Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

International Bio Recovery Corporation V.IBR



TSXV:IBR - Post by User

Post by spacespot501on Mar 03, 2007 8:52pm
162 Views
Post# 12350116

appreciated.

appreciated.Excellent feedback. Really excellent. I am impressed by the knowledge being presented here. I have one further point on this subject. From the same City of Toronto report. “One note worthy feature of the IBR proposal is that the pricing is based on product revenues being approximately equal to operating costs. While IBR has identified some existing customers in western North America, it would appear that the market for this material, particularly in eastern North America, is immature. IBR has not yet produced products derived from residential organic wastes and the quality of such products, and in particular the resulting concentrations of regulated contaminants, is unknown. Therefore, key questions regarding the marketability of the end product cannot be answered at this time, specifically: would the end product satisfy product quality requirements; whether or not the demand would be sufficient to consume the entire output from a 75,000 or 150,000 tonne Toronto facility; and, what the market price would be.” IBR’s model uses revenue streams from projected fertilizer sales to offset the energy and other production costs. So you could say that creating your own energy is not necessary. IBR’s end product fertilizer was still unproven and the market not yet defined. It was too much of a risk for Toronto and understandably so. They lost out on this contract because they were NOT prepared! This report was written October 2002. Are we any further along. Have we a proven market for ‘Genica’. Not yet. IBR’s technology works with ‘source-separated organics’ (SSO). Toronto’s ‘green bin’ program creates an endless stream of SSO. IBR must prove the market for the mountains of fertilizer produced. They must also prove that a full scale model of the plant can work successfully. And that they could build it! This is why I believe that the Converted Organics deal is the key. Canada Composting (CCI) got the Toronto deal. Their technology is proven. They have plants operating all over the world. It is a private Canadian company. Task-force 2010 has declared Toronto a ZERO-WASTE city. CCI’s technology is NOT ZERO WASTE. IBR should not convert to an anaerobic digestion model but rather be considered part of a unified waste solution model. I believe that if Converted Organics gets the plant built and operates it successfully then IBR will have a better chance at future projects. A provable, dependable technology that will work as part of a complete solution. If not; I'll see some of you down at the soup line.
<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>