Tomco Energy Share Discussion Threads

[lopodop] 14/3/2022 14:34

JP is doing a grand job - he threw you the bait and you swallowed it.
More bait to follow no doubt.

[fenners66] 14/3/2022 13:26

One other common theme

Losses

TOM - you all know how much

Vivakor loses $2m+ a year

PQE - accumulated losses around $100m

TSHII - created from a bankrupt company trying the same....

And now the other thread finally realises that PQE tech is not unique - how can that be ?

but this time it's different..... except it never is...

[rmart] 14/3/2022 13:26

There are 3 things which will put this share price into the multiple pennies.

1. Full plant funding.
or
2. Funding to complete the purchase of the remaining 90% of TSHII
or
3. The first Vivakor plant up and running and producing income for Tom from the sand products.

Everything else is just a sideshow.

[vauch] 14/3/2022 13:09

One of the gripes I also have Rmart, this terms sheet was suppose to be with in the two week period from when mentioned. It remind me of the RF tec when it was suppose to be upgraded and then nothing.
Come on JP you have progressed this well but can we have just one over the line for a change.

[1dutchman] 14/3/2022 12:55

Re: SL - "CO2 production has never been commercially proved? Refining oil in a refinery has never been commercially proved? Vivakor RPC remediation technique has never been commercially proved? Give your head a shake." In reverse order, Vivakor RPC has never been proved commercial. That is why they were unable to privately fund a purchase of TS2 over the past 5 years and instead are left with a derelict plant that they now hope to recommission. Perhaps they have made improvements to their process and it now works? Or is it possible that they have new hopes for funding because they have recently listed and hope to take funding from less discerning investors, eg, shareholders? Refining oil in a 10 tbd refinery is not economic. If it was, you would see refineries cropping up all over the world. Instead, these tin pot refineries have all been shut down, just as this one has. 'CO2 production' or secondary production using CO2 for enhanced oil recovery is indeed proven - but not using CO2 produced by the technology described here. Or using the in situ process planned here. Again, not commercially proven. As someone else pointed out, it is interesting that the one common bond between all of these dream projects is Valkor. A group that continues to tout on its website projects that haven't operated for years. What have they actually accomplished? Perhaps, like Tom investors, Valkor hopes that one of these technologies might work. They are certainly leading the Tom Board down that merry path.

[rmart] 14/3/2022 12:30

I would just like them to get ONE of them up and running.

I like this tie in with Vivakor.

However,we are now almost entering week 7 since the 2 week expectation of the term sheet. Coming out with new curve balls is not the answer.

We need updating on the original plan.

[damac] 14/3/2022 12:18

As you said yourself Stuart, there are no such things as 'no brainers' on AIM. I would just like to see Greenfield get as many viable income streams up and running as soon as possible to further de-risk the ongoing sustainability of the company.

[stuart little] 14/3/2022 12:14

Yes, on that the board knows infinitely more than we do. They know exactly where the funding is up to and it's likeliness off concluding. Ok they won't know about the drilling of the wells but they'll have more understanding of the progress on the upgrades to the refinery and Vivakors intentions. They are armed with the facts to do the right thing. Hopefully they read these boards to gauge opinion.

[bungeetrader] 14/3/2022 12:07

Thanks for correcting me damac, I'd forgotten about that. Still feel the same though.

[stuart little] 14/3/2022 12:02

My original view on this was if funding was imminent then great but if it's going to drag on put it in the shelf for a while. Whilst it's hanging over us the share price won't factor in the other projects.

[stuart little] 14/3/2022 11:59

Letting the royalty projects run for a couple of years and drilling as many in situ wells as possible would make a much stronger company and vastly improve the terms over the funding deal. It's about maximising return in a timescale that is acceptable. It's a good problem to be faced with.

[damac] 14/3/2022 11:56

BungeeTrader,

Yes but for Valkor to get that 29% holding, Greenfield have to achieve financial closure on the finance required for a 5k bopd CORT plant.

[damac] 14/3/2022 11:52

'If' Vivakor operations are subject to logistical constraints and as such they can only have 4 units in total on TS2 then....

Assuming the 1000 barrels per day output...

Assuming say 350 operational days per year...

Assuming the 20 year lifespan as stated by Vivakor....

This would equate to 7m barrels over the 20 years, leaving 37m of the 44m barrels still in the ground (stated in the reserves report as suitable for oil sand processing).

In that scenario it would be crazy (in my opinion) for Greenfield to shelve aspirations to have their own 5k bopd CORT plant up and running as soon as possible.

[damac] 14/3/2022 11:37

foxm,

In this video, Matt Nicosia from Vivakor says that they hope to have the first processing unit operating by end of Q2 and the other 3 by end of the year.




Maybe it is just how I pick it up, but to me the tone of his comments suggest that they will only ever be intending to install 4 units in total on TS2. Maybe that is down to logistical constraints? It is only a 3 acre lease they have taken. The rest of the TS2 site will most likely be taken up by mining operations, in-situ wells (remember there are 20 being considered, and a CORT plant if that goes ahead.

[bungeetrader] 14/3/2022 11:24

Quite happy with slow and steady share price increases now rather than the sharp 20-30% rises then drop back to almost where it was. As I've already said, I do think there is something big being built up here which will transform Greenfield/Tomco. My only concern now is Tomco being bought out with a low ball offer. They could also of course sell Greenfield for a considerable amount however if the share price continues to remain at these low levels then it is a concern. Valkors holding though could be a deciding factor in any offer being accepted. Whatever way you look at it there are exciting times ahead IMHO.

[stuart little] 14/3/2022 11:16

Damac, part of the mou was for Valkor to upgrade the sand separation process. From memory of the POSP it was a fairly straight forward back end addition. I agree it's not without risk but maybe not as problematic as envisaged. Coby will be all over it!

[rmart] 14/3/2022 11:13

Yes I understand, I got my figures wrong. Somehow I thought valkor were upgrading each vivakor plant to 1000bopd.

"It is Vivakor's intention, with the assistance of Greenfield, to develop and enhance a pre-exisiting oil sands processing plant that it owns on the Property. Such upgraded plant, to be operated by Vivakor, would be designed to produce at least 1,000 barrels of oil per day or equivalent tonnage of asphalt cement."

[damac] 14/3/2022 11:10

I still think that Greenfield would/should be intending pressing ahead with their own 5k bopd CORT plant. There are no guarantees that income from other streams will happen until they do. For example, the upgrades to the refinery may result in insurmountable problems and the 3rd party walk away, and that potential revenue stream disappears. Greenfield have to safeguard and de-risk their future as much as possible and that means having as many viable income streams as possible.

You also have to consider that the Vivakor plants are of different design to CORT and with production outputs limited to only 1 oil product, that being suitable for Asphalt cement only. We do not know the quality or degree of separation of the sand by-product from the Vivakor process, it may not be as advanced as the CORT separation process and thus command lesser revenues.

The CORT plant can produce 4 different types of sand, Fracking & Well sand, Silica, Industrial Sand, and Building sand. It can also produce 2 different types of oil depending on demand, Asphalt/Heavy oil, and Middle Distillate oil.

So, given the amount of recoverable oil available from processing oil sands (44m as per the reserves report) and given the different outputs of both systems, for me it comes down to getting as much oil out of the ground as quick as possible and having multiple income streams that will support the ongoing development of Greenfield.

[damac] 14/3/2022 10:56

rmart,

Your post #26173

I'm reading it as each Vivakor plant that produces 250 bopd costs $6.25m. Which would mean that a 5000 bopd production facility would cost $125m.





"It costs about $6.25 million to build each system and Vivakor generates around $5 million on average in top-line revenue per machine."


"Following the NASDAQ listing and capital raise, Nicosia said Vivakor plans to expand its Utah facility, adding three more systems to take the project from producing 250 barrels of asphalt a day to a thousand barrels."


"The CEO said Vivakor already has a demand for five systems that it needs to deploy this year, which will require $30 million in equipment financing."

[rmart] 14/3/2022 10:31

Fenners -lol how silly

[stuart little] 14/3/2022 09:57

CO2 production has never been commercially proved?Refining oil in a refinery has never been commercially proved?Vivakor RPC remediation technique has never been commercially proved?Give your head a shake.

[1dutchman] 14/3/2022 09:51

How many potential revenue sources are there now? 5, 6 7? Has it occurred to anyone that all of these projects (and Tom's future) are based on technologies which have never been commercially proven? That's quite a feat. Tom has become a fine exhibition of failed technologies. Perhaps there is yet another revenue stream from selling tickets to "the grand illusion"?

[fenners66] 14/3/2022 09:47

I see the La La's have finally noticed the "unique tech " of Petroteq is not unique - but they still cannot see the significance...

Only last year they were saying that TOM/Greenfield has to be worth a fortune as it had the only rights to use PQE tech on multiple sites in the US.

NOW - they are telling us the Vivakor tech could be cheaper.... and neither lose solvent .... ever....

But surely PQE is patented ?
Vaivakor must be breaching a patent ?

Or more likely - anyone could do it , so the licence is worth very little?

More blinkers , only ever good news on the other thread.
One thing it indicates - the CORT plant idea for $175-200m is effectively dead already.
Why try and fail to raise that cash when someone else wants to build it and buy the raw material from you...

But have they ever PROVEN that it works at 1000 bpd - its all right saying you had a good hour here and there , but that is not commercial.

[foxm] 14/3/2022 09:19

Even if the two processes are similar and cost more or less the same, Vivakor has a few advantages over PQE. As stuart says, it can be scaled up over time, the systems are mobile, they can easily be moved to where the tar sands are, and the time to get a system operational is therefore much quicker. I think they can get these RPCs installed and commissioned in less than 6 months, a CORT system is at least 18 months.