on property. What would the landfill pocket after all these costs? $30/ barrel? $20? I don't know. But $70 per barrel asound way better than 430 per barrel. Especially considering how easy selling recycled plastic would be compared to trying to convert plastic to oil. But I do know that in this example it would make a lot of sense to avoid plastic to oil altogether and stick with the money from recycling. All that expense just to get a refiner to pay them about the same a plastic recycler would pay upfront in this example? And if sorted into color (shows the value in sorting) a plastic recycler would be willing to pay over 30 cents/pound, a 50%+ markup for the extra step of sorting by color. Now this is just all my opinion and I have personally never shorted an individual stock. I am not short nor long JBII but when it moves to the AMEX I think it might be the first company I short. The risks to shorting it are IMO- it has a lot of momentum and rules now broker can make you cover your short at any time as I understand. The 'technology' although I don't think it is worth much, green tech has a lot of momo to it and there may be some dumb money that buys up the technology. All just IMO only and I'm a rather unsophisticated investor so take it for what you want out of it plus do your own DD to verify or refute anything I've mentioned. Good luck. shortscreen.com

To: scion who wrote (31)	3/4/2010 9:42:42 PM
From: scion	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 621

Feedstock Recycling of Plastics to Liquid Fuel Using Zeolite Y Catalysts GMSARN International Conference on Sustainable Development: Issues and Prospects for the GMS 12-14 Nov. 2008 dl.gmseenet.org Waste plastics can be reused as valuable resources according to the treatment technologies. The mechanical recycles for the production using the same material can be recommended as a desirable technology because this makes no more pollution problems. But it is very difficult to separate various waste plastics with dust and metals into one-component raw material which can be recycled without any problems. So thermal recycle technologies are the objects of interest used as alternatives for the mechanical recycle technologies. In these technologies, pyrolysis may be favorably used for oil and monomer recovery from waste plastics. Also, this technology has more advantages than combustion technology in the view of discharging less pollutant. Especially, it can be more attractive than any other technologies because it is able to make light oil to be directly used for the industrial fuel. But, all kinds of plastics attributed to the series of thermoplastics are not easily converted into oil product by pyrolysis. To pyrolyze plastics such as polyethylene (PE) and polypropylene (PP) of olefin series, the catalysts with high cracking property are needed. Recycling is one of the three ways for utilization and minimalization of the huge amount of wastes. The others are landfilling and incineration with or without energy recovery. Neither landfilling nor incineration can solve the growing problem of huge amount of wastes, e.g. directives exist to maximalize the mass of the deponable wastes. In 2005 it will be 40% of the total amount of wastes arisen in 1993. End gases with high content of toxic and handful compounds can be arisen in case of incineration, therefore incinerators need special filter system with high efficiency which can only decrease their concentration, but not eliminate. The slug of incineration containing toxic ash as well can also cause environmental problems. Several methods have been suggested for solving the problem of waste plastics, but some of them are still in their initial stages, or produce further environmental pollution. One of the prospective ways of the utilization of the waste polymers is chemical (thermal) treatment which is named tertiary recycling in the literature- where long alkyl chains are broken into a mixture of lighter hydrocarbons. Further utilization of these hydrocarbons has also not been solved yet. One possibility of their utilization is fuel like application or blending in fuel as mixing components. Many researches study their application as fuel. This hydrocarbon mixture having high olefin content can be saturated with hydrogen, and perhaps isomerized by the use of catalysts. These steps result in a high quality synthetic diesel fuel, with high cetane number, and theoretically these fuels are free from sulphur, nitrogen and metals. The treatment might be only thermal or catalytic. Cracking reactions are endothermic, and have need energy. The required heat and temperature can be reduced with catalysts, but the disposal and the activation loss or regeneration of the catalysts could cause some problems. [...] Catalytic Activities of Zeolite Y The cracking process was carried out by using the prepared zeolite Y as catalyst at the temperature of 232-343 °C for 3 hours. The cracking process was done by using the catalyst to recycled polyethylene plastic ratio of 1:10 and the cracking conditions are shown in Table 5. dl.gmseenet.org