Oxford Catalysts Share Discussion Threads

[plasybryn] 28/1/2013 10:26

I believe expecting major GTL order in Q1-2013.

[fern5] 28/1/2013 10:08

What are the expectations around newsflow, anything imminent?

[fern5] 28/1/2013 10:06

Thanks Asterix, thats what I like to see, confidence!

[plasybryn] 28/1/2013 10:06

Fern5: Very bullish.

[asterix96] 28/1/2013 09:58

The sky's the limit!

[fern5] 28/1/2013 09:28

Hi All

I'm a new comer to OCG. What are people's opinions and views about the OCG value and potential?

[beeezzz] 26/1/2013 12:23

I wonder if we will test support level 2 in next few weeks, if so good buying opportunity.

Resistance 2 206.7
Resistance 1 189.2
Closing price 177.5
Support 1 171.7
Support 2 165.8
Volatility (daily) 3.69
Value At Risk % 8.59
Performance (weekly) -4.83 %

[dmor] 25/1/2013 20:43

Will Linc Energy's interest in Gas to Liquid wane following their recent ( 2 billion to 200 billion barrel ?! ) oil find in Cooper Pedy

[dmor] 25/1/2013 16:35

though still low volume that nearly £0.5m a day continues to be traded is good news to us old timers !

[beeezzz] 25/1/2013 12:15

slow decline...usually happens when I buy in..future looks bright thou.

[gac141] 24/1/2013 10:42

I hope you are right.. It will do this but I think based upon some new news or update from OCG.

[r007212] 24/1/2013 08:39

to break and close above 200p today

[gac141] 22/1/2013 17:04

It has been nearly 2 months since the last update on orders so hope the company might give the market a heads up in the next few weeks...

[piadda] 22/1/2013 16:32

Hardly any sells today compared with buys. I think we are still on the way up. It would be nice to see £2 taken out and one good RNS should do it.

[cestnous] 22/1/2013 12:16

Bought more on this dip @ 185

[jdb2005] 21/1/2013 16:41

Could be Coded messages between MMs !!
Have you got stock to trade - cannot balance our books/cover our backsides without help, or I'm about to drop my bid and try and frighten a few PIs into selling some stock prematurely ??

[pablo666] 21/1/2013 16:24

Anyone figured out what all these 61, 62, 63 mean? There is suspeciously many of them to just be random.

[gac141] 21/1/2013 16:18

Sharing Info from another source.

Gas-to-Liquids Plants: No Longer Exclusive to Larger Players

0
Twitter


0
LinkedIn



0
Share



Sponsored by

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, The Government of India has issued the following news release:

Recently, British Airways announced an agreement to purchase $500 million of jet fuel converted from landfill gas. It signed with a consortium of companies to create a conversion facility in the UK, utilizing the Fischer Tropsch (FT) technology to convert gas to liquid fuels. The technology is not new, dating back to the 1920s and was used by Germany in World War II as well as South Africa during the apartheid era of isolation.

This gas-to-liquids (GTL) process is now more broadly entering the rest of the world. In Louisiana, Sasol is investing between $16 and 21 bn to create a sizable facility for conversion of natural gas to diesel fuel. Similarly, Shell has a project in the $18 to19 bn range in Qatar to exploit cheap natural gas, and is also exploring a potential project on the US Gulf Coast.

On a smaller scale, a number of companies are mobilizing to utilize the FT process to take advantage of more site-specific opportunities. Their goal is to create small-scale and modular GTL systems both on- and offshore to take advantage of a wide range of gas resources that are by themselves too small for larger multibillion GTL plants.

In particular, these companies plan to create GTL opportunities where gas byproduct from oil production is too far from pipelines and thus flared, and from smaller gas fields where scale has been a limiting factor. It has been estimated that less than 10% of the world's gas fields are large enough to sustain a 10,000 barrels per day (bpd) GTL facility. But scaling production down to the 2,000 bpd range is estimated to open up 40% of the world's gas fields to economic viability.

One of the companies most active in this area is UK-based Oxford Catalysts Group. They are the ones bringing the Fischer Tropsch technology to the British Airways deal. They are also aggressively pursuing natural gas plays. With15 years of experience and $300 million in investments by partners such as BP, Chevron, Petrobras, and – most recently – Roman Abramovich, Russian billionaire and Chelsea Football club owner, investing £5m for a 3.5% stake Oxford is pursuing a strategy to enter the market with modular plants that can convert gas in the 1,000 to 15,000 pbd range.

According to CEO Roy Lipski, these plants cost about $100,000 for every b/d capacity, so a 1,000 barrel/day unit would cost roughly$100 mn. These economics work if the delta in price between petroleum and natural gas continues. With gas at $4 per mmBtuLipski notes that you can produce a barrel of finished diesel product for $66. Oxford's US-based subsidiary in Columbus, Ohio – Velocys – has been established to address numerous perceived opportunities on the continent. Given the number of shale plays, the delta between natural gas and oil, and proximity to consumer markets, they may find a profitable niche in this space.

The conversion of gas to liquids is not a simple process. Oxford/Velocys markets three products in the US: the FT reactor, a steam methane reformer, and a hydrocracking process. These are protected by a total of 800+ patents. The simplified process is as follows:

1) Conversion of methane into carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen through the steam methane reforming process (and removing the carbon dioxide) to produce syngas.
2) Reacting the syngas in the FT reactor to create what are known as long chain hydrocarbons.
3) Conversion of these hydrocarbons into diesel, naptha, and 'waxy bottoms,' which may be further converted to additional diesel and naptha.

The first of Oxford's smaller GTL plants may spring up as early as 2014 at the Calumet Specialty Product Partners site in Karns, PA. Calumet has announced that it selected Velocys to develop a 1,000 bpd capability that will allow Calumet to lower its raw material costs in producing its traditionally petroleum-based products (think motor oils, WD40, Turtle Wax, Vaseline and the like).

Calumet would come up with the majority of project funding, with partners providing the remainder. ?A final decision is expected in the first half of the year.? This business approach is standard for Oxford/Velocys. They provide the technology and licensing, while their suppliers source the physical plants. According to Lipski, this approach lets them "scale-up the business with limited investments...since cash requirements from our suppliers are matched with payments from our customers."

Oxford/Velocys has also been selected by Sierra Energy ("Sierra") for a $5 mn California Energy Commission ("CEC") funded waste gasification demonstration plant to produce diesel fuel. It is projected to yield 25-100 barrels per day, by mid to late 2013. If successful, it is expected to serve as a template for a larger roll-out by Sierra. Biomass, waste gasification, and coal conversion projects may ultimately have commercial potential, but Lipski commented that "most of these projects will be longer term development efforts because these projects are more complex due to additional processing steps."

Oxford is not the only player in the small GTL realm focused on flare gas and stranded fields. Perhaps the most formidable competitor is Compact GTL. This UK-based company is focused largely on addressing the problem of what to do with associated gas resulting from oil development that would otherwise be flared or reinjected. Their goal is to capture and process the gas, mixing the end product with the petroleum extracted from the same field. To date they have successfully demonstrated and operated – for nearly two years - a $45 mn GTL plant in coordination with Petrobras. Compact GTL is also doing client-funded work for a number of major oil companies in Russia and the former Soviet Union to utilize natural gas at a rate of up to 100 mcf/day.

Longer-term, as the technology matures, we can expect to see more GTL plants pop up, particularly the smaller ones costing in the hundreds of millions rather than tens of billions. Just how successful this technological approach will become remains to be seen. However, Oxford Catalysts' Lipski estimates sufficient economic feedstock around the world to make 25 mn bpd – nearly as much fuel as Opec produces.

Lipski noted in an email exchange "Our ambition is to enable a new segment within the energy industry. We have made great progress in the past two years and we see two primary inflection points on our path. The first is securing the investment commitment for the initial GTL facilities. The second is achieving the successful start-up of a facility and having a commercial reference plant."

Considering the opportunities to treat gas that would otherwise be flared, to unlock otherwise uneconomic shale and conventional gas fields, and increasing opportunities for biomass, waste and coal conversion, small-scale GTL may well have a significant niche to fill in our emerging energy picture.

[arf dysg] 21/1/2013 12:44

Price over £2. Whoopee! Good news coming?

[dmor] 21/1/2013 12:43

£2 per share broken - hope it holds/rises to 210 before fall back ( 12.47 edit - some hope ! )

[rogerbridge] 21/1/2013 12:09

Interesting reading gac141

[gac141] 21/1/2013 11:01

Global interest in GTL expected to grow


MENAFN - Arab News - 20/01/2013


(MENAFN - Arab News) Last week Doha hosted the first World Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) Congress. The event comes at a time of heightened interest in the industry, according to QNB Group.

Recent landmark developments include the commissioning of the second train of Pearl GTL in Qatar, moves by Qatar Airways to utilize GTL as jet fuel and plans for new GTL plants in the US and elsewhere.

The GTL process converts natural gas into refined liquid fuels, such as kerosene and diesel.

These can be more easily transported to relevant markets than gas, and have a higher sales value than raw gas. The GTL process is a chemical transformation, in contrast to purely physical methods of reducing the volume of gas for transportation by increasing pressure, producing compressed natural gas (CNG), or reducing temperature, producing liquefied natural gas (LNG).

Unlike CNG and LNG methods, GTL products do not require any special equipment to transport or use, as they are similar to fuels derived from crude oil. Moreover, the purity and quality of the GTL-produced fuels also means that they are considered suitable for high-value applications, such as jet fuel.

The chemical process underlying GTL was developed nearly a century ago.

However, high capital development costs limited its application except in situations where countries lacking oil reserves needed security of fuel supplies. This was the case for Germany during the Second World War and for South Africa under sanctions during the Apartheid era. Both countries used coal rather than natural gas as the feedstock for the process.

Sasol, a South African firm, brought the technology to Qatar to build the 34,000 barrels per day (bpd) Oryx GTL plant in partnership with Qatar Petroleum (QP). At its launch in 2006 it was the world's largest GTL plant, but has since been surpassed by Pearl GTL, a joint-venture of Shell and QP.

Its first train was commissioned in 2011 and the second last summer. The entire plant is currently operating at around 85 percent of its nameplate capacity of 140,000 bpd of GTL. This capacity is equivalent to more than half of global GTL production.

The huge 19 billion project utilized twice the concrete of the Burj Khalifa, 40 times the steel of the Eiffel tower and involved 52,000 construction workers at its peak. The other commercial facilities are much smaller and in South Africa and Malaysia, operated by PetroSA and Shell respectively.

Interest in GTL has come in three waves, according to QNB Group. The first was in the early 1990s, when the South African and Malaysian plants were launched. The second wave was in the early 2000s, when the current plants in Qatar were envisaged, as well as a 33,000 bpd project by Chevron and Sasol in Nigeria, due to be commissioned this year.

However, some other GTL projects, envisaged during the second wave were subsequently canceled. This happened largely because the LNG market looked like it offered a better rate of return on capital. Qatar backed Oryx and Pearl GTL, alongside its even larger LNG projects, in order to diversify its options for monetising gas.

It is too early to judge which technology - GTL or LNG - will offer better returns on investment in the long-term. This will depend on the average premium of liquid fuels over LNG prices over the lifetime of the projects, compared to the difference in capital and operational costs.

Currently, GTL capital costs are about 100k-200k per bpd, about 2-4 times those of LNG, affected by several factors such plant size and the potentially volatile prices of construction materials. The GTL conversion process also consumes some of the gas feedstock.

Depending on the particular plant and local cost of gas, GTL is considered to break even at about 40-80 per barrel. Refined oil prices are currently well above this level, providing strong profit margins.
One place where a significant premium has opened up between oil and gas prices is in the US.

The US shale gas revolution there has driven down local gas prices at a time of high oil prices, thereby boosting the appeal of GTL. The US government's Energy Information Agency (EIA) forecasts that the ratio of domestic oil to gas prices will be twice as high in the period until 2030 than it was in the previous two decades. This is why Sasol announced plans last month for a 96,000 bpd GTL plant in Louisiana, to start operations in 2018.

This is part of a third wave of interest in GTL. Sasol also has plans for a 38,000 bpd plant in Uzbekistan, with a final investment decision due this year, and is also investigating a 48,000 bpd plant in Canada. PetroSA is in discussions on a 40,000 bpd plant in Mozambique, which has recently discovered sizeable reserves of offshore gas. Finally, Shell is also considering a plant in the US.

Although Sasol and Shell hold most of the expertise and patents for large-scale GTL plants, new firms are entering the sector. Oxford Catalysts, a spinoff from the university science department, is developing smaller-scale modular GTL technology, suitable for production ranging from a few hundred to a few thousand bpd.

This could help capture "stranded" associated gas from oilfields which would otherwise be flared because the volume and/or location means that it is not economical to market by pipeline or LNG.

Petrobras, for example, is considering this technology to utilise the associated gas in Brazil's offshore oilfields. Waste biomass can also be used as a feedstock for small-scale GTL.

GTL-derived fuel has less environmental impact than conventional jet fuel as it has a higher energy density and cleaner emissions. Coal-derived GTL jet fuel has been used in South Africa for over a decade, and British Airways is planning on using some biomass-derived GTL jet fuel.

Qatar Airways is leading the way in usage of natural gas-derived GTL jet fuel, and began commercial flights this month utilising up to 50 percent GTL kerosene.

QNB Group concludes that the future of GTL will depend on whether capital costs can be kept under control and on long-term expectations for the price premium of oil over gas/LNG.

If the major GTL plants under discussion go ahead, then global production capacity could more than double by the end of the decade to nearly 0.5 million bpd.

The new capacity would not significantly compete with existing GTL because it would still be well under 1% of global oil consumption. Small scale GTL is a new development that has yet to be commercialised, but its prospects look promising.

An optimistic case envisages that it has the potential to produce perhaps 3 million bpd of GTL from currently flared gas, although the installation of this capacity could take decades. Coal and biomass based GTL capacity is also likely to grow, driven by energy security and sustainability considerations, respectively.

[piadda] 21/1/2013 10:13

That was tongue in cheek. I see no reason why we couldn't build a plant that size but other technologies become competitive over 15,000 bpd.