RE:Why PYR stepped away previously from PFAS project last falldevelopbc wrote: Just so everyone knows...it was PYR said no and NOW the customer as seriously back at he table.
Brief history from fall of 2022:
PYR CEO absolutely made the best decision this PFAS project:
As a long term shareholder I fully agree and support the CEO's decision to NOT compromise or just hand over the IP of PYR tech/engineering to the client. Only the FUD bashers are trying to twist this into negative slant.
Please re read key points that clearly state PYR is still pursuing similar PFAS opportunities in USA:
"....Essentially, if we agreed to the Client’s demand, all the IP we developed in Phase 1 could be used by someone else in Phase 2. As a company who has invested decades in building its intellectual capital and assembling a team of world-leading experts, this was unacceptable to us on many levels, and not in the best interest of shareholders. It must be clear that we will always stand by our investors, and will not jeopardize long term benefits of the Company, no matter how good it might at first seem in the short term.”
"....the fact remains that PyroGenesis’ technology and expertise won a very competitive bid to destroy PFAS,” added Mr. Pascali. “Nothing can change that. The take-a-way is that it seems that using PyroGenesis’ plasma technology has a place in the destruction of PFAS. Sadly, we will not prove it out on this project, but rest assured, we are, as we speak, pursuing similar opportunities in the USA.”
Nice catch, Develop.
I now do remember Pyro's press release on terminating that contract. Made sense 100% then and still does. I remember thinking they made a smart, gutsy call. Very responsible decision made.