Congrats to yourself and all ECT holders for the return and increase in value of your stock over this past week, and I hope for all new holders that we can continue to see more rises and sustained support at the higher levels moving forward.
The title of this thread - "cred thread 1" caught my attention, so I trust you won't mind me adding comment to what I consider was an informative post coming from a strong supporter of ECT and it's technology.
I won't claim to know much about ECT's capabilities for delivering technologies with environmental and commercial benefits, because I in fact know very little about the processes involved with Coldry or Matmor technologies, however I just wanted to throw a couple of points out there to encourage some balanced discussion.
In the closing comments of your post you said, "The Company has never been in better hands", however you also posted the following Post: 6915292 on 07/07/11 which stated:
"Next Mon - ECT will have 2 directors. Carter and Davies.
Mike seems like a great addition.
Fact is - neither have the technical Coldry/Matmor background to convince anyone - let alone a financier to back the DFT... especially in the short term - which obviously ECT need.
Carter has been a director for years - but holds ZERO shares. What does that tell you? Yet he now holds the reigns....for now... Not healthy.
A measure of a directors worth is his ability to generate news flow . Plenty of holders here have vented at the constant lack of news flow.
I believe that situation will not change unless Kos is appointed as a Director effective immediately.
Big statement - but I'm utterly convinced thats the ONLY way forward if s/holders want ESI to exist as a listed coy and the techs are to be commercialised." ___
15 August 2011 Resignation of Chief Executive "Environmental Clean Technologies Limited wishes to advise the resignation of Chief Executive, Mr. Kos Galtos, effective 15 August 2011.
Mr. Galtos has advised the company of his desire to pursue other interests. The Board of ECT acknowledges the efforts and contribution of Mr. Galtos and extends its best wishes for future endeavours." ___
Imo, Kos was ECT - he put his heart and soul into this company, so has your own opinion changed on this matter since posting your former opinion back in 2011? Not having a dig - just interested in your thoughts on this.
I also note on Megagene79 top rated post on April 6 it states, "That was my trigger point to jump on board. Also the fact that the company was taking shareholders out to their pilot plant for demos", however these regular onsite "demos" for s/holders have been conducted since Kos started them back in 2009. ___
"Tincom have NOT changed their mind...they had 2+ years to explore OTHER techs yet they still hold the same opinion!"
Correct, however Tincom failed to meet its obligations on more than one occasion, and this was the reason ECT decided to terminate the agreement in 2011:
31 May 2011 “While Tincom have demonstrated their confidence in the marketability of Coldry, the Directors of ECT no longer have confidence in Tincom’s ability to deliver funding or the technical requirements for the Loy Yang Project. ECT had the option to further extend the time for satisfaction of conditions under the Joint Venture Agreement but has decided not to do so. It is now over 2 years since we commenced discussions with Tincom (early 2009), and progress towards establishment of the project has been unacceptably slow." ~ Termination of Tincom Joint Venture - 31/05/2011 ___
05 July 2011 Victoria Coldry Pty Ltd / Tincom "In June 2009, ECT signed a Coordination Agreement with Tincom of Vietnam. This set out the path towards the construction of an initial 2Mtpa Coldry facility, expanding to 20Mtpa over the first decade of its operation. Within that Coordination Agreement and subsequent agreements, Tincom made various commitments to project advancement. This culminated in the signing of a formal Joint Venture Agreement13 (JVA), despite lengthy delays. In this JVA, Tincom again committed to meeting certain obligations to establish material progress for the Coldry project.
On 30 May 2011, Tincom again failed to meet its obligations, despite further extensions on key elements of the agreements. As such, the JVA was terminated.
ECT is determined to commercialise our Coldry technology and to establish our first commercial scale-up via a project. The key remaining aspects of this are our Design for Tender engineering package (DFT), and our application testing or Test Burn that we are completing with Datang. We believe meaningful advancement in concert with reliable partners will enhance shareholder value." ~ Shareholder Update - Coldry Technology
What's changed - Have the new board restored confidence in Tincom, where previous management had lost theirs? ___
I'm not a greenie, nor am I particularly interested in the whole CO2 emissions debate - If the truth be known, I personally see it as nothing more than a politically motivated movement - The "clean energy debate" that is, not global warming - but these topics are best left to other forum threads imo.
What is best for investors of ECT imo, is Government support, which as reported more recently does appear to be picking up the pace with Victoria's Baillieu government.
What maybe worthy of continued discussion is whether or not the actions of green environmental groups such as Environment Victoria (EV) will have much of a detrimental impact on ECT's future Coldry developments moving forward?
Imho, probably not, but I also provide the following arguments from both sides of the coin for the benefit of all newbies to ESI, including comments left on the Environment Victoria's blog site from HC members supportive of ECT posted back in 2010:
Baillieu set to boost brown coal Sun Herald - 20 March 2012
"THE Baillieu government is preparing a campaign to promote development of Victoria's brown coal reserves, as it confirms plans to open up new coal allocations for industry.
The Age has seen a draft cabinet submission outlining the communications strategy and proposals for a tender for new allocations of Latrobe Valley brown coal expected to be finalised by the middle of next year.
The draft submission says one of the objectives of the communications effort will be to ''address community concerns about the ongoing use of brown coal in a carbon-constrained future".
It also aims to "increase industry interest in participating in the proposed allocation of brown coal".
Victoria's brown coal-fired power industry has become the focus of widespread environmental campaigns due to its high carbon emissions and contribution to global warming.
Environment Victoria's Mark Wakeham hit out at the strategy.
"Given the established link between coal and climate change, green-washing coal is completely inappropriate and unacceptable. It is akin to a taxpayer-funded campaign promoting the tobacco industry," Mr Wakeham said. "The document confirms that the Baillieu government plans to proceed with a coal allocation despite the fact that past coal allocations have completely failed and that releasing billions of tonnes of polluting coal would be a climate disaster." ~ Baillieu set to boost brown coal - 20 March 2012 ___
Coldry plan to prop up brown coal? MEDIA RELEASE - Friday June 12, 2009
Coldry and plan to prop up brown coal?
"Friends of the Earth say plans by Environmental Clean Technologies (ECT) to build a Coldry pellet plant, which will essentially bake brown coal to the water level of black coal, is a desperate attempt to prop up an industry that is environmentally and economically unviable.
Based upon ECT's limited numbers, the efficiency of this plant would be 50% at best, with two tonnes of brown coal only making a tonne or so of brown coal pellets. The energy, resources and costs associated with this process will make such pellets virtually unsellable outside of Victoria, ruling out an export market said Louise Morris, Friends of the Earth, Climate and Coal Campaigner.
I think serious questions need to be asked as to whether this pitch by ECT is a real one. ECT are yet to commit to a Coldry plant in the Latrobe Valley and have yet to secure an energy partner to power the plant.
Beyond those questions we need to clear up if there is any link between ECT's Coldry proposal and the floundering HRL, IDGCC coal fire power plant - that also claims to be able to dry brown coal into so-called ‘clean coal, said Ms Morris
The HRL Ltd proposal was similarly promoted as a jobs provider for the Latrobe Valley, which were dramatically scaled back when Chinese partner, Harbin Electricity, revealed the construction would take place in China. It has also been plagued by uncertainty on location, job numbers, costs and red tape.
The future lies in renewable energy, which governments and industry the world over recognise as the job rich and viable energy future we need. By continuing to tie Victoria and the Latrobe Valley to the dinosaur that is brown coal we are letting the opportunity to transition to a suit of renewable energy sources pass us by.
In perusing smoke and mirror ventures such as the HRL or Coldry proposals we are failing to embrace proven renewable technologies and committing ourselves to a losing strategy with coal� concluded Ms Morris." ~ Coldry plan to prop up brown coal - 12 June 2009 ___
Gillards first climate test could be a failure
How about she step up and take control of climate policy
"This morning we awoke to the bad news that the federal government was supporting a deal by company ‘Environmental Clean Technologies’ to export up to 20 million tonnes of brown coal a year from Victoria to Vietnam.
It’s a pretty bad first move for our new Prime Minister Julia Gillard, who only yesterday assured the community that her government would take climate change seriously. Yet there they were today ready to sign up for millions of tonnes of greenhouse pollution, increasing coal dependence in the developing world, and continued reliance on polluting coal in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley.
Brown coal is the dirtiest form of energy available. The company is pretending that their product will be clean because they intend to dry the coal before exporting it, meaning that it will still be as polluting as black coal!!! Coal simply isn’t clean, just like cigarettes simply aren’t healthy.
Along with a host of other green groups, we hastily pulled together a rally out the front of the signing at the Langham Hotel on Southbank. With really short notice and in the pouring rain we pulled together nearly 50 people for a vocal action. Resources Minister Simon Crean certainly got a rousing welcome, and we made it clear to the awaiting media that this was the first key test for our new PM on climate.
We’re calling on Prime Minister Gillard to step up and take control of climate policy by withdrawing the federal government’s support for a brown coal export industry in Victoria. And with the strong support from the media we’ve received thus far, coupled with a great short-notice turnout from the community, we hope she’ll be listening... after all, we know what happened to the last four leaders who failed to deliver on climate change." ___
A couple of 'for' and 'against' comments posted in reply to the article above:
CAPITAL FUNDING FOR CLEANER ALTERNATIVE ENERGY/COLDRY? ~ Mon, 28/06/2010 - 18:59 — Anonymous
"The recent negative comments regarding Coldry by environment victoria need to be revised. The proposed alternatives of wind ,solar ,and others on a world scale would require billions of dollars of investment capital,this is where your position does not have solid foundations moving forward.
In the most polluting countries that use coal, india ,China ,US and Australia, they are going to continue to use Cheap source of energy, namely BROWN COAL. Giving these countries a cleaner alternative in CONJUNTION with the alternatives you propose is a start. Irrespective of what you or i say these countries will continue to use brown coal because financially that is what is affordable energy at the present time.
WHOLISTIC APPROACH, clean the most polluting form of energy and recieve drinkable water that is an essential, while working on the renewables. What has EV done recently to stop the burning of brown coal in its own back yard?" ___
Here's our take on brown coal exports ~ Tuesday 28/06/2010 - 17:24 - Victoria
"There’s been a lot of comments on Environment Victoria’s lack of support for a) creating a brown coal export industry for Victoria and b) coal drying technology. We believe these are totally reasonable and credible positions to have in this time of climate change and recognised urgency to reduce greenhouse emissions.
Here’s a couple of points of clarification:
1) A number of comments have highlighted Environment Victoria’s study which showed we can more than halve Victoria’s emissions by 2020. As we stated at the time (and as it still says on our website here), we modelled all the technologies that the state government had considered at the time, including coal drying. However, we clearly stated that this did not mean that we endorsed all the technologies. Therefore claims that Environment Victoria supports coal drying are incorrect.
2) The report clearly shows that coal drying (if proven to be viable) would make a very small contribution to emissions reductions, primarily because as renewable energy, energy efficiencies and some efficient gas (as a transition fuel) are brought on-line, we can reduce and even replace the use of coal. As the report shows, Victoria’s emissions can be halved without using coal drying technology.
3) We do not support the use of brown coal, including the export of brown coal, because it is a highly polluting source of energy production. Even if greenhouse pollution from brown coal can be reduced via coal drying, it is still far more polluting than existing alternatives such as renewable energy and energy efficiency for example. Exporting brown coal rather than renewable energy technologies to developing countries locks them into a polluting future at a time when all countries need to reduce emissions. Introducing a new brown coal export industry also increases the dependence of the Latrobe Valley on coal, delaying the necessary transition to a clean energy economy for that community and the state.
4) Even if brown coal can be made as polluting as black coal, it is still far from clean. This is not an acceptable solution to our climate problem as it will not allow us to reduce emissions as far or as fast as the science tells us is necessary.
At Environment Victoria we believe we’ve got to get on with the job of a rapid transition to truly green energy technologies if we are going to avoid the worst impacts of climate change. ___
dig deeper for the truth - Sun, 27/06/2010 - 19:07 - Anonymous
"I am well researched on ECT and heavily invested in it. This tech will reduce emissions, here and in emerging economies where brown coal WAS going to be used (now coldry). It will also reduce the drag on our prescious water resource in Vic and elsewhere globally. Dig a bit deeper on this.
We need a mulitude of solutions and this is a legitmate one that should be embraced. We are all different shades of green. btw. I only became aware of this site tonight after reading the hotcopper site (you're not getting good press over there!)It's not just one person or organisation posting here.
Anyway keep protesting - the more people who know about this tech the better for me :-). ___
"EV comments "Hazelwood is the most polluting power station in the country and it's a very good place to start if you want to reduce both Victoria's and Australia's greenhouse gas emissions." Switching it to run on Coldry BCE pellets would be a magnificent start !
"If they replace just 10 per cent of their volume with coldry pellets they would decrease CO2 emissions by five per cent." (Kos Galtos CEO ECT)
Come on EV someone is actually trying to help, realistically we can't do without it but we can make it better and all efforts should be applauded not criticised.
This product will help Australia reduce it's greenhouse emissions immediately without the need for developing a massive renewable energy infrastructure Renewables can and should be phased in over time but fair shake of the sauce bottle this technology can help us reduce emissions immediately. why the negativity and protesting????" ___
ECT-bot: your dirty - Sun, 27/06/2010 - 09:35 - Anonymous
ECT-bot: your dirty technology doesn't replace black coal. It makes brown coal as polluting at black coal. It's nothing more than a bit of theatre; a bit of Al Jolson in blackface, a travelling minstrel show. Good, however, to note that you accept that this process is 'not 100% clean'. That being the case, let's rename your company to acknowledge this mutually agreed fact. I think we'll call you 'Unclean Technology'. And the acronym: UT. Hmm. Bit clumsy. How about: UCNT? Bingo! UCNT. Now, run along to the spin doctors at Monsoon Communications and ask them what to say next. Off you go. Until next time, UCNT!" ___
Misleaded - Sun, 27/06/2010 - 11:51 - Anonymous
"I saw the protest on the news and thought how could Australia be supporting the export of brown coal to Vietnam?? After looking into this trade deal further I feel I have been misleaded by the protesters and the media. This trade deal is actually about exporting a substance called 'Coldry'. I'm not sure if it's proven but it apparently reduces emissions by up to 30% compared to brown coal in generating electricity.
I then thought to myself, why would EV be protesting against a deal that could potentially reduce emissions?? The only answer I could come up with is that this was more about politics than the export deal itself, or the protesters were unaware of what they were protesting. There is no way I will vote Labour or the Coalition in the next election. My vote was going to the greens, but now I'm not sure of that either.
No-one likes to be misleaded, the truth will always come out eventualy!" ___
"@Coal Protest: I took your advice and looked into the Coldry process. The most useful source was your (yes, your) own webpage: http://www.ectltd.com.au/coldry/coldry-overview. The key point: the Coldry process produces a 'black coal equivalent'. Well, thank heavens for that. Now that we've saved the planet from itself, I can go shopping. Or not. Because as I understand it, until you guys come up with a way to excuse the Earth from the second law of thermodynamics, we have to stop using fossil fuels. Whether that's brown coal, black coal or your so-called black coal equivalent, it has to stay in the ground. The burning of any fossil fuel will only add to the greenhouse emissions in the atmosphere and therefore to the temperature of the planet and the acidity of the oceans. As EV and the fifty switched-on protesters and countless others know, there is a direct correlation between greenhouse emissions and the planet's rising temperatures. Here's a link to verified data that shows just that: http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-basics/facts_and_figures
So: more greenhouse emissions, more global warming. Fossil fuels need to stay in the ground. The Earth's energy needs must be met by renewables now. There is no place and no future for your dehydrated brown coal bikkies. In fact, I think you should make a nice cup of tea for yourself and dip your wrinkled, lignite munchies in it. Yum. And while you chew on that savoury delight you could do no worse than read the ACCC's guidelines on green marketing claims, right here:http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/815763 ___
So how does that position reconcile with "Turning it Around - Sun, 27/06/2010 - 21:49 - Anonymous
"Pretty strong words Mark - just wondering how you reconcile your position with EV's strategy for reducing emission by 50% by 2020 as described in "Turning it Around"?
The emissions will not drop to zero by themselves - individuals and large enterprises of all descriptions will need to work very hard to bring them down. I happen to be quite familiar with the laws of physics and so far I have seen noone in this discussion deny those laws or climate change - quite the opposite: people who are supporting ECTL have been investing in the company (a very risky investment I might add - many of these people could have lost a great deal of money) and doing the best to see Coal Drying technology become a reality.
This technology (or others like it) are an essential part of the EV strategy to get to 50% by 2020. I applaud EV policy for being science driven and I think "Turning it Around" is a serious piece of work that we should strive to achieve - one wedge at a time.
I suggest you stop picking a fight and reread the paper and perhaps thank some of these people who have propped up this company to the point where it may actually get to the point of being able to assist generators in complying with the EV strategy. Without these people we will never get to a fully renewable future."
JI
"PS I know some of the pro-ECTL posters personally and happen to know that they (like myself) also have investments in renewable companies - the Geothermal and Solar companies that will build the technology that we are all hoping is the endpoint of this arc. Cut them a break - in many cases they are personally funding the future you are striving for."
(20min delay)