Saturday, November 27, 2010

tykundegex comments on why waste incinerators won't want to see P2O proliferate

Because MSW commonly has a lot plastic content. During incineration, plastic generates a lot of energy (more than most other things in MSW). However if the plastic is converted into fuel along the lines of the efficiency claimed by JBI, you can recover 2x more energy from it (see a prior post of mine from ages ago with figures taken from the UK Royal Society of Chemistry April 2009 "Plastic waste as a fuel"), here: http://pubs.rsc.org/en/Content/ArticleLanding/2009/EE/b908135f

That would explain why any company doing incineration of waste doesn't want the plastic removed from the mix (and it's not just household food packaging we're talking about), as it would affect their energy output.

From an environmental standpoint (and also a commercial standpoint), P2O is a far better use of plastic waste than incineration: C02, NOx, and dioxins are all avoided with P2O.

That's what makes P2O so compelling -- it's not only far more profitable than other waste-to-energy systems, it's also far more environmentally friendly. Finally a green solution that is not at odds with a capitalist society! That's gotta be a first, no?

Tykün

Friday, November 26, 2010

Steady_T responds to skeptics' negative comments & provides P2O production calculations

Why do you keep posting items that are not related to JBII, but are related to somebody else's process.

In the second line of that post the process description says that the process use very high temperatures. We already know from previous statements by the company that the JBII process uses a much lower temperature than other pyrolysis processes.

Therefore that post is unrelated to JBII's process and this board.

You keep posting this unrelated stuff on the JBII board.

Taylor is burning garbage.

JBII is running an enclosed P2O processor. There is NO COMBUSTION of plastic. Plastic is decomposed in an anaerobic environment into it's original hydrocarbons.

You also may want to look up the COMBUST. More useless information that doesn't apply to JBI.

Skeptic's Quote: To obtain a BUD, the petitioner must show consistency with solid waste regulations. BUDs to combust materials such as paper, plastic, etc., are not usually granted since these materials are readily recyclable (see Appendix A for a more complete discussion of the BUD process).

http://www.dec.ny.gov/chemical/31238.html

Taylor's problems are unrelated to JBI's situation. I did some calculations some time back about how much space 20 tons of plastic would take. Turned out not to be that much.

I think that most people would crush the air out of the bottles before shipping them but that is an individual decision.

Many plastic bottles are made of PET plastic which is the type that is most likely to be recycled. As PP points out it is not likely to be in the input stream to JBII because of the value as a recycled plastic. Of course JB has said that he doesn't want or expect much PET plastic in the input stream.

Here are the calculations I posted for the benefit of another poster, you may have missed them.

Plastic has a density of .35 to .45 lbs/cu in.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_density_of_plastic

20 tons = 40000 lbs

40000 / .4 lbs/cu in =10000 cu in.

1 cu ft = 1728 cu in

100000 /1728 = 57 cu ft.

Lets assume the plastic is bundled loosely and double that 57 cu ft to 114 cu ft.

That is a cube 4.9 ft on a side. One truck load a day should do it.

One truck a day in and per your calculation $7560/day of fuel out. Sounds like a money making deal to me.

$7560 / day time 5 days a week and 50 weeks /yr = $1,890,000 / YR
INCOME.

You may ROFLMAO at that kind of money, but I take that kinda of revenues seriously.

There's none so blind as he who will not see.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Steady_T & P51-D comment on P2O air permit approval

Steady_T states:
Talked to DEC. Larry Sitzman. Says that application is in and has been reviewed. There are now discussions going on between DEC and JBI about how much of the material in the application will classified as confidential / trade secret. When that is resolved the permit will be acted upon.

This is Larry's last week in the Reg 9 office. He goes to Albany to assume larger responsibilities. As I understood it he will be over Air Compliance state wide.

He also said that he expected the Solid Waste people in Albany to decide about BUD/SW requirements this week.

Things are moving forward.

P51-D says:
That's consistant with what I have discussed with them and heard / confirmed through others....we're on solid ground with the DEC, and on the brink of approval for JBI.

Saturday, November 20, 2010

techisbest opines on known & unknown facts about JBII's P2O


Firing up the lawnmower with JBII gasoline!

My unrehearsed video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1XdgRJ1CSg

First of all, JBII will not initially be selling to a refinery. The diesel and gasoline do not need "refinement." They are refined coming directly from the P2O processor. They are more pure than what comes from crude. Less sulphur.

They would need some "blending" to be sold at a pump.

Initially JBII diesel and gasoline will be sold back to the companies that are supplying the plastic for use in their industrial processes.

What's impressive about JBII P2O:

- The purity of the diesel/gasoline that is impressive.

- The clean process to produce the diesel/gasoline that is impressive.

- The process cost to produce the diesel/gasoline that is impressive (processor, energy, catalyst).

What's not known:

- The overhead costs to produce the diesel/gasoline (transportation of plastic, transportation of finished fuel, etc.).

- The amount of plastic that can be easily sourced with a joint agreement to sell back the generated fuel at a discount (a discount to market prices which are high, not given away).

- The ease with which plastic can be sourced for a facility to allow the processors to run 24/7.

- The number of P2O facilities that can be supported in various locations in North America and beyond.

- The most economical distribution of P2O facilities.

- How quickly JBII will be able to expand once the first full production model (sourced plastic to fuel to customer) is in place.

- The amount of time it take to establish that first production model.

- The ability of John Bordynuik to manage the growth of the business.

Not a complete list, but those are the bullets that stand out in my mind.

P2O is great, but it is not without risks.

Friday, November 19, 2010

Rawnoc speculates Pak-It & Javaco are about to become profitable


PAKIT & JAVACO looks about to make some bucks....

Q1 2010 Net loss = ($645K)
Q2 2010 Net Loss = ($500K)
Q3 2010 Net Loss = ($25k) <~~~95% reduction over the Q just prior


Looks to me like a bottom line improvement of $475,000, reducing the net loss by 95% in a single sequential quarter basically down to nothing. Looks like the "trend" is headed for +$300k net income for PAKIT for Q4 2010, despite "many US-based transactions are accounted for through Pak-It resulting in an increase in expenses associated with Pak-It that would not otherwise be incurred by the operating unit."

Looks like Javaco's whopping $5,000 loss will be turned into a profit for Q4 as well, making both segments of Javaco and PAKIT profitable for Q4 -- something not even the most optimsitic among us seemed to expect if I recall. :)

"The Company uncovered inefficiencies in Javaco’s operations and consolidated some of the workforce at this subsidiary in order to improve performance and working capital turnover. Javaco is now being focused towards higher profit margin sales, and the Company is identifying these customers and tailoring an integrated sales approach that we expect will improve this subsidiary’s earnings."

Looks like Javaco & PAKIT will easily be profitable and just P2O is at a loss because they're not selling fuel yet of course.

2 out of 3 business producing a net income while their 3rd is about to be launched is not too shabby. That's probably why they have access to loans.

Raw

stocker11 comments on JBII's positive progress

Of course expenses have increased although many expenses were a one time expense. When you're on the cutting edge of something this great you gotta go for it.

The processor is now complete.

It can be built quickly (5 weeks) and cheaply (less than $300,000.)

Pak-It is fully automated and Master Suppliers are being set up around the world.

Javaco has moved to cheaper premises which will result in tens of thousands of dollars of savings per month.

JBII has purchased new office space which will result in tens of thousands of dollars savings per year.

Blending site has been purchased and renovated which will increase the selling of the fuel tremendously.

Large salaries have been cut.

Stack tests have confirmed that emissions are not an issue.

Partners are permitted to go when Simple Air Permit is issued.

Supplies have been acquired to assemble at least 2 more 30 ton processors?

Production audit is pending.

Media is pending.

Huge profits are pending.

Huge increase in price per share is pending.

My retirement is pending.

My dream home is pending.

Thursday, November 18, 2010

stonehenge disagrees with negative skeptic & predicts bright future for JBII


I dare to disagree.
*Money seems not to be that tight, as has been pointed out a couple of times today and yesterday. See the 10Q on 'liquidity';

*Shares handed out: if you count the amount of shares that have been withdrawn and compare that amount to the minor amount of shares rendered for services or to commit employees, I still think we have been witnessing a negative dilution in 2010.

*Profitability has yet to be proven, I agree. But THAT is where the bets are on the table, LOL.

In addressing the future earnings potential you have to have a feeling on potential sales volume, growth margins, costs, etcetera.

Assuming that the P2O process does have this revolutionary USP's (which have been confirmed by IsleChem and the DEC) and assuming that the production costs per barrel are less than $10.-, while being able to sell it for apx. WTI, and assuming the Capex of a processor are apx. 400,000.- this leads to a conclusion ex ante that this might become an ultra profitable business model.

By the time the definite proof you seem to be asking for will be released (10Q, 10K), the pps will be much higher. No doubt about that.

In investing there's a golden rule:
The (by the general market participants perceived) risk is 1-to-1 correllated to the potential and required returns.

The main question is: are the investors/participants in the general market as well informed about JBII (at this moment) as the relatively few who have been digesting and DD'ing this JBII concept in detail?

It is obvious that your perception of the risks associated with investing in JBII is much higher than the perceprion of those who think it is undervalued.

And that's the reason people win or lose money in the stockmarkets. My bet is that the current JBII shareholders are going to make huge gains, percentage wise.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

JBII's latest 10Q discusses Pak-It's "DropShots"


On July 30, 2010 Pak-It launched a new retail product line called DropShot. DropShot’s initial advertising campaign was managed by Western Creative and included a 60-second and 120-second commercial, as well as an online store, www.buydropshot.com. The launch of DropShot commercials was seen by the Company as a way to gain a better understanding of this market’s dynamics. With the airtime we purchased, the commercials provided limited success, and the Company expects to pursue a more in depth retail approach when it makes more financial sense.

DropShot’s unique selling proposition lies with its packaging process, which is positioned to capitalize on the ‘green’ movement that many businesses and consumers have become focused on. Although the retail-cleaning sector is highly competitive with low barriers to entry, by exploiting our technological advantage, and through correct product positioning, the Company believes there is an opportunity to derive considerable value from what many would consider a saturated market. A successful marketing approach will involve significant up-front financial investment to make sure that DropShot and Pak-It products produce the revenue we believe they are capable of.

When purchasing PakIt, we saw that there was a considerable amount business value that was being lost to inefficient internal controls and operating procedures. In addition, the Pak-It accounting system runs from a DOS operating system that turns tracking orders and analyzing data into a complex process. We have invested in a new accounting system for this subsidiary, which is currently being implemented. With this new accounting system, purchasing, production orders, inventory, sales, and shipping/receiving will be integrated into a network with the capacity to accommodate larger sales volumes, increased inventory turnover, and a shortened cash conversion cycle.

JBII files 10Q, has received P2O air permit approval for Canada, will commence U.S. P20 when air permit is received from NYDEC


The Company received notice dated October 15, 2010 that the Ontario Ministry of Environment registered a “certificate of Approval for Air, Section 9, EPA” in the Company’s name. A “Certificate of Approval for Air” in Ontario is equivalent to a NYDEC Air Permit in the United States. The Company also received a Certificate of Approval for Industrial Sewage Works, Section 53, from the Ministry of the Environment. These approvals are for use at the Company’s fuel blending site. The Ministry of Environment allowed the transfer of existing approvals (permits) of the blending site to the Company.

"...the Company has been reviewing the feasibility of realizing P2O revenue in different jurisdictions with partners who have already obtained the necessary operating permits required for P2O. The Company is also reviewing the feasibility of installing a P2O machine in Ontario, where one of the Company's facilities recently obtained it’s air approval."

On November 10 th , 2010, JBI Inc.’s simple air permit application was officially submitted to the DEC after significant consultation and meetings between the parties. JBI Inc.’s environmental consultant has significant experience with permitting and in consulting with the DEC prior to submitting our permit application, we mutually agreed upon language and data so that many of the questions that would typically arise during a permit review process were already eliminated. These lengthy consultations and discussions with the DEC about the permit language and data greatly reduce the amount of time required for the DEC to review a submitted application.

NO BUD NO WASTE PERMIT NEEDED:

"...it is expected that the Company’s current cash balance will sustain operations until the DEC issues an air permit for our Niagara Falls, NY P2O machine. Upon receipt of this air permit, the Company expects to immediately commence P2O operations in order to generate revenue and earnings from the P2O machine"

"In speaking with various investment funds and high net worth individuals, the Company expects that once an air permit is obtained, raising significant amounts of capital for the purpose of building P2O sites will be a relatively straightforward process, however there can be no guarantee. In the event that cash is needed in the interim, JBI Inc. is positioned favorably for small debt and equity issuances."

Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Rawnoc responds to skeptic's extremely pessimistic comments


So let's summarize your thoughts...

(1) JBII has to sell fuel some day and can't exist for the next 500 years without doing so. Really? lol

(2) Filing an extension automatically disqualifies JB and the other 759 CEOs of public companies from being the CEO even though the very filing apparently prepared by their auditors specifically states that they won't be late and gives the reason that two filings had to be prepared at once so the filing will be done this week within the NORMAL extension period.

760 public companies and counting have taken advantage of the extension period:

http://sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcurrent&datea=&dateb=&company=&type=NT&SIC=&State=&Country=&CIK=&owner=include&accno=&start=700&count=100

Many of them NASDAQ, NYSE, and AMEX companies.

I think they need to raise money in the form of LOANS unless they already did in which case they don't of course.

Additionally, I think they are one permit away from having so much money thrown at them they'd have to reject it. There is so much dough being thrown on the biggest POS projects that are green it's ridiculous. JBII proves their processor is even break-even? It's BOOYAH time.

Look at the money being thrown down that rat hole Agilyx just on a hope of turning waste plastic into black slurry sludge crap and they can't even do it in a viable efficient manner.

The company is NOT in any position to go to zero. They are about to get their air permit and start full production.

Raw

Zardiw discusses Fuel registration requirements for offroad fuel manufacturers.


RE: Fuel registration requirements for offroad fuel manufacturers.

1-EPA just told me over the phone that fuel that is manufactured to be sold for off road use has NO DESIGNATION under the registration program!

2-"At the present time, only gasoline and diesel F/FAs produced and commercially
distributed for use in highway motor vehicles are designated for the registration and testing program. Both domestic and foreign products are included in the designation. Fuels intended for use exclusively in off-road vehicles are not currently designated. EPA is developing a separate rulemaking to designate alternative fuels and fuel additives for registration in the future."
http://www.epa.gov/oms/regs/fuels/additive/spring94.pdf

3- another poster had posted he called and was told the same
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=53300564

Quote:StockSpock Share Friday, August 13, 2010 12:03:46 PM
Re: None Post # of 71129

FYI JBI can sell fuel Immediately!

I just spoke to a very helpful person with the EPA. JBI does not need to register with the EPA to sell their fuel for off road use(construction, logging etc.) or for legitimate R&D purposes.

Registration is only required for on road motor vehicle use.

So put that in your DD tank!

4- Just to be clear I asked if such a manufacturer of such a fuel wanted to sell it...he stated there was no problem in doing so, as long as the fuel is not used in vehicles travelling on streets or highways....to be clear as a bell I suggested railroads...he stated "fair game."

NOW
It is my opinion that jbi can and will sell to offroad, but I would like them to eventually register for on road use

BUT THIS SHOULD OBVIOUSLY CLEAR UP THE MISCONCEPTION THAT THE FUEL IS USELESS FOR SALE IF NOT REGISTERED.

OH...RE: EPA is developing a separate rulemaking to designate alternative fuels and fuel additives for registration in the future."

I ASKED if theres any action on that yet...the answer was no!

Millions of dollars get thrown at these technologies that have a small fraction of the potential that JBII does........We should be at $10 just on the promise of what's coming....considering the 51M OS........This is the bargain of the decade if not the century.....and looks like the bargain is getting better.......until the permit is approved.....then all bets are off, and we can start reaching our true value............

JBII is one of the greatest companies to come along in a LONG Time.........She will have a HUGE effect on making Mother Earth a Better place to live...........z

COMMENTS?

z

Monday, November 15, 2010

lites59 submits article discussing the shrinking global oil supply & the potential impact of alternative energy development such as P2O

Oil will run out 100 years before new fuels developed:
Mon Nov 15, 4:39 PM

WASHINGTON (AFP) - The world will run out of oil around 100 years before replacement energy sources are available, if oil use and development of new fuels continue at the current pace, a US study warns.

Researchers at the University of California, Davis (UC-Davis) used the current share prices of oil companies and alternative energy companies to predict when replacement fuels will be ready to fill the gap left when oil runs dry.

And the study's findings weren't very good for the oil-hungry world.

If the world's oil reserves were the 1.332 trillion barrels estimated in 2008 and oil consumption stood at 85.22 million barrels a day and growing yearly at 1.3 percent, oil would be depleted by 2041, says the study published online last week by Environmental Science and Technology.

But by plugging current stock market prices into a complex equation, UC-Davis engineering professor Debbie Niemeier and postdoctoral researcher Nataliya Malyshkina calculated that a viable alternative fuel to oil will not be available before the middle of next century.

The researchers analyzed the share prices of 25 oil companies quoted on US, European and Australian stock exchanges, and of 44 alternative energy companies that produce fuels such as ethanol or bio-diesel, or are developing fuel cells, batteries and propulsion systems aimed at replacing gasoline and diesel in vehicles of the future.

What they found is that the market capitalization, or total value of all stock shares, of traditional oil companies far outstripped that of the alternative energy companies.

That indicated to them that investors believe oil is going to do well in the near future and occupy a larger share of the energy market than alternative energy, said Malyshkina.

"To assess the time until a considerable fraction of oil is likely to be replaced by alternatives, we used advanced pricing equations to make sense of the large discrepancy between the market capitalization of traditional oil companies and the market capitalization of alternative-energy companies," she told AFP.

Their calculations show that there would not be a widely available replacement for oil-based fuels before 2140, which, even if the more optimistic date of 2054 for oil depletion is retained, would mean there could be a gap of around 90 years when it might be difficult to run a motor vehicle.

Nearly two-thirds of crude oil is used to produce gasoline and diesel to run vehicles, said Malyshkina.

The researchers' calculations were based on the theory that long-term investors are good predictors of when new technologies will become commonplace.

"Sophisticated investors tend to put considerable effort into collecting, processing and understanding information relevant to the future cash flows paid by securities," said Malyshkina.

"As a result, market forecasts of future events, representing consensus predictions of a large number of investors, tend to be relatively accurate."

Similar calculations have been used to accurately predict the outcome of elections and the results of sports events, Malyshkina said.

But all is not doom and gloom, says the study.

On the oil supply side, consumption could well decrease in future as more energy-saving measures are introduced and used by consumers, and new oil reserves could become available as extraction techniques improve.

On the alternative fuel side of the equation, the study did not look at nonprofits, government agencies and universities which are developing new fuels, because they are not quoted on the stock market.

And if governments announced new policy initiatives to promote alternative fuel development, share prices of alternative energy companies would rise, and the gap between the end of oil and the kick-in of alternative fuels would shrink.

.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

techisbest demonstrates use of JBII's P2O fuel in his lawnmower


Firing up the lawnmower with JBII gasoline!

My unrehearsed video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1XdgRJ1CSg

This lawnmower has not been run this season. The smoke you see when I first fire it up is from it sitting idle. Note that the longer it runs the cleaner it runs.

The jar used is the one on the left in this pic:
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs942.snc
/73533_459502925788_832165788_5395895_704048_n.jpg


I sent John an email to tell him about the YouTube video I posted.

His response:

Quote:Nice to hear your lawnmower ran well with the fuel tapped directly off our gasoline condenser.

Our gasoline is no different than highly refined gasoline from a refinery. Our gasoline is different than gas found at the pump because we do not inject the additives and low cost cutting agents (butane injection), aromatics, and other additives to artificially inflate the octane thereby reducing the amount of high-cost gasoline. Many additives are injected in pure gasoline to increase the margin on gasoline at the pump. Our fuel was tested in a new engine long ago and the spark plug, head, valve seats and valves were inspected. There was no carbon build up, pitting, burns, or oxidation on those parts. We were quite impressed by how cleanly it burned.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

lites59 provides article re the plastics industry

Plastics industry battles negative image

Fri Nov 12, 12:15 PM

SASKATCHEWAN (CBC) - The Canadian plastics industry is aggressively fighting government and consumer efforts to curb the sale of its product, according to industry documents.

There are mounting negative perceptions across North America about plastics' toxicity, recylabilty and harmful effect on the environment.

Plastics are made from a non-renewable resource petroleum and combined with chemical additives to help bind and soften the material. One of the additives, Bisphenol A, was declared toxic by Health Canada in October.

Civic facilities and universities across Canada have moved in recent years to ban plastic bags and bottles. Several grocery store chains have also banned plastic bags outright or started charging customers for them.

Toronto and Vancouver have passed laws banning municipal water bottles sales, and the Manitoba community of Leaf Rapids in 2007 became the first Canadian municipality to ban plastic bags.

The rising tide against plastics has prompted a "very aggressive, pro-active campaign to change [the] publics perceptions," wrote Canadian Plastics Industry Association (CPIA) president Mark Badger, in an industry bulletin released in late August.

The campaign was initially launched in 2009 and ramped up again in the fall of 2010.

As part of the campaign, the CPIA has published stories and issued news releases touting the benefits of plastic liquor bottles. The agency said they "significantly decreased in-store/ in-transit scrap, improved safety, decreased transportation costs due to lighter weight, and even allowed more bottles on the shelves since they are thinner walled than glass."

"Our next stories within the campaign will include energy-efficient vinyl windows, plastic packaging that reduces food spoilage and increases safety," states the bulletin from Badger, who has blamed the public backlash for cutting into the industry's profits.

"Unfortunately, in North America, the public's perception of plastic is predominantly negative," he wrote.

"The fallout from misperceptions includes de-selection of certain plastic products by retailers, changing consumer purchasing patterns and also in legislation that makes doing business difficult."

He noted in an online video with Canadian Plastics magazine that "the plastics industry contracted in 2009, and very substantially, by 17 per cent or 18 per cent."

Recently re-elected Winnipeg City Coun. Harvey Smith, who tried unsuccessfully in 2008 to ban plastic bottle sales from Winnipeg's recreation centres and city-run facilities, is not surprised by the industry's push to change perceptions.

He said he was amazed at how industry representatives flew out to Winnipeg to persuade other councillors to reject his motion before it made its way to council chambers.


"The industry sent two people out immediately to [an executive policy committee meeting]," Smith said. "I couldn't believe it. They wanted to forestall anything happening in Winnipeg."

With a new council in place, Smith said he will try to reintroduce the motion again.

"Maybe we'll get more support," he said.

Nestle Canada's John Challinor told Winnipeg councillors at the time a bottle ban was "nothing more than political greenwashing, environmental symbolism and bad political policy."

The plastics industry maintains plastic water bottles are safe, highly recyclable and provide a more convenient alternative to tap water.

The CPIA insists plastics are superior to paper, glass, aluminum and cardboard packaging from an energy-efficiency and transportation perspective.

It has also engaged in a glitzy pro-plastic marketing campaign to reverse anti-plastic sentiments. Their efforts include a "Teachers Ambassadors Program" to help Canadian schoolteachers educate children on the environmental benefits of plastic recycling.

This week, a CBC News investigation revealed 82 per cent of Winnipeg's residential blue bin plastics were shipped last year to China, to mostly become durable goods, like fly swatters and toy dolls, that never get recycled again.

"The good news with plastic is that we don't need most of this junk," says Manuel Maqueda, co-founder of Plastic Pollution Coalition.

The California-based environmentalist recently travelled with a Canadian film crew to a remote Pacific island to shoot a documentary, Journey to Midway, about plastic pollution killing birds who mistake plastic for food.

But Maqueda admits cutting back on plastics can be overwhelming given that stores are full of plastic packaging.

"It's really hard to avoid plastic 100 per cent, but this is something we must do," Maqueda said. "This is a conversation we need to have.

"Don't be afraid of having this conversation with your children, with store owners. We can do it. We can move away from the disposable plastic era."

Maqueda recommends two simple steps: refuse plastic bags and bottles and choose products with less plastic packaging.

The City of Winnipeg is hosting a Speak Up on Garbage Expo at the Convention Centre on Saturday to kick off six months of consultations on the future of trash and recycling.

Friday, November 12, 2010

KingVegita2006 summarizes JBII's P2O DEC Permit Application

DEC Permit Application

Summary of company P2O

(1) JBII is in the very final stages of obtaining an air permit from the New York Department of Environmental Conservation which will allow full commercial production and sales for their first Plastic2Oil processor for which they plan to turn free feedstock into high value diesel fuel. It only takes two modestly-paid employees to run a P2O machine, the energy from the free feedstock runs the machine, and the machine only costs around $200,000 to build and can be duplicated fairly quickly.

For these reasons, it appears that JBII's fuel margins on their fuel will be obscenely high from such low costs and low capital investment.

(2) It's my opinion, and nobody else that I've challenged has been able to come up with his own opinion, that JBII's P2O processor is about to prove to be the most viable alternative energy producer that's clean to come around in decades. Nothing else that I or others can think have possess these three key characteristics:

(a) Doesn't pollute and is green (certified by Islechem, the NYSDEC, and CRA)

(b) Has a high return on capital (around $200,000 per machine that should make at least $4 million in fuel per year)

(c) Makes energy cheap at high margins (estimated cost $10 per barrel of fuel that can be sold for up to $100 or more per barrel)

BRIG_88 believes smart money is currently aggessively buying JBII at 60 - 61 cents!

JBII...increasing volume as the smart money scoops cheap shares....just remember the DUMB money always sells at the bottom....they are what MAKES a bottom in stocks.....soon enough they will be standing there with their dick in their hand wondering wtf they have done to themselves......

Thursday, November 11, 2010

Nice article on eco-friendly Dropps as featured on http://www.philadelphiasustainabilityawards.org


Jonathan Propper's family created and owned the Conshohocken Cotton Company, a pioneer in the early 80s in developing a heavier cotton yarn used by Perry Ellis and Ralph Lauren. Seeking a better way to clean cotton, Jonathan's family developed Cot n' Wash, in 1986, a patented concentrated liquid detergent that earned top review for efficacy in leading consumer rating magazine.

Cot'n Wash Inc. is a privately-held, Philadelphia based business, that was sold in 1996 and was repurchased in the fall of 2005 by Jonathan Propper

.Noticing the trend toward high efficiency washing machines and convenience, Jonathan saw how the Cot n' Wash formula could translate into a new consumer product that could change the way consumers do laundry by offering conservation, convenience and results.

Jonathan put a lot of thought into creating an environmentally friendly product. dropps are biodegradable and NPE- and phosphate-free, and dropps is packaged in a stand-up pouch to reduce its environmental footprint. dropps offers a convenient way to protect the planet -- the highly concentrated formula is made without the water that traditional laundry detergents needlessly waste. By eliminating water, Jonathan was able to gain the intellectual property to put dropps liquid detergent in a water soluble film, thereby doing away with the lugging, pouring and measuring associated with traditional laundry detergents. As a result, less packaging (plastic and corrugated), less fuel required to transport lighter water-free dropps and less gas emissions.

dropps is available nationally and in the Philadelphia region at Whole Foods, Target, Wal-mart, Mapes and Killians Hardware and Mapes.
Sustainability Narrative

There is currently a lot of talk and media coverage about environmental sustainability, but for the average consumer, it can be confusing, with many wondering how they can personally make a difference. The makers of dropps put a lot of thought into creating a truly 'green' product. With the move in the market toward concentrated detergents and High Efficiency washers, dropps saw a great opportunity to develop a product that can eliminate the waste currently inherent in the household cleaning industry, addressing not just the cleaning formula in the package, but the packaging itself.

Few consumers realize that most traditional laundry detergents are 75% water; even the new '2X concentrates' are 50% water. dropps asked why consumers should pay for this excess water, when water is added during the washing process. In fact, dropps calculated that an average town of 20,000 could save over 55,000 gallons of water per year simply by using dropps instead of traditional detergents. And if you factor in commercial laundry operations, the savings can be even greater. Because dropps does not contain water, less packaging (plastic and corrugated) and less fuel are required to transport dropps and with dropps pre-measured packets you do not overdose your laundry with detergent.

dropps are biodegradable and NPE- and phosphate-free, and dropps has not only paid attention to what is in the laundry detergent formula but also how it was packaged. Laundry detergent bottles -the standard packaging for liquid laundry detergent - are more difficult to recycle than the highly publicized drinking-water bottle. Laundry detergent jugs are made of 75% non-recycled virgin material, and the caps, which cannot be recycled, are almost always sent to landfills. dropps patented delivery system first came to market with a PET 100% recyclable plastic package, and with a recent upgrading, we've chosen another package, a stand-up pouch, with an even smaller environmental footprint.

The makers of dropps are passionate about achieving sparkly clean results without the waste.
Results

The environmental impact of dropps is huge. Laundry is chore that all Americans do, and 70% of Americans use liquid laundry detergent. Traditional liquid laundry detergent jugs are loaded with water, use only 25% post consumer plastic, and have caps that are non-recyclable. Traditional detergents also only have one benefit per bottle, i.e. one bottle is for high efficiency washing machines and another bottle allows you to use cold water for your wash. dropps has multiple benefits loaded within one small pac. dropps can be used in high efficiency machines and in cold water washes, which saves the consumer energy and water. dropps saves even more water by eliminating water completely from its formula. The elimination of water reduces the overall weight of the package thereby using less cardboard to pack dropps, and less energy and gasoline to transport them. Best of all, there is no way to waste with dropps. Traditional liquid laundry detergent requires pouring and measurement; the more you pour, the more you use. Detergent companies want consumers to overuse. We don't. We've figured out how much detergent you need for each load, so that you don't waste and you get what you paid for. If the average family used cold water for washing, they would save $65 per year in energy costs.

In addition, in the U.S., liquid laundry detergent is used for 25 billion wash loads every year. If these loads were done with dropps instead of the usual cup and jug, we would save:

1. 6,233,726 gallons of diesel gas in transport
2. 267,968,750 pounds of plastic
3. 622,373 tons of greenhouse gas emissions in transport

We have also taken great lengths to make sure that no harmful toxins go into dropps. The dropps formula is phosphate-free, NPE-free, enzyme-free and biodegradable. Not only is what goes in the detergent important, but so is the packaging itself. We have recently switched from a 100% PET clamshell package to a Flex Pac stand-up pouch. The PET clamshell was a big step away from detergent jugs, but there were still too many additional pieces of the packaging. The stand-up pouch is one piece that flattens completely when empty, and leaves the smallest footprint of any liquid laundry detergent packaging. As dropps gain greater distribution the impact of the product will continue to grow and we will continue to cut down on waste as a whole.

http://www.philadelphiasustainabilityawards.org/node/332

PRE opines on P2O's "Golden Spigot" & JBI's global impact

GOLDEN SPIGOT

Internal and External Logistics must be in place before The Golden Spigot opens.

"Timing is Everything" - Bob Dylan

"There is much going on behind the scenes". JB

The P2O MACHINE

1 Kilo Plastic = 1 Liter Fuel

1000 Kilos Plastic = 1000 liters of Fuel

20000 kilos Non-Biodegradable PLASTIC = 20,000 Liters LIQUID GOLD and Liberating EARTH from 20,000 kilos Non-Biodegradable Plastic ..... OR ...

100 BARRELS FUEL FOR MAN 1 GIANT STEP FOR MANKIND in one 8 hour shift from 1 Small Processor.

Planning, production, inventory, purchasing, transportation, warehousing, etc. >>
INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL LOGISTICS.

"Stand unwavering Patiently in Faith" - Bob Dylan

Steve Prefontaine was the greatest middle distance runner in American history. As the youngest man in the MUNICH OLYMPIC 5K FINALS .... he MADE the race ... when with 1mile to go in a slow tactical race ... he shot to the front and almost ran the last mile in sub 4 minutes. He is, though deceased almost 35 years, more quoted then any runner in US athletic history. One of my favorite quotes of his ......

"TO DO ANYTHING LESS THAN YOUR BEST ....IS TO SACRIFICE THE GIFT"

PRE

I believe that JB practices this maxim.

Steven Prefontaine held every American record from the 2000 meters through to the 10,000 meters; something no US runner has ever done since He took the Sport to a new level and together with Phil Knight and Bill Bowerman, established a small company .... that would become bigger. You may have heard of them flptrnkng (a skeptic)? They are called Nike.

I believe JB will set similar records in the Environmental Industry soon to be processing more plastic to oil than any other company on Earth.

You look at Prefontine and see one race and you think he failed !!!!! but It was the Olympics at Munich .... where he was 4th Best In the entire World .... he was the youngest man in the race and the only one brave enough to take it out and make it a classic with 1 Mile to go. His efforts changed the sport of Track and Field and brought down the AAU that would not allow athletes more than 3 dollars a day or amateur status was lost.

Pre changed things Friend ....

JB is changing things to because he is courageous and is doing .... what others would not dare.

Tuesday, November 9, 2010

rce9rys comments on P2O's carbon footprint & the blending facility


HUGE view into "carbon footprint" issues:
John says that the diesel and gasoline is better than what you buy at the pump. The diesel has a centane rating (it's the diesel equivalent of an octane rating for gasoline) of over 80 - what you buy at the pump must have a rating over 40. The higher the number the better the combustion quality of the fuel.

http://alternativefuels.about.com/od/researchdevelopment/a/cetane.htm

What happens at a blending facility? Fuels are blended with additives to both meet certain government standards and reduce the cost of the finished product. Adding ethanol/butane, even solvents, drives down the cost to the manufacturer.

Right now it is more advantageous to sell P2O oil for purposes other than use in vehicles. One example given by John is use in the paper industry. They have industrial furnaces/boilers that use a lot of diesel fuel. They also have a lot of plastic waste. I was surprised to hear this. But John told of one smaller plant that had 60 tons of plastic waste each day.

tykundegex opines on possible reasons for delay of simple air permit receipt


NYTimes Article: New York Has Plan to Cut Emissions

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/science/earth/10climate.html?_r=1&hp

It's all good news for P2O, but within this article are links to several others that may shed some light on the permitting delays for JBI (emphasis added by me):

(taken from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/23/nyregion/23grannis.html)

"The turmoil in the staffing and leadership of the [DEC] coincide with an overhaul of its rules"

"they are deeply worried by the shrinking resources of the department"

"Not counting the 209 jobs scheduled to be eliminated from the current level of about 3,100, the department has lost 595 employees over the last two and a half years."

"additional staff was needed to administer permits ... and to enforce department rules"

"the agency, whose responsibilities range from monitoring air and water pollution to selling fishing licenses, had already cut back significantly on services and programs. It is cleaning up fewer petroleum spills, delaying environmental reviews and reducing inspections and enforcement of regulations"

"In many instances, we have offices or sections responsible for important permitting and monitoring functions staffed by only one or two people"

(taken from http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/22/nyregion/22fired.html)

"The agency’s workforce...is at its lowest level in two decades"

Tykün

Johnik defines & discusses "material" information for public companies and Regulation D

Regulation FD and the Form 8-K filed in accordance therewith. I see that there has been a lot of chatter about these two requirements. At the end of this post is a link to the text of Regulation FD, as it currently appears on the SEC's website, for you to read at your leisure.

In general terms, Regulation FD requires the corporation (more precisely, the "issuer" as defined in the regs) to make public disclosure of "material nonpublic information" in the event that it discloses such information to specified persons (most notably, a "holder of the company's securities, under circumstances in which it is reasonably foreseeable that the person will purchase or sell the issuer's securities on the basis of the information").

The question you raised is a good one: When is information deemed "material" under this rule? Given that a violation of Regulation FD turns, at least in part, on the meaning of the term "material," it is a fundamental consideration. You will see that Regulation FD itself does not define the term "material."

The most common definition of "material" I have seen states that a fact is material if "there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable shareholder would consider it important" in making an investment decision, or, stated in different terms, the fact "would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the 'total mix' of information made available." This oft-quoted language is taken from a 1976 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court (on page 449):

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8985475040212340102&q=426+U.S.+438&hl=en&as_sdt=40000002

Even with this definition, there is no definitive guidance as to what information necessary implicates Reg FD; rather, the materiality requirement must be determined in light of the underlying facts and circumstances. The SEC has, however, provided at least some guidance as to what type of information might be considered material, depending on the circumstances. Note that this list is non-exhaustive (found under section II.B.2):

Quote: While it is not possible to create an exhaustive list, the following items are some types of information or events that should be reviewed carefully to determine whether they are material: (1) earnings information; (2) mergers, acquisitions, tender offers, joint ventures, or changes in assets; (3) new products or discoveries, or developments regarding customers or suppliers (e.g., the acquisition or loss of a contract); (4) changes in control or in management; (5) change in auditors or auditor notification that the issuer may no longer rely on an auditor's audit report; (6) events regarding the issuer's securities -- e.g., defaults on senior securities, calls of securities for redemption, repurchase plans, stock splits or changes in dividends, changes to the rights of security holders, public or private sales of additional securities; and (7) bankruptcies or receiverships.

http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm

Note that the SEC in this release has followed the above-quoted definition of "material" taken from the Supreme Court decision, and has explained that there is no definitive (or "bright-line") test for determining materiality:

Quote: The final regulation, like the proposal, applies to disclosures of "material nonpublic" information about the issuer or its securities. The regulation does not define the terms "material" and "nonpublic," but relies on existing definitions of these terms established in the case law. Information is material if "there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable shareholder would consider it important" in making an investment decision. To fulfill the materiality requirement, there must be a substantial likelihood that a fact "would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the 'total mix' of information made available." Information is nonpublic if it has not been disseminated in a manner making it available to investors generally.


. . . While we acknowledged in the Proposing Release that materiality judgments can be difficult, we do not believe an appropriate answer to this difficulty is to set forth a bright-line test, or an exclusive list of "material" items for purposes of Regulation FD.

(same section and link noted above)

Regulation FD: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=fe408b58c5c209dd7618b3cfad374ab1&rgn=div5&view=text&node=17:3.0.1.1.4&idno=17

I hope this information is helpful.

Monday, November 8, 2010

BRIG_88 urges patience & says JBII is going to make a fortune

There isn't another company doing what JBII is doing or is even in the process of doing what they are doing....the rest of these so called green energy conversion companies are a joke.....JBII has the ONLY practical affordable answer for processing plastic into the fuel.....the rest are a pathetic joke. Notice only one with a permit in the US and it produces sludge and is so expensive to run nobody will ever convince me they will make a dime Yeah Environ has a 5 million dollar machine nobody will buy so who's going to step up tot he plate with 8 million?.....and why would anyone buy either one when you can get TWO machines from JBII for 400k?......ROFL!!!!....anyone care to guess what state they switch to next to propose firing up a machine?...LOLOLOLOL!!!

Well all I can say is the DD I did was a real eyeopener for me.....there is much more to the process than can be found on any web site.....but be patient.....you'll see soon enough that JBII is going to be running their P2O.....and it's going to make a fortune.....it puts out less pollution than?.....well you'll just have to guess on that won'tcha?

Sunday, November 7, 2010

techisbest elaborates further on his recent P2O factory tour & provides CEO's email comments


A few more comments ...

I did have to go past the guard house, shortly after crossing the railroad tracks that run behind the building on Iroquois Ave.

The last time I visited (a couple of weeks after the AGM) I had to meet John at a Wendy's. He is comfortable with giving out the address now that proper security is in place.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=20+Iroquois,+niagara+falls,+NY&sll=42.897246,-78.778332&sspn=0.100856,0.222988&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=20+Iroquois+St,+Niagara+Falls,+Niagara,+New+York+14303&ll=43.079446,-79.015371&spn=0.001571,0.003484&t=f&z=19&ecpose=43.07931686,-79.015371,408.57,0,3.503,0

They are not yet begun to assemble the larger processors, but will as soon as the permit is granted.

John emailed me this about the two new processor drums:

Quote: 1) more surface area to transfer heat into the reactor.
2) screens to allow residue to accumulate higher between conveying it out.
3) number 1 is more important.

This is what John told me in an email when he invited me:

Quote:I’m traveling to feedstock sources a lot so I am in transit often now that the plant is on autopilot.

Feedstock is not going to be an issue. Nor will customers for the diesel and gasoline. Often they will be the same.

Here is what had been said in the original IsleChem PR (in addition to what is shown in the iBox:

http://www.jbiglobal.com/news/2010-press-releases/isle-chem-validation.aspx

Quote:The "near diesel" fuel is diesel with some extra light fuel fractions (gasoline range fuel). The extra gasoline can be separated at the Company's fuel blending site or our fuel can be sold to a refinery. The Company is working with Islechem to add an additional piece of hardware to the P2O processor to separate the extra light fuel (which is valuable) from the output fuel. The company has been able to shift the output fuel range from light hydrocarbon gasoline fuels to heavy oils.

The new condenser is the additional piece of hardware. The volatiles that exist after the first condensation are fed back to the second condenser. It's a simple solution. I saw gasoline poured out of the second condenser and diesel poured out of the first. You've seen the pictures.

15-20% of the 85-90% that is converted by the processor to fuel (8% off-gas, 1% residue) is gasoline. The remainder is diesel. The gasoline smells a lot like gasoline from the pump, but not exactly. Wait, let me check my signed jar (JB should have been a doctor). What do you know, still liquid and still smells similar to gasoline. And very clear.

JBII will not, initially, be selling its diesel for running in an engine. There are plenty of other industrial uses (think boilers and furnaces with fuel atomizers) for their diesel. And because JBII diesel has no sulphur, companies that use it will reduce their air emissions. And the same companies that need it for this use will have plastic waste. They will get JBII diesel for a discount to market prices.

Symbiotic relationships.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-diesel-furnace.htm

John did say I could have it tested and I would find it is "gasoline with some light ends." "Light ends" are typically butane or lighter. That's probably what I am smelling.

If someone wants to pay to have it tested I would be willing to talk. But I am happy without taking on that expense myself.

This is a new process that the DEC has not seen before. That is part of the issue - they don't know how to evaluate it.

I was told that the application for the permit was in right after the stack test, but that it was lost for a while because it was sent to the boss of the person doing the evaluation.

Once the permit is approved they will be able to expand immediately throughout western NY.

I was there with six other investors. Also while I was there a gentleman showed up who is going to be managing a fund the company is starting. A fund? Yes, a fund that will promote science and education.

Clearly John plans to have his company be around for a while.

techisbest

Rawnoc summarizes shareholder's recent P2O factory tour


New JBII Update From Shareholder Visit:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56370341

Pictures from visit:

http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=56378523

Some Key Points:

(1) Apparently the diesel fuel and gasoline are able to be easily separated now and will be sold individually as diesel fuel and gasoline.

(2) Two new P2O processors are bigger (30 tons???) than the 20 ton version currently awaiting permitting. Two 30 tons can obviously handle 50% more plastic and therefore likely create 50% more yield (fuel).

(3) They've been busy lately closing deals for sources of plastic and selling low sulfur fuel back to some of these sources providing them free plastic.

(4) The plastic was mixed, multi-colored of various types of waste.

(5) In this report, the shareholder reported the processor had been running uninterrupted for 5 days and that fuel is already being transported to the blending site for storage.

Raw

Friday, November 5, 2010

techisbest discusses his recent P2O factory tour


Just a note about that picture for those not looking on FB.

The darker fuel is diesel, the lighter fuel is gasoline. The processor generates roughly a 80/20 ratio of those two (off gases are also generated as we all know).

You might notice that the diesel fuel on the left has some darker, heavier liquid in the bottom of the jar. This jar was collected when the processor was first warming up. Once the processor is in steady state it produces the clear liquid seen in the other three jars which were drawn off while I was there.

I got to keep the jar on the left. smile

Here is my FB post to John:

Thanks for another tour of the P2O factory today! It was great to see you and talk with you again.

I have posted pictures on FB here:

http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=252457&id=832165788&l=d06c7a0b83

It was also good to be able to speak with Jacob Smith (COO), Bob Molodynia (VP, Business Development), Alan Barnett (Chief R&D Chemist), Scott (P2O Installation) and Jerry (P2O controls). It was gracious of Dr. Smith to take our pictures.

It was clear that nobody wants to get that DEC permit as quickly as possible more than all of you. Hopefully with the elections over things in the government can start moving again.

The new configuration for the P2O processor looked great. It was nice to see that second feeder gone and the process drum insulated on the outside to retain heat. It was amusing to hear how you were trying everything possible to lose heat before the off-gas compression system was installed.

Those two new processor drums outside are pretty. It will be great to see the new, bigger processors up and running as soon as possible. It will also be nice to have them handling more plastic at one time. The new feeder being developed sounds like a great innovation.

It is too bad that JBII has to be bothered with lawsuits by various entities wanting a piece of JBII. It sounds like Mr. Kaplanis definitely went outside his employment contract. Hopefully any lawsuits can be dispatched without much cost (time and money) to the company.

I was happy to hear that a lot of your time is currently being spent closing deals for sources of plastic. And it was good to verify that a part of the business plan is to sell fuel back to the companies supplying the plastic. It is a win-win solution. JBII gets a free source of plastic and the company supplying the plastic gets discounted fuel with out the sulphur allowing their emissions to be greener.

I like your plan to have a waste recycling center as part of your local operations. That could be a good model for any JV's that are started.

I got a close up look of the shredded plastic being fed into the processor. It was certainly not uniform. I saw gooey plastic of all colors shredded together into a single bin. Some of it was black.

But what I saw coming out of the processor, from both the diesel condenser and the gas condenser, was clean, amber fuel. It was interesting to note how cool the jar of gasoline was coming right out of the condenser while the jar of diesel was only warm to the touch. Thank you for the signed jar of P2O gasoline. I could try to use it in my lawnmower (snowblower?), but I think it is worth more to me as a keepsake.

I was very happy to hear that the processor had been running uninterrupted for five days. And that fuel is already being transported to the blending facility for storage.

GWMAN challenges skeptic's quote



Skeptic's quote:
If Mr. Bordynuik has any basis for believing that anyone will buy the liquid, he should be announcing it early and often--it would help his credibility and help his shareholders. Sales are a big deal. If he hasn't announced any, it's a good indication that he doesn't have any lined up.

Sorry Paper, you are completely wrong on this. There are lots of things companies do not talk publicly about as part of business strategy. And in my opinion, who the company is lining up as customers is easily one of them. And to be clear, look at the business journal article about the recycling center in NY looking to buy Agilyx equipment. Why should JB feel any pressure to make such an announcement as far as who he is selling to before he even has anything to sell? Why would JBI tip off potential competition as far as types of customers they are pursuing?

To be honest, I would consider it stupid to make such announcements regarding plastic supplies or customers prematurely. Those announcements will be made, but only when all the ducks are in a row and the company is ready to move forward commercially at full speed.

Thursday, November 4, 2010

Steady_T responds to skeptic's persistent negative comments

You keep saying that crap "The problem there is that Mr. Bordynuik could prove it if he was being truthful but he chooses to stay silent just like any of the other penny stock scammers out there--how does that make him look? "

The truth is that there is no level of proof that JBI can provide at this time that would be considered irrefutable proof by the critics on this board.

Run tickets, sales numbers, etc. will only come after the permit is issued. That is the proof of the process and its profitability.

Anything else will be claimed to be estimates, guesses, not real world conditions, etc. etc.

By the way your use of the phrase "just like any of the other penny stock scammers" makes it clear that you think JBI is a scam.

JBI has no need to prove anything to a small population of posters on a stock message board.

JBI does have to prove to its shareholders that it can produce pyrolysis fuel at a profit. The opportunity to provide that proof is getting close. It will not come before the permit or permits are issued. Afterwards we will have solid data.

Skeptic's quote-------
Second, either Mr. Bordynuik already has a good basis for his claims (something allegedly convinced him that there was something special about his pyrolysis oil, right?) that he could communicate to investors or he doesn't have any basis.
----------------

Mr. Bordynuik does have a good basis for his claims. He has communicated that to investors. IsleChem... remember? Then there is the running of the system under the testing permit.

If you choose to think that there is no market for the products produced by P2O process that is up to you. Others have shown that the output from other pyrolysis process that produce a lower grade product have contracts to sell. When the time is right JBI will announce its contracts.Until you provide evidence to the contrary, we have to go with the information provided by IsleChem.

When did it become "obvious" ? On what basis did you decide that the information that IsleChem stated in the letter was "obvious".

Skeptic's quote-----
The whole Islechem thing is even more telling. All they did what state the obvious. The juice is "near diesel" and the gas is "an off gas similar to natural gas". They wouldn't even state that it is of higher quality than diesel or natural gas so contrary to what the promoters say, it appears it must be of less quality or Islchem would have specified. Good luck selling it.
-----------------

Information provided by "promoters" should be viewed with the same degree of skepticism as information provided by"bashers".

Information provided by the company and by qualified third parties (IsleChem) may be afford greater confidence.

What you asked for "they wouldn't even state that it is of higher quality than diesel or natural gas so contrary to what the promoters say, it appears it must be of less quality or Islchem would have specified." would be entirely inappropriate for IsleChem.

As far as I know there is no such thing as "higher quality" than diesel. A hydrocarbon mixture either meets the specifications for diesel or it does not. I am not aware of any "higher quality" diesel. There is a category for low sulfur diesel which the P2O product would meet once the gasoline component is separated out from the near diesel.

As far as offers to buy the fuel.... you will just have to wait until the company chooses to announce. That event will be driven by the companies schedule, not yours.

Skeptic's quote-----
I've never seen faith nor patience to be a competitive advantage in investing, however.
-------------

“The stock market is a highly efficient mechanism for transferring wealth from the impatient to the patient.” –Warren Buffet

Tuesday, November 2, 2010

“aquapocalypse" ..... Massachusetts Town Votes to Ban the Sale of Bottled Water

posted by: alicia graef

Last week residents in Concord, MA voted to ban the sale of plastic water bottles in their municipality as of next January, which could make it the first town in the U.S. to make such a move.

The vote has environmentalists excited, while the $10 billion industry is worried other towns will follow suit. More than 100 towns across the U.S. have prohibited spending city dollars on the product, all in a worldwide effort to reduce plastic in landfills and waterways and reduce green house gases.

The International Bottled Water Association issued a statement threatening a “legal challenge” comparing bottled water to other products, such as cleaning supplies, food and other beverages. Their argument is that they shouldn’t be singled out for producing a wasteful product when everyone else is doing it too.

“Any efforts to discourage consumers from drinking water, whether tap water or bottled water, is not in the best interests of consumers. Bottled water is a very healthy, safe, convenient product that consumers use to stay hydrated,” said Joe Doss, president of the International Bottled Water Association.

That’s true, of course, but a ban on bottled water doesn’t necessarily mean people will drink less of it, it just means they will have to be more conscientious about their drinking habits.

The convenience of throw-away products, like bottled water, is causing many environmental problems.

Jean Hill, an 82-year-old activist working on the ban, used the Pacific Gyre to help illustrate the amount of pollution plastic bottles are contributing to. The great garbage patch floating in the ocean was impressively horrifying enough to sway some votes.

Hill also used a study by the Container Recycling Institute, which found 88 percent of plastic water bottles are not recycled, at the rate of 30 million a day, along with the using the fact that bottled water is not redeemable, unlike soda and other drink bottles, which could discourage people from recycling.

In the U.S. alone, 60 million plastic bottles a day are manufactured, producing massive greenhouse gases, then transported and thrown away, leaching synthetic chemicals into the earth. According to the Food and Water Watch, when all is said and done producing and distributing bottled water uses up to 2,000 times the amount of energy used to produce tap water.

Millions of gallons of fuel are used transporting filtered tap water across the U.S. and around the world. Three times as much water is used to make a bottle than is used to fill it.

In March 1999, the Natural Resources Defense Council report, "Bottled Water, Pure Drink or Pure Hype?” revealed that as much as 40 percent of all bottled water comes from a city water system, just like tap water. Federal regulations also don’t require bottled water to be any better than tap water, and FDA standards don’t apply to water that’s bottled and sold in the same state.

While it’s unclear whether the town will be able to legally uphold the ban, it's clear that home filtering systems and reusable containers are far healthier for us and our environment.

It’s also unclear whether Boston’s “aquapocalypse” that left some 2 million people in the area without drinkable water when a water main broke shortly after the vote will have anyone changing their minds about the ban.

However, Hill still has no doubts about the decision and points out that people can easily keep stored water jugs for such an emergency.

Zardiw contends JBII will be IMMENSELY PROFITABLE!


JBII is going to be IMMENSELY PROFITABLE. They are getting raw materials either for free, or are being paid to take them. Each ton they process results in about $523. Each processor at a conservative 20T/Day generates $10K. That's a million dollars in 100 days.

ONE other processor will DOUBLE that. Now factor in all the new processors. Each one will generate $3,000,000/year.

Some pretty awesome math huh?

Have you considered 'Economies of Scale'?
What do your numbers show with 5 processors?....10?......50?.....100?.......1,000???????

My calculator doesn't even go up that high.....

Bottom Line is that JBII has proved its concept. They are ready for production. When the permit is issued, everyone's eyes will open wide in amazement............z

Monday, November 1, 2010

Rawnoc says JBII's P2O can process thousands of types of FREE waste plastic


(1) Out of thousands of types of plastic that JBII can process, only a few can be recycled which means thousands of types of plastic are worthless and landfilled and FREE to JBII.

(2) Dyes and other additives which MOST plastic has can NOT be recycled and must be landfilled. JBII can take for FREE.

(3) Most plastic gets sent to landfill because it's too tough/expensive to recycle it. Which is why recoilers themselves have incredible amounts of free plastic available.

(4) The recycling war is failing miserably. Production has outpaced recycling five-fold which means the supply of FREE plastic has also grown, despite foolish claims to the contrary about recycling reducing the amount available.

"Only a few kinds of plastic have the supply and market conditions that make recycling feasible."

"Atlhough there are only seven resin codes, there are actually thousands of different types of plastic. Different combinations of dyes and additives can be added to the basic resin to produce a desired color, shape and texture in the final product. There variations in the manufacturing process lead to different melting points and other properties within the same resin code. To be made into another product, plastic must be carefully sorted by type. Combining different types of plastic renders it useless for manufacturing."

"Unfortunately, plastic is much more difficult to recycle than materials like glass, aluminum or paper. Most plastic ends up in a landfill or incinerator."

"Despite the promotion of plastic recycling, plastic production has outpaced recycling by five times over the plast decade. While increased plastic recycling is one way to alleviate this problem, it only has limited potential to reduce the glut of plastic waste."

"...This number does not include the majority of post-industrial plastic waste, which is accounted for separately. Most of it goes to landfill, as its economic use is hindered by two integrated factors. First, plastic waste is comprised of a large number of different resins, and each type has had to be handled separately or sorted..."

http://newsblaze.com/story/20080302112019tsop.nb/topstory.html

"Plastic is a bigger danger than global warming"

http://www.greenbiz.com/news/2007/05/03/plastic-waste-more-dangerous-global-warming#ixzz11AfwoKch


JBII have to pay for plastic waste? Puh-leaze.
http://pdfcast.org/pdf/recycling-plastic-complications-limitations

Raw