AAE - Australian Ethanol, could be a very profitable company in the future, due to current oil prices and future shortages as oil grows more scarce. It looks like its on the way back up aswell. Its in a good financial position as far as i can tell from comsecs information.
AAE - Agri Energy
- Thread starter el_ninj0
- Start date
-
- Tags
- aae agri energy
- Joined
- 30 March 2005
- Posts
- 835
- Reactions
- 2
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Were you aware that to create ethanol, you need to consume much more energy & cost than what you receive in return.
Ethanol will have a life due to subsidising, to keep a dead sugar industry propped.
I have recently seen an ex sugar mill being converted into a power station in Brandon QLD... Now that could be interesting.
cheers,
Were you aware that to create ethanol, you need to consume much more energy & cost than what you receive in return.
Ethanol will have a life due to subsidising, to keep a dead sugar industry propped.
I have recently seen an ex sugar mill being converted into a power station in Brandon QLD... Now that could be interesting.
cheers,
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Isn't there a new fuel source out for sale through independant fuel stations that is primarily ethanol based?, and is suposedly alot better for people cars, and the environment, as it burns cleaner. thats what made me think about it.
I wasn't aware that it takes alot more energy to make it than it would produce, however, i dont know if that is correct, its worth doing some more research into i think. Ethenol is definetely not a viable alternative to oil based fuels, however, it could act as a step along the way to more environmentaly friendly energy sources for the individual consumer.
Stan 101 said:
Isn't there a new fuel source out for sale through independant fuel stations that is primarily ethanol based?, and is suposedly alot better for people cars, and the environment, as it burns cleaner. thats what made me think about it.
I wasn't aware that it takes alot more energy to make it than it would produce, however, i dont know if that is correct, its worth doing some more research into i think. Ethenol is definetely not a viable alternative to oil based fuels, however, it could act as a step along the way to more environmentaly friendly energy sources for the individual consumer.
- Joined
- 25 September 2004
- Posts
- 431
- Reactions
- 0
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
" I wasn't aware that it takes alot more energy to make it than it would produce, however, i dont know if that is correct, its worth doing some more research into i think. Ethenol is definetely not a viable alternative to oil based fuels, however, it could act as a step along the way to more environmentaly friendly energy sources for the individual consumer."
Na that fule has only 10% ethenol in it. Any more and I think it can be damaging to the cars engine.
" I wasn't aware that it takes alot more energy to make it than it would produce, however, i dont know if that is correct, its worth doing some more research into i think. Ethenol is definetely not a viable alternative to oil based fuels, however, it could act as a step along the way to more environmentaly friendly energy sources for the individual consumer."
Na that fule has only 10% ethenol in it. Any more and I think it can be damaging to the cars engine.
- Joined
- 25 September 2004
- Posts
- 431
- Reactions
- 0
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Na that fule has only 10% ethenol in it. Any more and I think it can be damaging to the cars engine.
The truth is that there are other fule sources instead of oil but no one uses them because oil offers the best mass
ower ratio.
With the growth of China there is now more demand then supply. Unless China collapses the price will rise much more. Predictions of around $80 a barrel.
please ignore the above post. I stuff the quote and now I can't edit it
el_ninj0 said:
Na that fule has only 10% ethenol in it. Any more and I think it can be damaging to the cars engine.
The truth is that there are other fule sources instead of oil but no one uses them because oil offers the best mass
ower ratio.With the growth of China there is now more demand then supply. Unless China collapses the price will rise much more. Predictions of around $80 a barrel.
please ignore the above post. I stuff the quote and now I can't edit it
- Joined
- 30 March 2005
- Posts
- 835
- Reactions
- 2
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
look here
Google is your friend...
I actually have a paper written on it from about 5 years ago... The figures may have changed slightly, but it's still a foundation for diminishing returns.
Ethanol is a buzz word. Cane farmers are forced to offload a tonne of raw cut cane for the price of a mars bar. I don't know if you travel in the north of Qld, but cane is a life blood from Bundaberg north on the coast. They simply cannot stop growing cane.
The power plant I mentioned in Brandon (about 10km north of Ayr) is funded by CSR and is due to employ 400 workers. They take raw cane. Maybe some research is due there. But it is still EXPERIMENTAL!
Hydrogen is also speculated to be a saviour for our power needs. Again it has a problem of deminishing returns.
If you are truly interested, I'll look through my old blue papers on the subjects we entertained some years ago...
Regards,
look here
Google is your friend...
I actually have a paper written on it from about 5 years ago... The figures may have changed slightly, but it's still a foundation for diminishing returns.
Ethanol is a buzz word. Cane farmers are forced to offload a tonne of raw cut cane for the price of a mars bar. I don't know if you travel in the north of Qld, but cane is a life blood from Bundaberg north on the coast. They simply cannot stop growing cane.
The power plant I mentioned in Brandon (about 10km north of Ayr) is funded by CSR and is due to employ 400 workers. They take raw cane. Maybe some research is due there. But it is still EXPERIMENTAL!
Hydrogen is also speculated to be a saviour for our power needs. Again it has a problem of deminishing returns.
If you are truly interested, I'll look through my old blue papers on the subjects we entertained some years ago...
Regards,
- Joined
- 30 March 2005
- Posts
- 835
- Reactions
- 2
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Without trying to put a downer on things (i certainly don't mean to), the cost of cane from an envoiromental position should place it on the 10 most deadly products list. Nitrogen leaching (fertilisers) to some of the most fertile marine grounds on the estern sea board is killing mangroves (juvinile aquatic kindergartens) and the estaern barrier reef at an allarming rate.
I'm not a tree hugging hippie, but just pointing some facts I have learned.
regards,
Without trying to put a downer on things (i certainly don't mean to), the cost of cane from an envoiromental position should place it on the 10 most deadly products list. Nitrogen leaching (fertilisers) to some of the most fertile marine grounds on the estern sea board is killing mangroves (juvinile aquatic kindergartens) and the estaern barrier reef at an allarming rate.
I'm not a tree hugging hippie, but just pointing some facts I have learned.
regards,
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Thats good information to know Stan 101, its good to know that atleast someone else on this particular forum(and im not saying there arnt others) that take into count the environmental and ethical stances of their investments.
Unfortunately hydrogen is not a suitable substitute for oil either. It takes quite a large ammount of energy, much more than it actually produces to extract the hydrogen.
Im thinking possibly the best investment for the future is wind/tidal/hydro-electic power. Im not sure what companies are listed that deal with this products, but if anyone could point in my the direction of some, or how to find them on comsec, i'd be very greatful.
Stan 101 said:
Thats good information to know Stan 101, its good to know that atleast someone else on this particular forum(and im not saying there arnt others) that take into count the environmental and ethical stances of their investments.
Unfortunately hydrogen is not a suitable substitute for oil either. It takes quite a large ammount of energy, much more than it actually produces to extract the hydrogen.
Im thinking possibly the best investment for the future is wind/tidal/hydro-electic power. Im not sure what companies are listed that deal with this products, but if anyone could point in my the direction of some, or how to find them on comsec, i'd be very greatful.
- Joined
- 23 November 2004
- Posts
- 3,974
- Reactions
- 850
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Unfortunately (for our environment) I think oil will continue to be a commodity that will enable investors to make huge profits in the near future (10 years).
There just are not any viable alternatives at the moment.
However the long term solution must be SOLAR ENERGY
(Every country in the world has a sun and you can access it for free!).
So invest for your kids in solar energy companies.
Unfortunately (for our environment) I think oil will continue to be a commodity that will enable investors to make huge profits in the near future (10 years).
There just are not any viable alternatives at the moment.
However the long term solution must be SOLAR ENERGY
(Every country in the world has a sun and you can access it for free!).
So invest for your kids in solar energy companies.
- Joined
- 23 November 2004
- Posts
- 3,974
- Reactions
- 850
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Probably more opportunities to invest in Solar Energy companies in USA at moment.
Anyone know of any Aussie co.'s - SOO is one.
Probably more opportunities to invest in Solar Energy companies in USA at moment.
Anyone know of any Aussie co.'s - SOO is one.
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
SOO looks pretty well set. Financialy, and they obviously have a big future. They are also pretty wide spread "Solco Ltd (SOO) develops, manufactures, markets and distributes solar water pumping and power generation systems in Australia, Europe, East Timor, the Maldives, and China." As from comsec site.
I think they'd be a sitter though, long term only, wouldn't be looking or short terms on that.
SOO looks pretty well set. Financialy, and they obviously have a big future. They are also pretty wide spread "Solco Ltd (SOO) develops, manufactures, markets and distributes solar water pumping and power generation systems in Australia, Europe, East Timor, the Maldives, and China." As from comsec site.
I think they'd be a sitter though, long term only, wouldn't be looking or short terms on that.
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,180
- Reactions
- 17,162
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
I am in the process of writing a rather large document (about 150 page, no pictures or charts, all text) explaining this to an ASX listed company. Details are confidential but I will say that at some point the company has been the subject of threads on ASF and is not itself an energy company.
Very heavily condensed, the energy picture looks something like this over the next half century.
My calculations, which include practically every significant oil producing country including OPEC members, suggests strong production growth in 2005 and 2006, moderate growth in 2007, minimal net change in 2008 and decline after that. Others have produced very similar results despite using widely varying methods.
If you take an optimistic view then technically production growth can be maintained with demand met until at least 2013. But it requires enormous co-operation and an incredible amount of (mainly American) capital invested particularly in Venezuela, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Canada, Kazakhstan, Russia, Libya, Nigeria, Azerbaijan and other countries.
Judge for yourself but I think the chances of US co-operation and unrestricted access to ALL of those countries is so small as to be not worth considering. Take even one country out and production falls short.
Environmentally, hydro-electricity is a clear winner in terms of greenhouse followed by wind. With present technology solar (photovoltaic) systems are highly polluting due to the fossil fuels used in production.
If we are ever to move to a totally renewable energy system then hydro is critical for the energy storage it provides, flexibility of output (to balance all those fluctuating wind and solar sources) and the technical characteristics of large rotating machines as power generation sources (a totally wind system is incredibly unstable in operation, and of course doesn't work two thirds of the time when there is inadequate (or too much) wind. That's why you need other sources with hydro the most practical and clean at present.)
Politics is the big problem with energy. The Greens came into existance for the specific purpose of OPPOSING renewable energy. That may shock some, but it is completely true. Just check their history if you doubt me. Opposition to renewables and the infrastructure needed to support them is particularly strong in NZ (to the point where opponents appear to favour nuclear) and parts of South-East Australia at the moment.
Realistically, a mix of technologies are the way forward. Gas is in the same position as oil with a time delay. We need it for transport, industry, fertiliser manufacture (the food you eat is largely fertilised with natural gas-based nitrogen fertiliser). Therefore, and I say this in the strongest possible terms, it is an absolute priority for the world to move away from oil and gas as sources of electricity. Power generation is just such an inefficient use of diminishing resources. Economics will (and is starting to) force the shift if other considerations don't.
So what are we going to use? For electricity, which represents by far the largest fuel use, renewables will play an increasing role but expect very major confrontation with environmentalists. Yes the landscape will be filled with wind turbines and it is almost certain that at some point the construction of big hydro-electric dams will be back on the agenda due to the critical storage role played by hydro in a renewable power system (otherwise it's fossil fuels forever with wind as merely a supplement).
Unfortunately, it will be some decades before we see the end of conventional power generation. Due to the oil and gas problem, this does mean that coal and / or nuclear have a substantial ongoing role to play over the next 50 years. Hate it or love it, that is practical reality.
Mobile power sources are by far the biggest problem since oil and gas are running out. Ethanol from waste is a useful contributor which makes a positive energy gain, but there is no point growing cane just to produce ethanol. Gas is a short term option, but is running out (discovery peaked nearly 30 years ago worldwide).
Hydrogen is a viable alternative only in the context of having a plentiful supply of electricity with which to produce it. It is incredibly inefficient such that oil or gas-fired electricity combined with hydrogen vehicles would more than double the total quantity of fuel used compared to conventional vehicle fuels. That's why developing non-oil and gas electricity is a must if hydrogen is ever to play a significant role.
Initial hydrogen production would largely be from natural gas by means of chemical processing (that is, not using the gas to generate electricity but directly extracting hydrogen from the gas itself). Another good reason not to squander gas for electricity. The process is, however, an inefficient use of gas compared to directly using the gas to fuel vehicles.
Realistically, unconventional oil sources like shale and coal liquefaction are almost certain to play a role. Incredibly polluting perhaps, but likely. Not expanding electricity generation would greatly increase the need for such unconventional oil sources since the lack of electricity rules out hydrogen for vehicles.
That the deadline is perhaps 3 years away is the reason why a totally renewable solution is simply not an option. A combination of all options including wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, large scale hydro, biofuels (including ethanol), nuclear and coal-fired electricity and production of liquid fuels from coal and shale is likely to be used. And of course we still have the ramaining supplies of oil and gas, total production of which will decline relatively slowly with gas still growing over the next couple of decades in some countries (Australian production peak seems likely around 2025-2030 based on present discovery and production trends).
Environmentally, the good news is that there isn't enough oil and gas to cause all but the mildest greenhose scenarios. The bad news is this lack of oil and gas is likely to be the greatest problem of the 21st century.
This was very highly condensed as I said at the start. Invest your money as you see fit but I suggest that Uranium (due to the Kyoto Protocol), and oil stocks with good PROVEN reserves are the way to go. This doesn't take account of the ethical considerations. Gas depends on location - anywhere in North America and UK there is a massive market due to reserves running out an production falling. There are good opportunities in NZ for anyone who makes a large find (the country faces a gas crisis as existing fields run dry) but the small size of the market (around 40 PJ plus 80PJ each for power generation (which is shifting to coal and renewables due to lack of gas) and export methanol production (which has substantially ceased due to lack of gas).
As for renewables, ethanol would make money in an oil crisis despite questionable fundamentals. The solar tower (Enviromission) and hot dry rock technologies seem to have a strong future in a technical sense although they are sources of electricity not vehicle fuel.
The dominant renewable energy business in Australia is not listed - it is owned 100% by the Tasmanian Government. Generates 60% of Australia's renewable energy from operations in Tas and SA. Will supply peak power to Vic in about 12 months. Involved in hydrogen research both for vehicles and stationary energy - has operating prototype systems and a 100% wind/hydrogem system on a remote island is planned. Has 50% wind in the King Island grid with a grid-connected battery system. Extensively involved in provision of technical expertise for hydro and other renewable energy and water supply systems around the world. Also a world leader in proven technology which increases rainfall 10 - 20% over targeted areas.
The next biggest player is the Snowy Mountains scheme. Another one you can't invest in.
The remaining players are generally focused on one or two projects and have minimal (if any) present production. Good thing though is they are ASX listed.
I am in the process of writing a rather large document (about 150 page, no pictures or charts, all text) explaining this to an ASX listed company. Details are confidential but I will say that at some point the company has been the subject of threads on ASF and is not itself an energy company.
Very heavily condensed, the energy picture looks something like this over the next half century.
My calculations, which include practically every significant oil producing country including OPEC members, suggests strong production growth in 2005 and 2006, moderate growth in 2007, minimal net change in 2008 and decline after that. Others have produced very similar results despite using widely varying methods.
If you take an optimistic view then technically production growth can be maintained with demand met until at least 2013. But it requires enormous co-operation and an incredible amount of (mainly American) capital invested particularly in Venezuela, Iraq, Kuwait, UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Canada, Kazakhstan, Russia, Libya, Nigeria, Azerbaijan and other countries.
Judge for yourself but I think the chances of US co-operation and unrestricted access to ALL of those countries is so small as to be not worth considering. Take even one country out and production falls short.
Environmentally, hydro-electricity is a clear winner in terms of greenhouse followed by wind. With present technology solar (photovoltaic) systems are highly polluting due to the fossil fuels used in production.
If we are ever to move to a totally renewable energy system then hydro is critical for the energy storage it provides, flexibility of output (to balance all those fluctuating wind and solar sources) and the technical characteristics of large rotating machines as power generation sources (a totally wind system is incredibly unstable in operation, and of course doesn't work two thirds of the time when there is inadequate (or too much) wind. That's why you need other sources with hydro the most practical and clean at present.)
Politics is the big problem with energy. The Greens came into existance for the specific purpose of OPPOSING renewable energy. That may shock some, but it is completely true. Just check their history if you doubt me. Opposition to renewables and the infrastructure needed to support them is particularly strong in NZ (to the point where opponents appear to favour nuclear) and parts of South-East Australia at the moment.
Realistically, a mix of technologies are the way forward. Gas is in the same position as oil with a time delay. We need it for transport, industry, fertiliser manufacture (the food you eat is largely fertilised with natural gas-based nitrogen fertiliser). Therefore, and I say this in the strongest possible terms, it is an absolute priority for the world to move away from oil and gas as sources of electricity. Power generation is just such an inefficient use of diminishing resources. Economics will (and is starting to) force the shift if other considerations don't.
So what are we going to use? For electricity, which represents by far the largest fuel use, renewables will play an increasing role but expect very major confrontation with environmentalists. Yes the landscape will be filled with wind turbines and it is almost certain that at some point the construction of big hydro-electric dams will be back on the agenda due to the critical storage role played by hydro in a renewable power system (otherwise it's fossil fuels forever with wind as merely a supplement).
Unfortunately, it will be some decades before we see the end of conventional power generation. Due to the oil and gas problem, this does mean that coal and / or nuclear have a substantial ongoing role to play over the next 50 years. Hate it or love it, that is practical reality.
Mobile power sources are by far the biggest problem since oil and gas are running out. Ethanol from waste is a useful contributor which makes a positive energy gain, but there is no point growing cane just to produce ethanol. Gas is a short term option, but is running out (discovery peaked nearly 30 years ago worldwide).
Hydrogen is a viable alternative only in the context of having a plentiful supply of electricity with which to produce it. It is incredibly inefficient such that oil or gas-fired electricity combined with hydrogen vehicles would more than double the total quantity of fuel used compared to conventional vehicle fuels. That's why developing non-oil and gas electricity is a must if hydrogen is ever to play a significant role.
Initial hydrogen production would largely be from natural gas by means of chemical processing (that is, not using the gas to generate electricity but directly extracting hydrogen from the gas itself). Another good reason not to squander gas for electricity. The process is, however, an inefficient use of gas compared to directly using the gas to fuel vehicles.
Realistically, unconventional oil sources like shale and coal liquefaction are almost certain to play a role. Incredibly polluting perhaps, but likely. Not expanding electricity generation would greatly increase the need for such unconventional oil sources since the lack of electricity rules out hydrogen for vehicles.
That the deadline is perhaps 3 years away is the reason why a totally renewable solution is simply not an option. A combination of all options including wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, large scale hydro, biofuels (including ethanol), nuclear and coal-fired electricity and production of liquid fuels from coal and shale is likely to be used. And of course we still have the ramaining supplies of oil and gas, total production of which will decline relatively slowly with gas still growing over the next couple of decades in some countries (Australian production peak seems likely around 2025-2030 based on present discovery and production trends).
Environmentally, the good news is that there isn't enough oil and gas to cause all but the mildest greenhose scenarios. The bad news is this lack of oil and gas is likely to be the greatest problem of the 21st century.
This was very highly condensed as I said at the start. Invest your money as you see fit but I suggest that Uranium (due to the Kyoto Protocol), and oil stocks with good PROVEN reserves are the way to go. This doesn't take account of the ethical considerations. Gas depends on location - anywhere in North America and UK there is a massive market due to reserves running out an production falling. There are good opportunities in NZ for anyone who makes a large find (the country faces a gas crisis as existing fields run dry) but the small size of the market (around 40 PJ plus 80PJ each for power generation (which is shifting to coal and renewables due to lack of gas) and export methanol production (which has substantially ceased due to lack of gas).
As for renewables, ethanol would make money in an oil crisis despite questionable fundamentals. The solar tower (Enviromission) and hot dry rock technologies seem to have a strong future in a technical sense although they are sources of electricity not vehicle fuel.
The dominant renewable energy business in Australia is not listed - it is owned 100% by the Tasmanian Government. Generates 60% of Australia's renewable energy from operations in Tas and SA. Will supply peak power to Vic in about 12 months. Involved in hydrogen research both for vehicles and stationary energy - has operating prototype systems and a 100% wind/hydrogem system on a remote island is planned. Has 50% wind in the King Island grid with a grid-connected battery system. Extensively involved in provision of technical expertise for hydro and other renewable energy and water supply systems around the world. Also a world leader in proven technology which increases rainfall 10 - 20% over targeted areas.
The next biggest player is the Snowy Mountains scheme. Another one you can't invest in.
The remaining players are generally focused on one or two projects and have minimal (if any) present production. Good thing though is they are ASX listed.
- Joined
- 17 November 2004
- Posts
- 333
- Reactions
- 2
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
I believe Maurituis runs there power plant on cane sugar once started due to the abundance of cane sugar on the island..
I believe Maurituis runs there power plant on cane sugar once started due to the abundance of cane sugar on the island..
- Joined
- 23 November 2004
- Posts
- 3,974
- Reactions
- 850
Re: AAE Good investment in oil crisis?
Smurf
A very good and interesting post.
There are alternative energy supplies available at the moment that you have discussed, but in my opinion are not as practical as oil.
I have no figures to back up my statements but in my opinion the sun is the energy source the World must harness as soon as possible. It is the only long term solution to our fervent need for energy.
But for the moment research into oil and uranium stock could be profitable.
Smurf
A very good and interesting post.
There are alternative energy supplies available at the moment that you have discussed, but in my opinion are not as practical as oil.
I have no figures to back up my statements but in my opinion the sun is the energy source the World must harness as soon as possible. It is the only long term solution to our fervent need for energy.
But for the moment research into oil and uranium stock could be profitable.
- Joined
- 13 July 2006
- Posts
- 48
- Reactions
- 0
Re: AAE - Australian Ethanol
I got into AAE not for it being an ethanol producer but a biodiesel producer. As I understand it is in the process of building. As to ethanol it has been put on hold until economics in Asutralia improve. The ethanol 'uses more energy to produce than it provides' arguement seems to loose some merit when you consider Brazil. Is this arguement for grain produced or grain and sugar?
without getting into the world of economics, if there aint any oil, isnt ethanol able to used and exisiting infrastructure used to support. Of course cars, plains and trains will need to be modified, but ethanol can be used.
As to AAE, is it a US biodiesel play rather than an aussie ethanol play?
If it floats on NASDAQ would there be a price increase?.
I got into AAE not for it being an ethanol producer but a biodiesel producer. As I understand it is in the process of building. As to ethanol it has been put on hold until economics in Asutralia improve. The ethanol 'uses more energy to produce than it provides' arguement seems to loose some merit when you consider Brazil. Is this arguement for grain produced or grain and sugar?
without getting into the world of economics, if there aint any oil, isnt ethanol able to used and exisiting infrastructure used to support. Of course cars, plains and trains will need to be modified, but ethanol can be used.
As to AAE, is it a US biodiesel play rather than an aussie ethanol play?
If it floats on NASDAQ would there be a price increase?.
- Joined
- 27 April 2007
- Posts
- 29
- Reactions
- 0
Re: AAE - Australian Ethanol
Hi all,
There is a decent source of info on ethanol as a fuel on the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition website which is a non-profit organisation. I joined their mailing list about 3 years ago as I had to do a committee report to an association I am a member of (more on the Oil and Gas side). I don't have a vested interest in this stock or ethanol, but it's worth reading if you are serious. I note that there are some inaccuracies in post on here where people state that anything more than 10% ethanol will damage an engine.
The biggest proponents of the www.e85fuel.com website seem to be focussed in the mid-west of the US which is traditional grain country. In that part of the world they started using corn and corn byproduct (stalks maybe) and when I last checked manufacturers like Ford and Chrysler/GM were producing normal vehicles which required minimal engine tweaking capable of using 85% ethanol blend fuel.
I know that in Brazil they have used 90% ethanol for years principally because they have lots of sugar, and not much oil or international spending to trade heavily in importing oil (and probably don't want to strengthen Venezuela, a regional power). Realistically, bio-fuels are more than viable but until the geo-politics change and the economic muscle of the oil companies start to realign themselves with 'renewable' fuel it's going to require a grass roots swell and local economic factors (e.g regional cane growers etc) to move things along.
Anyway, like I say I have no vested interest, just some info to share. There is a precedent for major car manufacturers producing ethanol fit vehicles, and up to 85% blend at that...happy trading
Hi all,
There is a decent source of info on ethanol as a fuel on the National Ethanol Vehicle Coalition website which is a non-profit organisation. I joined their mailing list about 3 years ago as I had to do a committee report to an association I am a member of (more on the Oil and Gas side). I don't have a vested interest in this stock or ethanol, but it's worth reading if you are serious. I note that there are some inaccuracies in post on here where people state that anything more than 10% ethanol will damage an engine.
The biggest proponents of the www.e85fuel.com website seem to be focussed in the mid-west of the US which is traditional grain country. In that part of the world they started using corn and corn byproduct (stalks maybe) and when I last checked manufacturers like Ford and Chrysler/GM were producing normal vehicles which required minimal engine tweaking capable of using 85% ethanol blend fuel.
I know that in Brazil they have used 90% ethanol for years principally because they have lots of sugar, and not much oil or international spending to trade heavily in importing oil (and probably don't want to strengthen Venezuela, a regional power). Realistically, bio-fuels are more than viable but until the geo-politics change and the economic muscle of the oil companies start to realign themselves with 'renewable' fuel it's going to require a grass roots swell and local economic factors (e.g regional cane growers etc) to move things along.
Anyway, like I say I have no vested interest, just some info to share. There is a precedent for major car manufacturers producing ethanol fit vehicles, and up to 85% blend at that...happy trading
- Joined
- 10 July 2004
- Posts
- 2,913
- Reactions
- 3
Re: AAE - Australian Ethanol
Todays announcement post the close of the ASX...
"RESTRUCTURE OF AUSTRALIAN OPERATIONS
The Board of Agri Energy Limited (AAE) has completed an assessment of the Australian biofuels industry and has taken the decision to put on hold development plans in Australia. The Company is fully focused on completion and successful start up of the Beatrice Biodiesel Project with the Group’s principal operational hub relocating to the United States. The Group has restructured the business in Australia back to a core administrative group.
The decision to put on hold any further development in the Australian biofuels industry is a result of current global biofuels market outlook reflecting ongoing high feedstock prices and continued uncertainty from the investment community, government and community support for alternative transport fuels in Australia. As a result, investment in offshore markets,
particularly the United States and European biofuels industries, represents a preferred medium term focus. The Group is in discussion with United States and European partner groups to consolidate the global business and rationalise operations under a more appropriate structure."
Looks like bio-fuels in Oz are somewhat "on the nose" as it were.... it was always going to come down to this equation - the price/availability of limited raw materials in a very competitive market under drought conditions is just too big a hurdle at the moment - and maybe going forward too. Anyone holding AAE here (I don't) are probably going to be mighty disappointed come Monday... not good news for the future of alternative fuels in Oz I'm afraid.
Todays announcement post the close of the ASX...
"RESTRUCTURE OF AUSTRALIAN OPERATIONS
The Board of Agri Energy Limited (AAE) has completed an assessment of the Australian biofuels industry and has taken the decision to put on hold development plans in Australia. The Company is fully focused on completion and successful start up of the Beatrice Biodiesel Project with the Group’s principal operational hub relocating to the United States. The Group has restructured the business in Australia back to a core administrative group.
The decision to put on hold any further development in the Australian biofuels industry is a result of current global biofuels market outlook reflecting ongoing high feedstock prices and continued uncertainty from the investment community, government and community support for alternative transport fuels in Australia. As a result, investment in offshore markets,
particularly the United States and European biofuels industries, represents a preferred medium term focus. The Group is in discussion with United States and European partner groups to consolidate the global business and rationalise operations under a more appropriate structure."
Looks like bio-fuels in Oz are somewhat "on the nose" as it were.... it was always going to come down to this equation - the price/availability of limited raw materials in a very competitive market under drought conditions is just too big a hurdle at the moment - and maybe going forward too. Anyone holding AAE here (I don't) are probably going to be mighty disappointed come Monday... not good news for the future of alternative fuels in Oz I'm afraid.
Re: AAE - Australian Ethanol
AAE could be one or the most undervalued companies around. The recent announcement of the sale of a 20% share of it's US subsidairy company for US$15million values that company at US$103m. AAE retains 80%. The current market cap at 11c is only $25m.
Given that a labour win in the election could mean more assistance for alternative fuels this one may have a good future. DYOR.
AAE could be one or the most undervalued companies around. The recent announcement of the sale of a 20% share of it's US subsidairy company for US$15million values that company at US$103m. AAE retains 80%. The current market cap at 11c is only $25m.
Given that a labour win in the election could mean more assistance for alternative fuels this one may have a good future. DYOR.
Similar threads
- Article
