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.

Pastimes : Plastics to Oil - Pyrolysis and Secret Catalysts and Alterna -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steady_on who wrote (18550)	2/8/2012 3:08:30 PM
From: SteveF	Respond to of 53574

It wasn't the permit application that DEC took issue with but certain aspects of the design. Who told you that? Do you believe Environmental Engineers (chemists) are qualified to re-design industrial machinery that a company just spent $30 million research/developing? By what legal right and/or mandate do they have to do so when emissions were their sole raison d'etre relative to JBI? The only thing I can plausibly imagine that could have occurred that may vaguely match your description of DEC's involvement might be safety concerns over the Donghe processor that had to be remedied before the DEC would even allow their staff to inspect/test. That would explain the radical redesign from the unit toured at the 2010 AGM being misrepresented to those investors as "just days away from permitting and 24/7 production" to it's present two-story incarnation. That, and maybe when the DEC told JB "You guys know you need a solid waste permit too, right?" P.S. "Took issue" is a great spin for "this heap doesn't even qualify for consideration", by the way.