Filed On 2/9/09 8:17pm ET · SEC File 333-152967 · Accession Number 950123-9-2250
As Of Filer Filing As/For/On Docs:Pgs Issuer Agent
2/10/09 Changing World Technologies/Inc S-1/A 4:237 Bowne of NY City...01/FA
Pre-Effective Amendment to Registration Statement (General Form) · Form S-1
Filing Table of Contents
Document/Exhibit Description Pages Size
1: S-1/A Amendment No.7 to Form S-1 HTML 1,335K
2: EX-10.21 Ex-10.21: Renewable Diesel Fuel Oil Sales Contract HTML 22K
3: EX-23.1 Ex-23.1: Consent of Ernst & Young Llp HTML 4K
4: EX-23.2 Ex-23.2: Consent of Ernst & Young Llp HTML 4K
| Page | (sequential) | | | | (alphabetic) | Top |
|---|
| | |
- Alternative Formats (Word, et al.)
- Additional Information
- Balance sheet as of July 31, 2005
- Business
- Capitalization
- Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions
- Change in Accountants
- Compensation Discussion and Analysis
- Consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2007 and 2006
- Consolidated balance sheets as of September 30, 2008 (unaudited), and December 31, 2007 (audited)
- Consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2007 (unaudited)
- Consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
- Consolidated statements of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2007 (unaudited)
- Consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
- Consolidated statements of stockholders' equity for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
- Description of Capital Stock
- Dilution
- Dividend Policy
- Experts
- Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
- Legal Matters
- Management
- Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
- Material U.S. Federal Tax Consequences For Non-U.S. Holders of Common Stock
- Notes to the consolidated financial statements
- Notes to the consolidated financial statements (unaudited)
- Notes to the financial statements
- Plan of Distribution
- Principal Stockholders
- Prospectus Summary
- Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
- Risk Factors
- Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data
- Shares Eligible for Future Sale
- Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
- Statement of cash flows for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
- Statement of members' equity for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
- Statement of operations for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
- Table of Contents
- Use of Proceeds
|
| 1 | 1st Page - Filing Submission
|
| " | Table of Contents
|
| " | Prospectus Summary
|
| " | Risk Factors
|
| " | Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
|
| " | Use of Proceeds
|
| " | Dividend Policy
|
| " | Capitalization
|
| " | Dilution
|
| " | Selected Historical Consolidated Financial Data
|
| " | Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
|
| " | Business
|
| " | Management
|
| " | Compensation Discussion and Analysis
|
| " | Principal Stockholders
|
| " | Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions
|
| " | Description of Capital Stock
|
| " | Shares Eligible for Future Sale
|
| " | Material U.S. Federal Tax Consequences For Non-U.S. Holders of Common Stock
|
| " | Plan of Distribution
|
| " | Legal Matters
|
| " | Experts
|
| " | Change in Accountants
|
| " | Additional Information
|
| " | Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
| " | Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
| " | Consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2007 and 2006
|
| " | Consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
| " | Consolidated statements of stockholders' equity for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
| " | Consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
|
| " | Notes to the consolidated financial statements
|
| " | Consolidated balance sheets as of September 30, 2008 (unaudited), and December 31, 2007 (audited)
|
| " | Consolidated statements of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2007 (unaudited)
|
| " | Consolidated statements of cash flows for the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and 2007 (unaudited)
|
| " | Notes to the consolidated financial statements (unaudited)
|
| " | Balance sheet as of July 31, 2005
|
| " | Statement of operations for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
|
| " | Statement of members' equity for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
|
| " | Statement of cash flows for the seven months ended July 31, 2005
|
| " | Notes to the financial statements
|
This is an EDGAR HTML document rendered as filed. [ Alternative Formats ]
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Amendment No. 7
to
Form S-1
REGISTRATION
STATEMENT
UNDER
THE SECURITIES ACT OF
1933
CHANGING WORLD TECHNOLOGIES,
INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as
Specified in Its Charter)
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
2899
|
|
86-0892450
|
(State or Other Jurisdiction
of
Incorporation or Organization)
|
|
(Primary Standard Industrial
Classification Code Number)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
460 Hempstead Avenue
(Address, Including Zip Code,
and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Registrant’s
Principal Executive Offices)
Brian S. Appel
Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer
Changing World Technologies,
Inc.
460 Hempstead Avenue
(Name, Address, Including Zip
Code, and Telephone Number, Including Area Code, of Agent For
Service)
Copies to:
Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the
public: As soon as practicable after the
effective date of this Registration Statement.
If any of the securities being registered on this form are to be
offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to
Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, check the
following
box. o
If this form is filed to register additional securities for an
offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act,
check the following box and list the Securities Act registration
statement number of the earlier effective registration statement
for the same
offering. o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
If this form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to
Rule 462(d) under the Securities Act, check the following
box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of
the earlier effective registration statement for the same
offering. o
Indicate by check mark whether
the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
“large accelerated filer,” “accelerated
filer” and
“smaller reporting company” in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer o
|
|
Accelerated
filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer þ
|
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
|
The Registrant hereby amends this Registration Statement on
such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective
date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment which
specifically states that this Registration Statement shall
thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a)
of the Securities Act of 1933 or until the Registration
Statement shall become effective on such date as the Securities
and Exchange Commission, acting pursuant to said
Section 8(a), may determine.
The
information in this prospectus is not complete and may be
changed. We may not sell these securities until the Securities
and Exchange Commission declares our registration statement
effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these
securities and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these
securities in any state where the offer or sale is not
permitted.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Changing World Technologies, Inc.
2,750,000 Shares of Common Stock
|
This is our initial public offering and no public market
currently exists for our shares. We are selling
2,750,000 shares of common stock. We expect that the
initial public offering price will be between $11.00 and $15.00
per share.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
THE OFFERING
|
|
PER SHARE
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initial Public Offering Price
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Underwriting Discount
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
Proceeds to Changing World Technologies, Inc.
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
We have granted the underwriters an option for a period of
30 days to purchase up to 412,500 additional shares of
common stock solely to cover
over-allotments,
if any. The underwriters expect to deliver the shares of common
stock
on .
Proposed NYSE Alternext Symbol: CWL
OpenIPO®:
The method of distribution being used by the underwriters in
this offering differs somewhat from that traditionally employed
in firm commitment underwritten public offerings. In particular,
the public offering price and allocation of shares will be
determined primarily by an auction process conducted by the
underwriters and other securities dealers participating in this
offering. The minimum size for any bid in the auction is
100 shares. A more detailed description of this process,
known as an OpenIPO, is included in “Plan of
Distribution” beginning on page 105.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of
risk.
See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 11.
Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state
securities commission has approved or disapproved of these
securities or passed on the adequacy or accuracy of this
prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal
offense.
ThinkEquity LLC
The date of this prospectus
is ,
2009.
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
You should rely only on the information contained in this
document or to which we have referred you. We have not
authorized anyone to provide you with information that is
different. This document may only be used where it is legal to
sell these securities. The information in this document may only
be accurate on the date of this document. Our business and
financial condition may have changed since that date.
PROSPECTUS
SUMMARY
This summary highlights key information contained elsewhere
in this prospectus. It may not contain all of the information
that is important to you. You should read the entire prospectus,
including “Risk Factors,” our consolidated financial
statements and related notes thereto and the other documents to
which this prospectus refers, before making an investment
decision. As used in this prospectus, unless the context
otherwise requires or indicates, references to “CWT,”
“Changing World Technologies,” “Company,”
“we,” “our” and “us” refer to
Changing World Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries.
Our
Business
Company Overview
We sell renewable diesel fuel oil and organic fertilizers which
we currently produce from animal and food processing waste using
our proprietary Thermal Conversion Process, or TCP. TCP can
convert a broad range of organic wastes, or feedstock, including
animal and food processing waste, trap and low-value greases,
mixed plastics, rubber and foam, into our products. TCP emulates
the earth’s natural geological and geothermal processes
that transform organic material into fuels through the
application of water, heat and pressure in various stages. Our
renewable diesel has a significantly higher net energy balance,
which is defined as the ratio of the amount of energy contained
in a fuel to the energy required to produce that fuel, than
conventional diesel, ethanol or other biofuels. Our renewable
diesel does not compete for food crops, uses fewer natural
resources than conventional diesel, ethanol or other biofuels,
and does not contain alcohol. TCP uses conventional processing
equipment, which we believe requires a comparatively small
operating footprint and is relatively easy to permit compared to
other waste processing technologies.
Our first production facility, located in Carthage, Missouri,
has demonstrated the scalability of TCP in an approximately 250
ton per day production operation. Our Carthage facility has the
capacity to convert 78,000 tons of animal and food processing
waste into approximately 4 million to 9 million
gallons of renewable diesel per year, depending on the feedstock
mix used. We also produce fertilizers through TCP. We currently
sell the renewable diesel produced at our Carthage facility as a
fuel for the industrial boiler market, and we sell our
fertilizers to a number of farms in the Carthage area. During
the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we produced
approximately 1,095,000 gallons of renewable diesel and sold
approximately 684,000 gallons of renewable diesel. We received
an average price of $1.19 per gallon of renewable diesel sold in
the nine months ended
September 30, 2008.
We rely on trade secrets relating to TCP, including facility
operating conditions, process chemistry and facility design. In
addition, we exclusively license seven issued U.S. patents
and five additional pending U.S. patent applications, a
subset of which relate to our proprietary TCP technology as
currently implemented. We commenced development of our Carthage
facility in 2002 and, from 2005 to 2007, we developed and
refined the equipment, procedures and processes at our Carthage
facility to bring TCP from demonstration status to production.
We commenced commercial sales of our renewable diesel in January
2007, and we commenced sales of one of our fertilizers in the
second quarter of 2008. Our Carthage facility is currently our
only production facility.
We intend to establish additional facilities close to sources of
feedstock, initially focusing on animal and food processing
waste and trap and low-value greases in North America and
Europe. We have entered into discussions with several animal and
food processors in North America and Europe and with municipal
treatment facilities and trap grease aggregators in the
Northeast United States regarding potential construction of new
TCP facilities and retrofitting existing facilities with TCP.
1
Market
Opportunity
There are approximately 23.5 million tons of animal and
food processing waste generated annually in North America and
18.7 million tons generated annually in Europe. There are
approximately 4.7 million tons of trap grease generated
annually in North America. Using TCP, these feedstocks can be
converted into our renewable diesel and fertilizers.
We believe that a number of trends in our markets are converging
to increase demand for TCP and our renewable diesel and
fertilizers, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
increased
long-term
global demand for industrial fuels from rapidly developing
nations, such as China and India;
|
| |
| |
•
|
increased focus on the development of alternative domestic
energy supplies due to geopolitical instability in the Middle
East and other oil exporting regions;
|
| |
| |
•
|
rising prices and global shortages of food due to the diversion
of crops to be used as raw materials in the creation of ethanol
and other biofuels;
|
| |
| |
•
|
increased demand for sustainable, “green” energy
sources;
|
| |
| |
•
|
increased demand for cost-effective methods for the safe
disposal of food and animal waste due to growing concerns
related to pathogenic and toxic contamination of the food chain;
and
|
| |
| |
•
|
increased demand by municipal water treatment facilities for
technology to address growing concerns regarding improper
disposal of trap and low-value greases from food service
establishments.
|
Our
Strengths
We believe our key strengths include the following:
Customer-Validated Renewable Diesel. We have
secured two customers for our renewable diesel. One customer,
Schreiber Foods Inc., or Schreiber, recently extended its
contracts with us, through May 2010, to provide them with
renewable diesel for two large industrial boilers at facilities
in Missouri. Schreiber’s boilers are expected to consume
approximately 1.4 million gallons annually of our renewable
diesel. In addition, Dyno Nobel Inc., or Dyno Nobel, has entered
into a two-year agreement with us to purchase approximately 2.0
million gallons of renewable diesel.
Scalable Business Model. We believe that as we
start to operate higher capacity TCP facilities, we should
benefit from substantial economies of scale and improve our
operating margins because a majority of our operating costs are
fixed and do not vary with production levels. We intend to price
our product at parity, on a per-British thermal unit, or Btu,
basis, with No. 2 Heating Oil. The price of No. 2
Heating Oil on the New York Mercantile Exchange was $1.44 per
gallon as of
December 31, 2008, and the average price of
No. 2 Heating Oil over the last three years from
December 31, 2005 to
December 31, 2008 was $2.25 per
gallon. Our renewable diesel contains approximately 9% fewer
Btus than No. 2 Heating Oil on a volumetric basis, and, at
parity, we believe our renewable diesel will sell for a price
that will be 9% lower than the market price for No. 2
Heating Oil. We estimate that our cash production cost,
including the cost of feedstock, of renewable diesel will
ultimately be in the range of $0.85 to $1.60 per gallon for our
larger production facilities. We believe that our cost of
feedstock conversion, which we define as our cash production
cost less the cost of feedstock, will be between $0.30 and $0.80
per gallon of renewable diesel for our larger production
facilities. We believe our future feedstock costs will vary
significantly based on the type of feedstock utilized and then
prevailing market conditions for feedstock. Our cash production
cost does not give effect to the $1.00 per gallon renewable
diesel mixture tax credit that we receive from the
U.S. government for each gallon of
2
renewable diesel produced at our facilities that we sell in the
United States. The renewable diesel mixture tax credit is
scheduled to expire at the end of 2009. Using the current
feedstock mix at our Carthage facility, for every gallon of
renewable diesel we produce, we produce approximately one gallon
of liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer, and approximately
three pounds of solid mineral phosphate fertilizer.
Proprietary Intellectual Property. We
exclusively license seven issued U.S. patents and five
additional pending U.S. patent applications, a subset of
which are directed to our proprietary TCP technology as
currently implemented, from AB-CWT LLC, or AB-CWT, a related
company. We also rely on trade secrets related to facility
operating conditions, process chemistry, facility design and
research and development experience that we have gained in the
ten years we have worked with TCP.
Ability to Convert Wide Variety of
Feedstock. We believe that TCP’s ability to
convert a wide variety of feedstock into renewable diesel
provides us with a competitive advantage in acquiring the
feedstock for our process. TCP can process a wide variety of
waste streams simultaneously. As a result, we can adjust our
sourcing efforts for feedstock as market prices for these
feedstock change. We believe this flexibility is a critical
advantage as it affords us an increased ability to manage our
costs.
Energy Efficient Process. TCP achieves high
product yield and recovery of the energy contained in the
feedstock, while maintaining a positive net energy balance.
Energy requirements are minimal due to the moderate processing
temperatures and pressures used, the short amount of time
required for the process and the recovery and reuse of waste
heat.
Environmentally Friendly Product. Our products
are renewable and are considered “carbon-neutral” as
they are created from animal and food processing waste and do
not result in the release of additional fossil carbon into the
environment. By converting the wastes rather than sending them
to a landfill, TCP eliminates the potential for pathogens and
harmful chemicals to leach into the ground water.
Low Cost of Customer Conversion. Based on our
experience with our customers, conversion of existing heating
oil or natural gas infrastructure to handle our renewable diesel
can be done with relatively simple modifications. The one-time
cost for converting an industrial boiler burning fuel oil or a
similar boiler burning natural gas to burn renewable diesel is
approximately $50,000 and $100,000, respectively. We estimate
that complete conversion can be accomplished in less than
30 days for fuel oil boilers and 60 days for natural
gas boilers, with the boiler down-time limited to less than
three days.
Flexible Manufacturing Facilities. We believe
new TCP facilities can be easily deployed due to several
attributes of TCP, including its relatively short permitting
process, the use of conventional chemical processing equipment,
the relatively small footprint required for a TCP facility as
compared to other alternative waste processing technologies and
the ability to scale the facility size to match the market
opportunity.
Our
Strategy
Our goal is to further expand our production and sale of
renewable diesel and fertilizers from waste. The key elements of
our strategy to achieve this goal include:
Develop New Facilities. Based on our analysis
of optimal plant sizes, initially we intend to establish TCP
facilities that can convert from 500 to 2,000 tons of animal and
food processing waste per day and produce approximately
8 million to 86 million gallons of renewable diesel
per year,
3
depending on the size of the facility and the composition of the
feedstock. We also intend to establish grease facilities that
can convert from 150 to 600 tons of feedstock per day and
produce 3 million to 46 million gallons of renewable
diesel per year, depending on the size of the facility and the
composition of the feedstock. We expect to locate future
facilities near sources of feedstock, in particular, near
agricultural areas that produce significant food and animal
processing waste and near areas that yield considerable amounts
of trap and low-value greases in North America and Europe.
We will also look to locate future facilities in areas where we
can replace No. 2 Heating Oil as the principal local
industrial boiler fuel.
Secure Additional Sources of Animal and Food Processing
Waste. We believe the animal and food processing
industries are good sources of feedstock because they generate
significant quantities of organic wastes that can be converted
to renewable diesel using TCP and are under increasing market
and regulatory pressures to change how animal wastes are handled
and utilized. We have entered into a supply agreement with
Butterball, LLC, or Butterball, to convert animal and food
processing waste from a Butterball turkey processing facility in
Carthage, Missouri. To secure large and steady supplies of
additional feedstock, we are seeking to enter into supply
agreements with other animal and food processors in North
America and Europe. We may replicate the strategy we utilized in
developing our Carthage facility and enter into arrangements
with other animal and food processors to co-locate our TCP
facility near their facility to provide a cost-effective waste
management alternative.
Expand our Sales and Marketing Efforts. As
production of our renewable diesel and fertilizers increases, we
plan to expand our sales and marketing infrastructure as well as
begin to collaborate with third parties that have local sales
and marketing expertise near our facilities. The market value of
our renewable diesel will vary, to some degree, by location
based on local market conditions and regulatory regimes. We
intend to make decisions regarding sales and marketing of our
products based on the specific products and locations of our
facilities. Our renewable diesel is transported by truck.
Secure Financing for Future Facilities on Favorable
Terms. We believe that certain aspects of our
business model, including its sustainable and renewable aspect,
will enable us to secure financing on favorable terms,
particularly in relation to fuel refinement and power generation
projects. In addition to raising debt financing and potentially
offering additional equity securities, we plan to work with
governmental entities to secure grants and co-sponsorships of
some of our projects.
Improve Efficiency and Reduce Costs. We are
continually seeking to optimize TCP to improve the efficiency of
our facilities and to reduce the per-Btu costs of producing our
renewable diesel. We have developed a substantial amount of
experience during the development, construction, operation and
scale-up of
our Carthage facility, and we are continually seeking to improve
our technology and facility operations.
Develop Potential Future Markets and Applications of
TCP. We believe that there are significant
opportunities to use TCP in different markets and convert other
suitable waste streams into renewable diesel and fertilizers. As
we continue to expand our operations, we expect to make efforts
to penetrate these other areas, including the conversion of
plastics and other non-metallic wastes to our renewable diesel
and the sale of our renewable diesel into the electrical power
generation market.
Regulations
We are subject to the rules and regulations promulgated by
various federal, state and local governmental agencies. Our
Carthage facility and our research and development facility in
Philadelphia are subject to rules and regulations set forth by
the U.S. Environmental Protection
4
Agency, as well as state and local agencies, that regulate air
emissions, odor, storm water, sewer water and wastewater. The
marketing of our fertilizers is regulated by state Departments
of Agriculture, which control the registration of fertilizer
products, licensing of manufacturers, label information,
inspections and various other aspects associated with the
marketing of fertilizers. In addition, we are subject to
regulation by the U.S. Department of Treasury associated
with the renewable diesel mixture tax credit from the
U.S. government.
Selected Risk
Factors
Investing in our common stock involves substantial risk. Before
participating in this offering, you should carefully consider
all of the information in this prospectus, including risks
discussed in “Risk Factors,” beginning on
page 11. Some of our most significant risks are:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
We have a limited operating history and our business may not be
as successful as we envision.
|
| |
| |
•
|
We have a history of losses, deficits and negative operating
cash flows and will likely continue to incur losses for the
foreseeable future, which may continue and which may negatively
impact our ability to achieve our business objectives.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Our $1.00 per gallon renewable diesel mixture tax credit may not
be extended beyond December 31, 2009 or may be reduced.
|
| |
| |
•
|
We may not be able to reduce our cash production costs for our
renewable diesel as anticipated.
|
| |
| |
•
|
We may not be profitable or able to successfully implement our
expansion strategy, including the construction of new facilities
on a timely basis or at all.
|
| |
| |
•
|
The design and operation of our facilities involve significant
risks.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Sufficient customer acceptance for our renewable diesel may
never develop.
|
| |
| |
•
|
If we are unable to obtain sufficient waste material to serve as
feedstock for our facilities, we may not be able to operate our
facilities at full capacity or on a profitable basis.
|
| |
| |
•
|
A substantial portion of the technology used in our business is
owned by AB-CWT, a related company.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Failure to obtain regulatory approvals or meet applicable state
and local standards could adversely affect our operations.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Failure to protect, or successfully enforce, our patents,
copyright and trade secrets could adversely affect our
operations.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Failure to obtain patent rights protecting current and future
TCP operations could adversely affect our operations.
|
| |
| |
•
|
We have a limited number of customers and the loss of any of
these customers would significantly reduce our revenues.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Our recurring losses from operations have raised substantial
doubt regarding our ability to continue as a going concern, and
as a result, our independent registered public accounting firm
included an explanatory paragraph in its report with respect to
this uncertainty.
|
Corporate
Information
We are a Delaware corporation organized in May 1998. Our
corporate offices are located at 460 Hempstead Avenue,
West
Hempstead,
New York 11552, and our telephone number is
(516) 486-0100.
Our
website address is
www.changingworldtech.com.
Information on our
website is not incorporated into this
prospectus and should not be relied upon in determining whether
to make an investment in our common stock.
5
Recent
Developments
On
February 6, 2009, we entered into a renewable diesel
fuel oil sales
contract with Carlisle Power Transmission
Products, Inc. (
“Carlisle”) whereby Carlisle agreed to
purchase approximately 1.35 million gallons of renewable
diesel annually from us for a term of two years beginning upon
completion of Carlisle’s boiler conversion, subject to
certain termination conditions. The price for the first year is
$0.59 per MMBtu below the lower of Carlisle’s monthly
natural gas cost or the Monthly U.S. Residual Fuel Oil
Retail Sales by All Sellers price. The price reflects a $0.23
per MMBtu discount for renewable fuel purchase and a $0.36 per
MMBtu allowance to repay boiler system conversion costs during
the term of the
contract. The price for the second year is $0.57
per MMBtu below the lower of Carlisle’s monthly natural gas
cost or the Monthly U.S. Residual Fuel Oil Retail Sales by
All Sellers price. The price reflects a $0.21 per MMBtu discount
for renewable fuel purchased and a $0.36 MMBtu allowance to
repay boiler system conversion costs during the term of the
contract.
6
THE
OFFERING
|
|
|
|
Common stock offered by us |
|
2,750,000 shares. |
| |
|
Over-allotment
option |
|
412,500 shares. |
| |
|
Common stock outstanding after this offering |
|
12,389,791 shares. |
| |
|
Use of proceeds |
|
We estimate that the net proceeds to us from this offering,
after underwriting discounts and commissions, estimated offering
expenses and the repayment of the promissory note issued to
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP for accrued fees and expenses
relating to this offering, will be approximately
$32.75 million, assuming an initial public offering price
of $13.00 per share, the midpoint of the estimated price range
set forth on the cover page of this prospectus. We intend to use
approximately $2.1 million of the net proceeds of this
offering to repay the promissory notes, including accrued
interest, issued to certain affiliates in connection with
short-term borrowings used for working capital. The estimated
net proceeds of approximately $32.75 million are net of
this payment. We intend to use the remaining net proceeds of
this offering for general corporate and working capital
purposes, including the development and construction of new
facilities. See “Use of Proceeds.” |
| |
|
OpenIPO process |
|
This offering will be made through the OpenIPO process, in which
the allocation of shares and the public offering price are
primarily based on an auction in which prospective purchasers
are required to bid for the shares. The OpenIPO process allows
all qualified investors, whether individuals or institutions, to
bid for shares. All successful bidders in the auction will pay
the same price per share. |
| |
|
|
|
• Bidders may submit bids through the
underwriters or participating dealers.
|
| |
|
|
|
• Potential investors may bid any price for the
shares, including a price above or below the projected price
range on the cover of this prospectus.
|
| |
|
|
|
• Once the auction closes, the underwriters will
determine the highest price that will sell all of the shares
offered. This is the clearing price and is the maximum price at
which the shares will be sold. The clearing price, and therefore
the actual offering price, could be higher or lower than the
projected price range on the cover of this prospectus.
|
| |
|
|
|
• We may choose to sell shares at the
auction-set clearing price or we may choose to sell
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
the shares at a lower offering price, taking into account
additional factors. |
| |
|
|
|
• Bidders that submit valid bids at or above the
offering price will receive, at a minimum, a prorated amount of
shares for which they bid.
|
| |
|
|
|
The OpenIPO process is described in full under “Plan of
Distribution” beginning on page 105. |
| |
|
Dividend policy |
|
We do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common
stock for the foreseeable future. See “Dividend
Policy.” |
| |
|
Listing
|
|
We have applied to list our shares on the NYSE Alternext under
the symbol “CWL.” |
| |
|
Risk factors |
|
Investment in our common stock involves substantial risks. You
should read this prospectus carefully, including the section
entitled “Risk Factors” and the consolidated financial
statements and the related notes to those statements included in
this prospectus, before investing in our common stock. |
The number of shares of common stock outstanding after this
offering is based on the number of shares of common stock
outstanding as of
September 30, 2008. Unless otherwise
indicated, this number:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
excludes 249,560 shares of our common stock issuable upon
exercise of stock options that will be outstanding upon
completion of this offering, at a weighted average exercise
price of $30.66 per share;
|
| |
| |
•
|
excludes 1,000,000 shares of our common stock reserved for
future grants under our compensation plans;
|
| |
| |
•
|
excludes 925,757 shares of our common stock issuable upon
exercise of warrants;
|
| |
| |
•
|
reflects the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of
preferred stock into 455,189 shares of common stock in
connection with this offering;
|
| |
| |
•
|
gives effect to a seven for one stock split and a subsequent one
for three reverse stock split of our common stock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
gives effect to our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation, which will be in effect prior to the completion
of this offering;
|
| |
| |
•
|
assumes no exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase
up to an additional 412,500 shares from us; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
assumes an initial public offering price of $13.00 per share,
the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on the cover
page of this prospectus.
|
8
SUMMARY
HISTORICAL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table provides our summary historical consolidated
financial data for the periods and as of the dates indicated.
The summary historical consolidated financial data for the years
ended
December 31, 2005,
2006 and
2007 are derived from our
audited consolidated financial statements for such periods
included elsewhere in this prospectus. The summary historical
consolidated financial data for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 and
2008 are derived from our unaudited
consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this
prospectus. The results for any interim period are not
necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for a
full year.
The consolidated financial data for the year ended
December 31, 2005 reflects our acquisition of the portion
of Renewable Environmental Solutions, LLC, or RES, our joint
venture with ConAgra Foods Inc., or ConAgra, that we did not
already own in July 2005. Prior to the RES acquisition we used
the equity method of accounting for our 50% investment in RES.
Commencing
August 1, 2005, RES became a wholly-owned
subsidiary and is included in our consolidated financial
statements.
The summary historical consolidated financial data set forth
below should be read in conjunction with “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations,” “Selected Historical Consolidated
Financial Data” and the consolidated financial statements
and notes thereto included elsewhere in this prospectus.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31,
|
|
|
ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
261
|
|
|
$
|
589
|
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
863
|
|
|
Total cost of goods sold
|
|
|
6,077
|
|
|
|
16,459
|
|
|
|
15,946
|
|
|
|
11,949
|
|
|
|
14,448
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin/(loss)
|
|
|
(5,944
|
)
|
|
|
(16,198
|
)
|
|
|
(15,357
|
)
|
|
|
(11,464
|
)
|
|
|
(13,585
|
)
|
|
Selling, general, and administrative
|
|
|
3,389
|
|
|
|
5,866
|
|
|
|
5,318
|
|
|
|
4,207
|
|
|
|
5,284
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
2,003
|
|
|
|
1,692
|
|
|
|
1,182
|
|
|
|
870
|
|
|
|
878
|
|
|
Impairment of long-lived assets
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
13,672
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(25,009
|
)
|
|
|
(23,913
|
)
|
|
|
(21,857
|
)
|
|
|
(16,541
|
)
|
|
|
(19,747
|
)
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
458
|
|
|
|
2,154
|
|
|
|
1,952
|
|
|
|
1,595
|
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and equity in net loss of joint venture
|
|
|
(24,551
|
)
|
|
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Equity in net loss of joint venture
|
|
|
(7,196
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(31,747
|
)
|
|
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
|
(14,946
|
)
|
|
|
(18,758
|
)
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(31,747
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14,946
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18,758
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
$
|
(6.85
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.62
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.53
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.94
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.21
|
)
|
9
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro
Forma(1)
|
|
|
As
Adjusted(2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
6,291
|
|
|
$
|
14,349
|
|
|
$
|
5,258
|
|
|
$
|
7,258
|
|
|
$
|
38,008
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
26,549
|
|
|
|
26,626
|
|
|
|
25,301
|
|
|
|
25,301
|
|
|
|
25,301
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
34,545
|
|
|
|
41,996
|
|
|
|
33,513
|
|
|
|
35,513
|
|
|
|
66,263
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
3,117
|
|
|
|
2,203
|
|
|
|
3,646
|
|
|
|
5,154
|
|
|
|
3,646
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
1,710
|
|
|
|
1,595
|
|
|
|
1,482
|
|
|
|
1,482
|
|
|
|
1,482
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(79,137
|
)
|
|
|
(99,042
|
)
|
|
|
(117,800
|
)
|
|
|
(117,800
|
)
|
|
|
(118,292
|
)
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
29,719
|
|
|
|
38,199
|
|
|
|
28,384
|
|
|
|
28,876
|
|
|
|
61,134
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
The pro forma balance sheet data
reflects (i) the completion of a secured debt and warrant
financing for aggregate net proceeds of $2.0 million, which
was completed in December 2008 and (ii) the automatic
conversion of all outstanding shares of preferred stock into
shares of common stock in connection with this offering. See
“Capitalization” and “Use of Proceeds.”
|
| |
|
(2)
|
|
The pro forma as adjusted balance
sheet data reflects the receipt of estimated net proceeds from
the sale of shares of common stock in this offering at $13.00
per share, the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on
the cover page of this prospectus, of $32.75 million, net
of underwriting discounts and commissions, estimated offering
expenses and the repayment of the promissory note issued to
Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP. The pro forma as adjusted
balance sheet also reflects the repayment of the promissory
notes issued to certain affiliates in connection with
short-term
borrowings as discussed in footnote (1) above. See
“Capitalization”’ and “Use of Proceeds.”
|
10
RISK
FACTORS
An investment in our common stock involves a high degree of
risk. You should carefully consider the following risks, as well
as other information contained in this prospectus before making
an investment in our common stock. The risks described below are
those that we believe are the material risks we face. Any of the
risks described below could significantly and adversely affect
our business, prospects, financial condition and results of
operations. As a result, the trading price of our common stock
could decline and you could lose all or part of your
investment.
Risks Relating to
Our Business
We have a limited
operating history and our business may not be as successful as
we envision.
Our Carthage, Missouri facility was commissioned in 2005. From
2005 to 2007, we developed and refined the equipment, procedures
and processes at our Carthage facility. We began commercial
sales of our renewable diesel in 2007 and one of our fertilizers
in the second quarter of 2008. As a result, we have a limited
operating history from which you can evaluate our business and
prospects. In addition, our prospects must be considered in
light of the risks and uncertainties encountered by an
early-stage company in the rapidly evolving renewable energy
market, where supply and demand may change significantly over a
short period. Some of these risks relate to our potential
inability to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
raise additional capital;
|
| |
| |
•
|
develop and construct future facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
obtain adequate financing to fund our expansion strategy and our
operations;
|
| |
| |
•
|
reduce our cash production costs, including our feedstock costs,
for our renewable diesel to anticipated levels;
|
| |
| |
•
|
expand our operations to convert additional types of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
effectively manage our business and operations;
|
| |
| |
•
|
secure supplies of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
develop markets for our renewable diesel and fertilizers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
further develop and achieve wider acceptance of TCP;
|
| |
| |
•
|
effectively manage our costs as we expand our business;
|
| |
| |
•
|
attract and retain customers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
obtain regulatory approval and meet governmental standards; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
manage rapid growth in personnel and operations.
|
If we cannot successfully mitigate these risks, our business,
financial condition and results of operations will suffer.
We have a history
of losses, deficits and negative operating cash flows and will
likely continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future,
which may continue and which may negatively impact our ability
to achieve our business objectives.
We incurred net losses of $21.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006, $19.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007 and $18.8 million for the nine
months ended
September 30, 2008, and as of
September 30, 2008, we had an accumulated deficit of
$117.8 million. We will incur operating losses and
continued negative cash flows for the foreseeable future as we
invest in the development of TCP and build additional facilities
to implement our expansion strategy. We may not achieve or
sustain profitability on a quarterly or annual basis in the
future. Our operations are subject to a number of risks inherent
in the establishment of a new technology and in the development
of new markets, as well as operating at an early stage of
development. To be profitable we will have to
11
significantly increase our revenues and significantly reduce our
cost of goods sold, in particular, our cash production costs for
our renewable diesel. Future revenues and profits, if any, will
depend upon various factors such as those discussed above, many
of which are outside of our control. Additionally, as we
continue to incur losses, our accumulated deficit will continue
to increase, which might make it harder for us to obtain
financing in the future. If we are unable to increase our
revenues or achieve profitability, we may have to reduce or
terminate our operations.
If the renewable
diesel mixture tax credit under the Energy Policy Act of 2005 is
not extended beyond 2009 or it is reduced, our business,
financial condition and results of operations may
suffer.
Under the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as amended by the Emergency
Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, or the Energy Policy Act, we
currently receive a $1.00 renewable diesel mixture tax credit
for each gallon of renewable diesel sold. Because we have no
fuel excise tax payable, we receive a direct cash payment from
the U.S. Treasury. Without the renewable diesel mixture tax
credit, or if it is reduced, we may not be able to compete with
traditional energy suppliers or other suppliers of alternative
or renewable diesel who could provide fuel to our customers at a
lower cost than we do. Under the Energy Policy Act, the
renewable diesel mixture tax credit is set to expire on
December 31, 2009. If the renewable diesel mixture tax
credit is not extended beyond 2009 or is reduced, it would have
a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
Operation of our
Carthage facility and the operation of future facilities involve
significant risks.
The operation of our Carthage facility and the operation of
future facilities involve many risks, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
the inaccuracy of our assumptions with respect to the timing and
amount of anticipated costs and revenues;
|
| |
| |
•
|
interruptions in the supply of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the breakdown or failure of equipment or processes;
|
| |
| |
•
|
unforeseen engineering and environmental issues;
|
| |
| |
•
|
difficulty or inability to find suitable replacement parts for
equipment;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the unavailability of sufficient quantities of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
disruption in utilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
permitting and other regulatory issues, license revocation and
changes in legal requirements;
|
| |
| |
•
|
labor disputes and work stoppages;
|
| |
| |
•
|
unanticipated cost overruns;
|
| |
| |
•
|
weather interferences, catastrophic events including fires,
explosions, earthquakes, droughts and acts of terrorism;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the exercise of the power of eminent domain; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
performance below expected levels of output or efficiency.
|
If any of these risks were to materialize and our operations at
our Carthage facility were significantly disrupted, it would
have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition and results of operations.
12
We have
encountered issues in the design and engineering of our Carthage
facility which have hindered our ability to effectively operate
the Carthage facility, and we may encounter similar difficulties
with our future facilities.
The operation of facilities involves many risks, including
start-up
problems, the breakdown of equipment and performance below
expected levels of output and efficiency. For example, during
our initial operations in Carthage, we dealt with a number of
start-up
equipment and process design issues and inadequate metallurgical
selection. We have not operated at a consistent mechanical
availability in excess of 80% for any fiscal quarter to date. In
the first nine months of 2008, our Carthage facility achieved
80% average mechanical availability, which is the percentage of
planned operating hours that the facility actually operated. We
will make improvements to the design of our new facilities based
on operating experience and knowledge we developed at Carthage,
and we are seeking to improve the average mechanical
availability at our Carthage facility. However, design and
engineering issues may nonetheless occur and, as a result, we
may not make improvements on our average mechanical availability
at our Carthage facility. We have experienced periods where our
Carthage facility was not operational, which required us to pay
to divert or dispose of feedstock that we received but were
unable to store or process. If our facility becomes
non-operational in the future, we may face additional diversion
and disposal costs related to the disposal of excess feedstock
that we may be contracted to purchase but cannot store or
process. In addition, we close our Carthage facility on an
annual basis to conduct routine maintenance and equipment
upgrades. These closures typically last two to four weeks and
can affect our results of operations for the relevant period. We
have also incurred costs in connection with the disposal of
waste water at our Carthage facility. We may encounter new
design and engineering challenges as we seek to expand the range
of feedstock we use in TCP. Material, engineering, workmanship
or design issues may result in diminished facility production
capacity, increased costs of operations or cause us to
temporarily or permanently halt facility operations, all of
which could harm our business, financial condition and results
of operations.
Because the time
required to negotiate contracts related to the operation of our
facilities is lengthy, and may be subject to delays, our results
of operations may suffer.
The negotiation of the large number of agreements necessary to
operate and manage any new facilities involves a long
development cycle and decision-making process. Delays in other
parties’ decision-making processes are outside of our
control and may have a negative impact on our cost of goods
sold, operating expenses, receipt of revenues and sales
projections.
We may not be
able to implement our expansion strategy as planned or at
all.
We have one production TCP facility in Carthage, Missouri and
one research and development facility in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. We plan to grow our business by developing and
constructing additional facilities.
Development, construction and expansion of TCP facilities are
subject to a number of risks, any of which could prevent us from
commencing or expanding operations at a particular facility as
expected or at all. These risks include finding appropriate
sites, regulatory and permitting matters, increased construction
costs, construction delays, availability of financing and higher
than anticipated financing costs.
We must obtain and maintain numerous regulatory approvals and
permits in order to construct additional facilities. Obtaining
these approvals and permits could be a time-consuming and
expensive process, and we may not be able to obtain them on a
timely basis or at all. For certain of our projects, we may
begin development and construction and incur substantial
development and construction costs prior to obtaining all of the
approvals and permits necessary to operate a TCP facility at
that site. In the event that we fail to ultimately obtain all
necessary permits, we may be forced to delay operations of the
facility and the receipt of related revenues or abandon the
project altogether and lose the benefit of any development and
construction costs already incurred, which would have an adverse
effect on our results of operations. In addition, federal and
state governmental
13
regulatory requirements may substantially increase our
construction costs, which could have a material adverse effect
on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Our construction costs may materially exceed budgeted amounts
that could adversely affect our results of operations and
financial condition. We expect to spend an average of
$30 million to $125 million per plant on construction
and
start-up
operating costs for facilities that can convert from 150 to
2,000 tons of animal waste, food processing waste and greases
per day. Although we intend to enter into fixed-price
contracts
for the construction of our facilities, we may be unable to
negotiate or agree to a fixed price.
We believe that contractors, engineering firms, construction
firms and equipment suppliers increasingly are receiving
requests and orders from companies to build energy production
facilities and other similar facilities and, therefore, we may
not be able to secure their services or products on a timely
basis or on acceptable financial or commercial terms, or at all.
In addition, we may suffer significant construction delays or
cost overruns as a result of a variety of factors, such as labor
and material shortages, defects in materials and workmanship,
adverse weather, transportation constraints, construction change
orders, site changes, labor issues and other unforeseen
difficulties, any of which could prevent us from completing the
construction of our planned facilities. As a result, we may not
be able to grow our business as quickly as we planned. Any
delays or cost overruns may result in the renegotiation of our
construction
contracts which could increase our construction
costs.
Additionally, we may not be able to obtain adequate financing to
fund our expansion strategy on acceptable terms, a timely basis
or at all, which could prevent, delay or significantly increase
the related costs associated with the implementation of our
expansion strategy.
If we are unable to address these risks in a satisfactory and
timely manner, we may not be able to implement our expansion
strategy as planned or at all. We intend to obtain and maintain
insurance to protect against some of the risks relating to the
construction of new projects, however such insurance may not be
available or adequate to cover lost revenues or increased costs
if we have construction problems, overruns or delays.
We may not be able to reduce our cash production costs for
our renewable diesel as anticipated.
The principal performance metric that we use to evaluate our
costs of goods sold is our cash production cost per gallon of
renewable diesel. For the nine months ended
September 30,
2008, our cash production cost at our Carthage facility was
$11.18. To be profitable, we will have to reduce our cash
production costs for our renewable diesel. Although we believe
our future cash production costs will be substantially lower
than our current cash production cost per gallon, we may not be
able to reduce our cash production costs for our renewable
diesel if we fail to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
enter into contractual arrangements for feedstock on more
favorable terms;
|
| |
| |
•
|
purchase adequate supplies of high yielding feedstock, such as
beef and pork processing waste and restaurant grease at
favorable prices, or otherwise reduce our feedstock costs on a
per ton or per gallon basis;
|
| |
| |
•
|
benefit from economies of scale resulting from the operation of
multiple, larger-scale facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
benefit from anticipated lower maintenance costs and improved
operational reliability at our new facilities which will be
designed based on the knowledge gained from the operation of our
Carthage facility; or
|
| |
| |
•
|
reduce our disposal costs for unused feedstock.
|
If we are unable to reduce our cash production costs for our
renewable diesel as anticipated, our financial condition and
results of operations will be materially and negatively affected
and we may not be profitable.
14
We will be highly
dependent upon the continued and mechanical availability of a
limited number of production facilities.
We have one production facility in Carthage, Missouri, and we
anticipate only having a limited number of production facilities
for the foreseeable future. As a result, our operations may be
subject to material interruption if any of our facilities
experiences a major accident or is damaged by severe weather or
other natural disasters, such as fire, flood or earthquake. In
addition, our operations may be subject to labor disruptions and
other hazards inherent in our industry. Some of those hazards
may cause personal injury and loss of life, severe damage to or
destruction of property and equipment and environmental damage
and may result in suspension or termination of operations,
incurrence of liability and the imposition of civil or criminal
penalties. Our precautions to safeguard our facilities,
including insurance and health and safety protocols, may not be
adequate to cover our losses in any particular case.
Moreover, our facilities may experience unscheduled downtime or
may not otherwise operate as planned or expected. All of our
facilities have or will have a specified nameplate capacity that
represents the production capacity specified in the applicable
construction agreement. The builder generally tests the capacity
of the facility prior to the start of its operations. The
operation of our facilities is and will be subject to various
uncertainties relating to our ability to implement the necessary
process improvements required to achieve optimal production
capacities. As a result, our facilities may not produce
renewable diesel at the levels we expect. For example, in the
first nine months of 2008, our Carthage facility achieved 80%
average mechanical availability. We are targeting operating our
facilities at 86% to 90% average mechanical availability in the
future to reduce our cash production costs and improve our
operating performance. We may not be able to achieve our target
mechanical availability. In addition, we close our facilities
periodically to conduct routine maintenance and upgrades in
order to operate at anticipated capacity levels. In the event
any of our facilities do not run at their nameplate or any
increased expected capacity levels or we fail to improve our
average mechanical availability, our business, results of
operations and financial condition may be harmed.
We will need to
obtain additional financing to implement our expansion
strategy.
We may not be able to finance our expansion strategy. The
development, construction and expansion of TCP facilities will
require us to raise additional debt or equity financing.
Additionally, we plan to work with governmental entities to
secure grants and co-sponsorships of some of our projects, as
well as take advantage of federal and state incentive programs
to secure favorable financing. Our ability to secure financing
and the costs of such capital are dependent on numerous factors,
including general economic and capital market conditions, credit
availability from lenders, investor confidence and the existence
of regulatory and tax incentives that are conducive to raising
capital. Current turmoil in the financial markets has caused
banks and financial institutions to decrease the amount of
capital available for lending and has significantly increased
the risk premium of such borrowings. In addition, this turmoil
has significantly limited the ability of companies to raise
funds through the sale of equity or debt securities. If we are
unable to raise additional funds, obtain capital on acceptable
terms, secure government grants or co-sponsorships of some of
our projects or take advantage of federal and state incentive
programs to secure favorable financing, we may have to delay,
modify or abandon some or all of our expansion strategies.
The amount of any indebtedness that we may raise in the future
may be substantial, and we could be required to secure such
indebtedness with our assets. If we default on any future
secured indebtedness, our lenders may foreclose on any
facilities securing such indebtedness. The incurrence of
indebtedness could require us to meet financial and operating
covenants, which could place limits on our operations and
ability to raise additional capital, decrease our liquidity and
increase the amount of cash flow required to service our debt.
If we experience construction problems, overruns or delays which
adversely affect our ability to generate revenues, we may not be
able to fund principal or interest payments under any debt that
we may incur.
15
Any effort to sell additional securities may not be successful
or may not raise sufficient capital to finance additional
facilities. The issuance of additional equity securities could
result in dilution to our existing stockholders, including
investors in this offering. If we are unsuccessful in raising
sufficient capital to fund our expansion strategy, we may have
to delay or abandon our expansion strategy, which could harm our
business prospects, financial condition and results of
operations.
As we expand our
operations, we may not be able to manage future growth
effectively.
As we expand our operations, we may be unable to continue to
grow our business or manage future growth. Our planned expansion
and any other future expansion will place a significant strain
on our management, personnel, systems and resources. We plan to
significantly expand our manufacturing capacity and hire
additional employees to support an increase in engineering,
manufacturing, research and development and our sales and
marketing efforts. To successfully manage our growth and handle
the responsibilities of being a public company, we believe we
must effectively:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
hire, train, integrate and manage additional qualified engineers
for research and development activities, sales and marketing
personnel, and financial and information technology personnel;
|
| |
| |
•
|
retain key management and augment our management team,
particularly if we lose key members;
|
| |
| |
•
|
implement additional and improve existing administrative,
financial and operations systems, procedures and controls;
|
| |
| |
•
|
expand and upgrade our technological capabilities; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
manage multiple relationships with our customers, suppliers and
other third parties.
|
We may encounter difficulties in effectively managing these and
other issues presented by rapid growth. If we are unable to
manage our growth effectively, we may not be able to take
advantage of market opportunities, research and further develop
TCP, develop our renewable diesel and fertilizers, satisfy
customer requirements, execute our business plan or respond to
competitive pressures.
We face risks
associated with establishing and expanding our international
business.
We expect to establish, and to expand over time, international
operations and activities. We have entered into discussions with
animal and food processors in Canada and Europe regarding
potential construction of new TCP facilities and retrofitting
existing facilities with TCP. International business operations
are subject to a variety of risks, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
changes in or interpretations of foreign regulations that may
adversely affect our ability to sell our products, perform
services or repatriate profits to the United States;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of tariffs;
|
| |
| |
•
|
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of limitations on production, sale or export of
renewable diesel or fertilizer in foreign countries;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of limitations on or increase of withholding and
other taxes on remittances and other payments by foreign
subsidiaries or joint ventures;
|
| |
| |
•
|
conducting business in places where business practices and
customs are unfamiliar and unknown and difficulty in managing
our international operations;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of restrictive trade policies;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of differing labor laws and standards;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition of inconsistent laws or regulations;
|
16
|
|
|
| |
•
|
economic or political instability in foreign countries;
|
| |
| |
•
|
imposition or increase of investment requirements and other
restrictions or requirements by foreign governments;
|
| |
| |
•
|
uncertainties relating to foreign laws and legal proceedings;
|
| |
| |
•
|
having to comply with various U.S. laws, including the
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
having to comply with U.S. export control regulations and
policies that restrict our ability to communicate with
non-U.S. employees
and supply foreign affiliates and customers.
|
We do not know the impact that these regulatory, geopolitical
and other factors may have on our international business in the
future.
We anticipate
that we will sell our renewable diesel to a limited number of
customers and the loss of any of these customers would
significantly reduce our revenues and adversely impact our
results of operations.
We anticipate that, until we commence renewable diesel
production at other facilities, we will sell our renewable
diesel to a limited number of customers. For example, Schreiber
accounted for approximately 72.9% and 78.1% of our revenues for
the year ended
December 31, 2007 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, respectively. Although we recently
began sales of our renewable diesel to a second customer, sales
to Schreiber have accounted for most of our total revenues, and
the loss of, or a significant reduction in orders from,
Schreiber, if not immediately replaced, would significantly
reduce our revenues and harm our results of operations. Although
we seek to enter into supply
contracts for our renewable diesel,
any failure to do so could result in our inability to sell our
renewable diesel on a timely basis or at favorable prices, which
would harm our business, results of operations and financial
condition.
Sufficient
customer acceptance for our renewable diesel and fertilizers may
never develop or may take longer to develop than we anticipate,
and as a result, the revenues that we derive may be insufficient
to fund our operations.
As we seek broader market acceptance for our renewable diesel
and fertilizers, it is possible that we may expend large sums of
money to bring our renewable diesel and fertilizers to market
without a commensurate increase in revenues. Sufficient markets
may never develop for our renewable diesel and fertilizers, or
develop more slowly than we anticipate. The development of
sufficient markets for our renewable diesel and fertilizers may
be affected by cost competitiveness of our renewable diesel and
fertilizers, consumer reluctance to try a new product and
emergence of more competitive products.
We anticipate that the market for our renewable diesel will
require potential customers to switch from their existing
heating oil and diesel fuel suppliers or switch from using
natural gas, which requires new equipment or retrofitting
existing equipment and requires new or additional permitting to
burn our renewable diesel products. For example, fuel storage
tanks and liquid fuel delivery systems need to be installed for
natural gas fired boilers. The one-time cost for converting a
boiler burning fuel oil or a similar boiler burning natural gas
to burn renewable diesel is approximately $50,000 and $100,000,
respectively. Initially, we intend to fund these boiler
modifications or provide a price adjustment for our renewable
diesel as a means of reimbursing the cost of modifications
incurred by a customer. Because we only recently began selling
our renewable diesel, potential customers may be skeptical as to
supply reliability, quality control and our financial viability,
which may prevent them from purchasing our renewable diesel or
entering into long-term supply agreements with us. If the market
for our renewable diesel does not develop as anticipated, we
will have to ship and store our renewable diesel, which would be
expensive. We cannot estimate whether demand for our renewable
diesel will materialize at anticipated prices, or whether
satisfactory profit margins will be achieved. If such pricing
levels are not achieved or sustained, or if our technologies and
business approach to our
17
markets do not achieve or sustain broad acceptance, our
business, operating results and financial condition will be
materially and negatively impacted.
We currently
price our renewable diesel primarily based on the price of
natural gas, and as we focus our development efforts on projects
devoted to the production and sale of renewable diesel and
fertilizers as commodities, we will be increasingly exposed to
volatility in the commodity price of natural gas, petroleum fuel
oil and fertilizer, which could have a material adverse impact
on our profitability.
We currently price our renewable diesel primarily based on the
price of natural gas, and as we seek to increase our production
and continue to develop the production of renewable diesel and
fertilizers for sale as commodities, we will become increasingly
exposed to market risk with respect to the commodity pricing
applicable to diesel fuel and fertilizer. Realized commodity
prices received for production of our renewable diesel and
fertilizers are expected to be primarily driven by spot prices
applicable to diesel fuel and fertilizer, respectively.
Historically, diesel fuel prices have been volatile, and we
expect such volatility to continue. Fluctuations in the
commodity price of diesel or fertilizer may reduce our profit
margins, especially if we do not have long-term
contracts for
the sale of our output of renewable diesel or fertilizer at
fixed or predictable prices. At such time as our facilities
begin to produce substantial quantities of renewable diesel or
fertilizers for sale, we intend to explore various strategies,
including long-term sale agreements, in order to mitigate the
associated commodity price risk and volatility. For example,
Schreiber has executed a three-year supply agreement with us for
our renewable diesel at Schreiber’s Monnet and Mount
Vernon, Missouri facilities. We have also entered into a
two-year
contract with another major customer in Carthage,
Missouri for our renewable diesel. If we enter into fixed-price
contracts for a significant portion of our renewable diesel and
fertilizers, those
contracts may be at a price level that is
lower than the then prevailing price, and such a difference
could have a negative effect on our revenues, results of
operations and financial condition. In addition, prevailing
prices for diesel oil or fertilizer could move in an unexpected
manner which could result in adverse results. Any such risk
management strategy may not be successful. As a result, our
revenues and profit margins may decline which would have an
adverse impact on our ability to service any indebtedness that
we may incur to build our facilities and on our financial
condition and results of operations.
If we are unable
to obtain sufficient feedstock for our facilities, obtain high
yielding feedstock or obtain feedstock on a cost-effective
basis, we may not be able to operate our facilities at full
capacity or on a profitable basis.
We need to acquire a substantial amount of feedstock for our
production of renewable diesel. In addition, the type of
feedstock we are able to obtain can have significant impact on
the yield of renewable diesel per ton of feedstock. For example,
hog and beef processing waste and restaurant grease yield
significantly more renewable diesel than turkey processing
waste. We use animal and food processing waste to supply our
Carthage facility, and we may use animal and food processing
waste or other organic waste to operate any future facilities
that we may develop. Consolidation within the animal and food
processing industry has resulted in bigger and more efficient
slaughtering operations, the majority of which utilize
“captive” processors to handle their animal and food
processing waste. Simultaneously, the number of small meat
packers, which have historically provided their waste to
independent processors and are a potential source of waste for
us, has decreased significantly. Although the total amount of
slaughtering may be flat or only moderately increasing, the
availability, quantity and quality of raw materials available to
non-captive processors from these sources have all decreased.
Major competitors include large integrated animal and food
processors and independent renderers such as Baker Commodities,
Darling International and Griffin Industries. A significant
decrease in animal and food processing waste or a change in the
type of feedstock available to us could materially and adversely
affect our business and results of operations.
The operation of our facilities is dependent on the availability
of animal and other organic waste resources to produce our
renewable diesel. We only have one binding agreement for the
18
supply of animal and food processing waste. Butterball is the
key feedstock supplier for our Carthage facility. The feedstock
supply agreement with Butterball requires Butterball to deliver
100% of the animal and food processing waste produced by its
facility in Carthage, Missouri less 40 tons per week, and it has
a two-year initial term, which expires in May 2010. The
agreement automatically renews for subsequent one-year terms,
unless either party terminates with a six-month notice. However,
should Butterball cease its operations, have its operations
interrupted by casualty or otherwise cease supplying feedstock,
our ability to operate our Carthage facility would be materially
and adversely affected.
Lack of animal and food processing waste or adverse changes in
the nature, quantity or cost of such waste would seriously
affect our ability to operate our facilities. As a result, our
revenues and financial condition would be materially and
negatively affected. Adequate quantities of feedstock may not be
available at a price that makes it affordable or cost-effective
for use in our facilities.
If we co-locate
other future facilities near other agricultural and food
processors, we will be dependent on such processor for
feedstock.
If we replicate the strategy we utilized in developing our
Carthage facility and enter into arrangements with other
agricultural and food processors where we co-locate our facility
near their processing facilities, we will be dependent on such
processors for feedstock. While we intend to enter into supply
contracts, should any such processors choose alternate methods
of disposal, cease its operations, have its operations
interrupted by casualty or otherwise cease supplying feedstock,
our ability to operate our other co-located facilities at
capacity or in a cost-effective manner would be materially and
adversely affected.
Technological
advances could significantly decrease the cost of producing
renewable diesel or result in the production of higher-quality
renewable diesel, and if we are unable to adopt or incorporate
technological advances into our operations, TCP could become
uncompetitive or obsolete.
We expect that technological advances in the processes and
procedures for producing renewable diesel will continue to
occur. It is possible that those advances could make TCP less
efficient or obsolete, causing the renewable diesel we produce
to be of a lesser quality than competing renewable fuels or
causing the yield of our renewable diesel to be lower than that
for competing technologies. These advances could also allow our
competitors to produce renewable diesel at a lower cost than
ours. We cannot predict when new technologies may become
available, the rate of acceptance of new technologies by our
competitors or the costs associated with such new technologies.
If we are unable to adopt or incorporate technological advances
or adapt TCP to be competitive with new technologies, our cost
of producing renewable fuels could be significantly higher than
those of our competitors, which could make our facilities and
technology uncompetitive or obsolete.
Many of our
competitors have significantly more resources than we do, and
technology developed by our competitors could become more
commercially successful than ours or render our technology
obsolete.
Competition in the traditional energy business from other energy
companies is well established, with many substantial entities
having multi-billion dollar, multi-national operations.
Competition in the alternative fuels and renewable energy
business is expanding with the growth of the industry and the
advent of many new technologies. We also compete against
traditional fertilizers produced by large companies that have
greater financial and other resources. Larger companies, due to
their better capitalization, will be better positioned to
develop and commercialize new technologies and to install
existing or more advanced equipment, which could reduce our
market share and harm our business.
19
We may enter
joint ventures with other companies which could adversely affect
our results of operations or cause us to incur additional debt
or assume contingent liabilities.
To expand our business and develop additional facilities, we may
enter into joint ventures with animal or food processing or
other industrial companies or waste processing companies in the
future. Joint ventures involve a number of risks that could harm
our business and result in any joint venture that we enter into
not performing as expected, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
insufficient experience with the technologies and markets
involved;
|
| |
| |
•
|
problems integrating or developing operations, personnel,
technologies or products;
|
| |
| |
•
|
diversion of management time and attention from our core
business to the joint venture;
|
| |
| |
•
|
potential failure to retain key technical, management, sales and
other personnel of the joint venture;
|
| |
| |
•
|
difficulties in establishing relationships with suppliers and
customers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
subsequent impairment of the acquired assets, including
intangible assets; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
being bought out and not realizing the benefits of the joint
venture.
|
In addition, to the extent that we enter into joint ventures
with animal or food processing companies or waste processing
companies, we may experience competition or channel conflict
with our then existing and potential suppliers and customers.
Specifically, existing and potential suppliers and customers may
perceive that we are competing directly with them by virtue of
such investment and may decide to reduce or eliminate their
supply volume to us or order volume from us.
We may also decide that it is in our best interests to enter
into joint ventures that may negatively impact our margins as a
whole. In addition, joint ventures could require investment of
significant financial resources and may require us to obtain
additional equity financing, which may be dilutive to our then
existing stockholders, or require us to incur indebtedness.
We may pursue
acquisition opportunities, which may subject us to considerable
business and financial risk.
We may pursue acquisitions of companies, including animal or
food processing companies, assets or complementary technologies
in the future. However, we may not be successful in identifying
acquisition opportunities, assessing the value, strengths and
weaknesses of these opportunities and consummating acquisitions
on acceptable terms or at all. Acquisitions may expose us to
business and financial risks that include, but are not limited
to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
diverting management’s attention;
|
| |
| |
•
|
incurring additional indebtedness;
|
| |
| |
•
|
dilution of our common stock due to issuances of additional
equity securities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
assuming liabilities, known and unknown;
|
| |
| |
•
|
incurring significant additional capital expenditures,
transaction and operating expenses, and non-recurring
acquisition-related charges;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the adverse impact on our earnings of the amortization of
identifiable intangible assets recorded as a result of
acquisitions;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the adverse impact on our earnings of impairment charges related
to goodwill recorded as a result of acquisitions should we ever
make such a determination that the goodwill or other intangibles
related to any of our acquisitions was impaired;
|
| |
| |
•
|
failing to integrate and assimilate the operations of the
acquired businesses, including personnel, technologies, business
systems and corporate cultures;
|
| |
| |
•
|
poor performance and customer dissatisfaction with the acquired
company;
|
| |
| |
•
|
entering new markets;
|
20
|
|
|
| |
•
|
failing to achieve operating and financial synergies anticipated
to result from the acquisitions; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
failing to retain key personnel of, vendors to and customers of
the acquired businesses.
|
If we are unable to successfully address the risks associated
with acquisitions, or if we encounter unforeseen expenses,
difficulties, complications or delays frequently encountered in
connection with the integration of acquired entities and the
expansion of operations, our growth may be impaired, we may fail
to achieve acquisition synergies and we may be required to focus
resources on integration of operations rather than on our
primary business.
We may be
adversely affected by environmental, health and safety laws,
regulations and liabilities.
Our Carthage facility and our research and development facility
in Philadelphia are, and any future facilities will be, subject
to federal, state and local regulatory requirements regarding
environmental, health and safety matters, including, but not
limited to air emissions, wastewater discharge, waste disposal,
odor, and occupational health and safety. In many cases, these
regulations require a complex process of obtaining and
maintaining licenses, permits, and approvals from federal,
state, and local agencies. In addition, we must maintain and
monitor our compliance with these regulatory requirements.
Maintaining compliance with environmental and health and safety
regulations is and will continue to be a significant cost to our
business. In the event of any period of non-compliance, our
operating facilities may be forced to shut down until the
compliance issues are resolved, and we could incur significant
liabilities, fines and penalties. For example, we received one
cease and desist order in December 2005 from the Missouri
Department of Natural Resources associated with alleged
violations of Missouri’s odor standards by our Carthage
facility. As a result, production at our Carthage facility was
partially shut down from January 2006 to March 2006. Although we
have resolved the issues in connection with the December 2005
cease and desist order, there can be no assurance that our
operating facilities will not be forced to shut down in
connection with any future event of non-compliance with
environmental and health and safety regulations. Moreover, there
is the risk that these laws will become more stringent, imposing
new or stricter requirements on our current or future
operations. To the extent new regulations are enacted or
adopted, we cannot predict the effect of such regulations on our
business. New regulatory requirements or our failure to maintain
compliance with current standards could require modifications to
operating facilities and significant capital and operating
expenses. Also, we may be subject to third-party claims and
common law liability if our facilities are found to cause
nuisance conditions due to odor or other factors.
Failure to obtain regulatory approvals or meet state
standards could adversely affect our operations.
While our business currently has all necessary operating
approvals material to our operations, we may not always be able
to obtain all required regulatory approvals, or modifications to
existing regulatory approvals, or maintain all required
regulatory approvals. If there is a delay in obtaining any
required regulatory approvals or if we fail to obtain and comply
with any required regulatory approvals, the operation of our
facilities or the sale of renewable diesel or fertilizers to
third parties could be prevented, made subject to additional
regulation or subject our business to additional costs such as
fines or penalties. For example, many states require
registration of fertilizer before it can be distributed in the
state, and a failure to register our fertilizers would limit our
ability to expand fertilizer sales into other markets. In
addition, we may be required to make capital expenditures on an
ongoing basis to comply with increasingly stringent federal,
state, and local environmental, health and safety laws,
regulations and permits.
Moreover, our customers may be subject to regulations, which
vary by state, that limit annually the levels of emissions that
result from burning fuels. If our renewable diesel is not
compatible with a particular state’s emissions standards,
customers may need to limit the amount of
21
our renewable diesel they burn or not burn it at all. States may
also adopt more stringent standards, which could also affect the
amount of renewable diesel we can sell. If customers are not
able to burn our renewable diesel or are required to limit the
amounts they burn to comply with state standards, our business,
results of operations and financial condition may be harmed.
We rely primarily
upon patents, copyright and trade secret laws and contractual
restrictions to protect our proprietary rights, and, if these
rights are not sufficiently protected, our ability to compete
and generate revenues could suffer.
Our success depends largely on maintaining the proprietary
nature of our process and on our ability to protect our
intellectual property rights. Although we rely on trade secret
laws and contractual restrictions to protect TCP, our success
and ability to compete in the future may also depend to a
significant degree upon obtaining and maintaining patent
protection for TCP. We are the exclusive, worldwide licensee
under seven issued U.S. patents, five pending
U.S. patent applications and 51 issued
foreign patents and
pending
foreign patent applications, a subset of which are
directed to our proprietary TCP technology as currently
implemented, owned by AB-CWT, a related company, the terms of
which patents will expire between
November 1, 2011 and
September 21, 2024. We seek to protect our proprietary
renewable diesel production processes, documentation and other
written materials under trade secret and copyright laws. We also
typically require employees and consultants with access to our
proprietary information to execute confidentiality agreements.
The steps taken by us to protect our proprietary information may
not be adequate to prevent misappropriation of our technology.
In addition, our proprietary rights may not be adequately
protected because:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
people may not be deterred from misappropriating our
technologies or unauthorized use of disclosure of confidential
information despite the existence of laws or contracts
prohibiting it and adequate remedies may not exist if
misappropriation, unauthorized use or disclosure were to occur;
|
| |
| |
•
|
policing unauthorized use of our intellectual property may be
difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and we may be unable to
determine the extent of any unauthorized use; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
the laws of other countries in which we may market our
proprietary TCP technology may offer little or no protection for
our proprietary technologies.
|
Reverse engineering, unauthorized copying or other
misappropriation of our proprietary technologies could enable
third parties to benefit from our technologies without paying us
for doing so. Any inability to adequately protect our
proprietary rights could harm our ability to compete, to
generate revenues and to grow our business.
The patent applications may not result in issued patents, and
even if they result in issued patents, the patents may not have
claims of the scope we seek. In addition, any issued patents may
be challenged, invalidated or declared unenforceable. The term
of any issued patents in the United States would be
20 years from their filing date and if the applications are
pending for a long time period, we may have a correspondingly
shorter term for any patent that may issue since the term of our
exclusive license is for the duration of the last expiring
licensed patents or patent application. In addition, given the
costs of obtaining patent protection, protection may not be
sought for certain innovations that later turn out to be
important.
A substantial
portion of the technology used in our business is owned by
AB-CWT, a related company.
A substantial portion of our technology is protected by patents
that are owned by AB-CWT. We are the exclusive, worldwide
licensee under seven issued U.S. patents, five pending
U.S. patent applications and 51 issued
foreign patents and
pending
foreign patent applications owned by AB-CWT, a subset of
which are directed to our proprietary TCP technology as
currently implemented. AB-CWT is a Delaware limited liability
company whose members include Brian S. Appel, our Chief
Executive Officer, Jerome Finkelstein, a member of our board of
directors, and one of our principal
22
stockholders, an entity of Sterling Equities. Together,
Mr. Appel, Mr. Finkelstein and an entity of Sterling
Equities hold over 79% of AB-CWT’s membership interests. We
cannot be certain that our rights to use these patents will
continue. We have an exclusive license to the patents owned by
AB-CWT through Resource Recovery Corporation, or RRC, our
wholly-owned subsidiary. AB-CWT has the right to terminate this
exclusive license for our nonpayment of royalties or our breach
of agreement, if either of which default remains uncured, or in
the event we transfer or assign any of our exclusively licensed
rights without the prior written consent from AB-CWT.
Additionally, upon a change of control of
our company, AB-CWT
has the right to terminate our exclusive license. The expiration
of patents licensed from
AB-CWT or
the termination of that license with
AB-CWT would
have a material adverse effect on our business.
We may face
intellectual property infringement claims that could be
time-consuming and costly to defend and could result in our loss
of significant rights.
Litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property
rights is extensive in the technology industry. Although we are
not currently aware of any parties pursuing or intending to
pursue material infringement claims against us, we may be
subject to such claims in the future. Also, because patent
applications in the United States and many other jurisdictions
are kept confidential for 18 months before they are
published, we may be unaware of pending patent applications that
relate to our technology. There may also be third-party patents
and patent applications published or unpublished, of which we
are unaware, but which relate to our technology.
We may also initiate claims to defend our intellectual property
and maintain our intellectual property. Litigation is expensive,
time-consuming, may require the cooperation of our licensor,
could divert management’s attention from our business and
could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating
results or financial condition. If there is a successful claim
of infringement against us, our customers or our third-party
intellectual property providers, we may be required to pay
substantial damages to the party claiming infringement, stop
selling products or using technology that contains the allegedly
infringing intellectual property, or enter into royalty or
license agreements that may not be available on acceptable
terms, if at all. All these judgments could materially damage
our business. We may have to develop non-infringing technology,
and our failure in doing so or obtaining licenses to the
proprietary rights on a timely basis could have a material
adverse effect on our business.
During the
ordinary course of our business, we may become subject to
lawsuits or indemnity claims, which could materially and
adversely affect our business and results of
operations.
We have in the past been, and may in the future be, named as a
defendant in lawsuits, claims and other legal proceedings during
the ordinary course of our business. These actions may seek,
among other things, compensation for alleged personal injury,
workers’ compensation, employment discrimination, breach of
contract, nuisance, negligence, property damage, punitive
damages, civil penalties or other losses, consequential damages
or injunctive or declaratory relief. In addition, pursuant to
our customer arrangements, we generally indemnify our customers
for claims related to property damage from retrofitting, the
use, storage or burning characteristics of our renewable diesel,
as well as intellectual property-related damages. In the event
that such actions or indemnities are ultimately resolved
unfavorably at amounts exceeding our accrued reserves, or at
material amounts, the outcome could materially and adversely
affect our reputation, business and results of operations. In
addition, payments of significant amounts, even if reserved,
could adversely affect our liquidity position.
Our insurance and
contractual protections may not always cover lost revenues,
increased expenses or liquidated damages payments.
Although we maintain insurance, obtain warranties from vendors
and require contractors to meet certain performance levels, the
proceeds of such insurance, warranties, performance
23
guarantees or risk sharing arrangements may not be adequate to
cover lost revenues, increased expenses or liquidated damages
payments.
Risks Related to
Our Operations and Financial Condition
Our recurring
losses from operations have raised substantial doubt regarding
our ability to continue as a going concern.
Our recurring losses from operations raise substantial doubt
about our ability to continue as a going concern, and as a
result, our independent registered public accounting firm
included an explanatory paragraph in its report on our
consolidated financial statements for the years ended
December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005 with respect to this
uncertainty. The
December 31, 2007 financial statements do
not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome
of this uncertainty. In August 2008, we raised $7.5 million
in a private placement, and in December 2008, we completed
a secured debt and warrant financing for aggregate net proceeds
of $2.0 million, which we expect will be sufficient to fund
our operations through February 2009. If we successfully
complete this offering, we will be able to fund our development
efforts and to meet our obligations through 2009. The perception
that we may not be able to continue as a going concern may cause
others to choose not to deal with us due to concerns about our
ability to meet our contractual obligations.
Our quarterly
revenues, expenses and results of operations are difficult to
forecast and may fluctuate substantially.
Our quarterly revenues, expenses and results of operations are
difficult to forecast. We may experience substantial
fluctuations in revenues, expenses and results of operations
from quarter to quarter. You should not rely on our results of
operations in any prior reporting period to be indicative of our
performance in future reporting periods. Many different factors
could cause our results of operations to vary from quarter to
quarter, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
the timing and amount of capital expenditures for facility
construction and expansion;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the efficiencies and costs of facility operations;
|
| |
| |
•
|
availability and cost of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
oil, diesel and natural gas prices;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the timing and length of routine maintenance and equipment
upgrade related facility shutdowns;
|
| |
| |
•
|
competition;
|
| |
| |
•
|
seasonal fluctuations in demand for our renewable diesel oil and
our fertilizers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
costs of compliance with regulatory requirements;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the timing, magnitude and terms of any future acquisitions or
joint ventures;
|
| |
| |
•
|
personnel changes;
|
| |
| |
•
|
general changes to the U.S. and global economies; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
political conditions or events.
|
We base our current and future operating expense levels and our
investment plans on estimates of future revenues and rate of
growth. We expect that our expenses will increase in the future,
and we may not be able to adjust our spending quickly enough if
our revenues fall short of our expectations. Any shortfalls in
our revenues or in our expected growth rates could result in
decreases in our stock price.
Our business is
highly dependent on key personnel.
Our future success depends to a significant extent on the
continued services of Mr. Brian S. Appel, our Chief
Executive Officer, Mr. Michael J. McLaughlin, our Chief
Financial Officer, Mr. James
24
H. Freiss, our Chief Operating Officer, and Mr. Dan F.
Decker, our Executive Vice President, as well as other key
personnel. Messrs. Appel, Freiss and Decker serve key roles
in the development and operations of our business, including
application of their market and operational expertise to our
day-to-day operations, and the loss of any one of them could
disrupt our operations. We intend to enter into employment
agreements with each of these officers. If, however, we were to
lose the services of any of these officers for any reason,
including voluntary resignation or retirement, we may not be
able to find a replacement who has equal skill or ability, and
our business may be adversely affected. We maintain key-man
insurance for Mr. Appel. In 2007, we accepted the
resignation of Steve A. Carlson, our former Chief Financial
Officer, and Brad Aldrich, our former Chief Operating Officer.
We may not be
able to attract and retain the highly skilled employees we need
to support our business.
Our ability to construct additional facilities and further
refine TCP is dependent on the experience and expertise of our
employees, especially highly trained engineers, facility
operations personnel and facility managers. We believe that our
future success will depend in large part on our ability to
attract and retain qualified personnel, particularly as we
continue to secure additional sources of animal and food waste
and implement our expansion strategy. Many of the companies with
which we compete for experienced personnel have greater
resources than we do and may be able to offer more attractive
terms of employment. As competition for qualified employees
grows, our cost of labor could increase, which could adversely
impact our results of operations. In 2007, our then Chief
Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer resigned. We
cannot predict our success in hiring or retaining the personnel
we require for continued growth.
We determined
that at December 31, 2007, we had a material weakness in
our internal controls over financial reporting.
At
December 31, 2007, we had a material weakness in our
internal controls over financial reporting. Under standards
established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or
PCAOB, a
“material weakness” is a deficiency, or a
combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial
reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a
material misstatement of
the Company’s annual or interim
financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a
timely basis. The material weaknesses identified was with
respect to the technical expertise of our accounting staff,
particularly our need to re-evaluate our current accounting
staff to determine if we have sufficient accounting personnel
with the requisite expertise to ensure our ability to properly,
accurately and reliably prepare our consolidated financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. As we prepare for the completion of this offering,
we are in the process of addressing the issues. In September
2008, Michael J. McLaughlin joined
our company as our Chief
Financial Officer and Suzanne Wollman joined
our company as our
Controller. However, our remediation efforts may not enable us
to remedy the material weakness or avoid other material
weaknesses or significant deficiencies in the future. In
addition, these and any other material weaknesses and
significant deficiencies will need to be addressed as part of
the evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting
pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
and may impair our ability to comply with Section 404.
We will become
subject to additional financial and other reporting and
corporate governance requirements that may be difficult for us
to satisfy. Evolving regulation of corporate governance and
public disclosure may result in additional expenses and
continuing uncertainty.
We have historically operated our business as a private company.
In connection with this offering, we will become obligated to
file with the Securities and Exchange Commission annual and
quarterly information and other reports that are specified in
Sections 13 and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, and we will also become
subject to other new financial and other reporting and corporate
governance requirements, including the requirements
25
of the NYSE Alternext and certain provisions of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the regulations promulgated
thereunder, which will impose significant compliance obligations
upon us. These obligations will require a commitment of
additional resources and result in the diversion of our senior
management’s time and attention from our day-to-day
operations. In particular, we will be required to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
create or expand the roles and duties of our board of directors,
our board committees and management;
|
| |
| |
•
|
institute a more comprehensive financial reporting and
disclosure compliance function;
|
| |
| |
•
|
hire additional financial and accounting personnel and other
experienced accounting and finance staff with the expertise to
address the complex accounting matters applicable to public
companies;
|
| |
| |
•
|
establish an internal audit function;
|
| |
| |
•
|
prepare and distribute periodic public reports in compliance
with our obligations under the federal securities laws;
|
| |
| |
•
|
enhance and formalize closing procedures at the end of our
accounting periods;
|
| |
| |
•
|
retain and involve to a greater degree outside counsel and
accountants in the activities listed above;
|
| |
| |
•
|
establish an investor relations function; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
establish new internal policies, such as those relating to
disclosure controls and procedures and insider trading.
|
We may not be successful in complying with these obligations,
and compliance with these obligations could be time-consuming
and expensive.
Failure to
achieve and maintain effective internal control over financial
reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could have a material adverse effect
on our business and stock price.
As a private company, our internal control over financial
reporting does not currently meet all the standards contemplated
by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that we
will eventually be required to meet. We currently rely primarily
upon a substantive review by our management to help ensure the
accuracy of our financial reports. We will be required to
evaluate, test and implement internal controls over financial
reporting to enable management to report on, and our independent
registered public accounting firm to attest to, such internal
controls as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. While we anticipate being compliant with the
requirements of Section 404 for our year ending
December 31, 2009, we cannot be certain as to the timing of
the completion of our evaluation, testing and remediation
actions or the impact of the same on our operations. If we are
not able to implement the requirements of Section 404 in a
timely manner or with adequate compliance, our independent
registered public accounting firm may not be able to certify as
to the adequacy of our internal control over financial
reporting. This result may cause us to be unable to report on a
timely basis and thereby subject us to adverse regulatory
consequences, including sanctions by regulatory authorities,
such as the Securities and Exchange Commission. Our failure to
comply with Section 404 on a timely basis could result in
the diversion of management time and attention from operating
our business and the expenditure of substantial financial
resources on remediation activities. In addition, such failure
may make it more difficult and costly to attract and retain
independent board and audit committee members. As a result,
there could be a negative reaction in the financial markets due
to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial
statements. We could also suffer a loss of confidence in the
reliability of our financial statements if our independent
registered public accounting firm reports a material weakness in
our internal control over financial reporting. We will incur
incremental costs in order to improve our internal control over
financial reporting and comply with Section 404, including
increased auditing and legal fees and costs
26
associated with hiring additional accounting and administrative
staff. Any such actions could increase our operating expenses
and negatively affect our results of operations.
Risks Related To
The Auction Process For This Offering
Potential
investors should not expect to sell our shares for a profit
shortly after our common stock begins trading.
A principal factor in determining the initial public offering
price for the shares sold in this offering will be the clearing
price resulting from an auction conducted by us and the
underwriters. The clearing price is the highest price at which
all of the shares offered, including the shares subject to the
over-allotment
option, may be sold to potential investors. Although we and the
underwriters may elect to set the initial public offering price
below the clearing price, the public offering price may be at or
near the clearing price. If there is little to no demand for our
shares at or above the initial public offering price once
trading begins, the price of our shares could decline following
our initial public offering. If your objective is to make a
short-term profit by selling the shares you purchase in the
offering shortly after trading begins, you should not submit a
bid in the auction.
Some bids made at
or above the initial public offering price may not receive an
allocation of shares.
The underwriters may require that bidders confirm their bids
before the auction for our initial public offering closes. If a
bidder is requested to confirm a bid and fails to do so within a
required time frame, that bid will be rejected and will not
receive an allocation of shares even if the bid is at or above
the initial public offering price. Further, if the auction
process leads to a pro rata reduction in allocated shares and a
rounding down of share allocations pursuant to the rules of the
auction, a bidder may not receive any shares in the offering
despite having a bid at or above the initial public offering
price range. In addition, we, in consultation with the
underwriters, may determine, in our sole discretion, that some
bids that are at or above the initial public offering price are
manipulative or disruptive to the bidding process or are not
creditworthy, or otherwise not in our best interest, in which
case such bids will be reduced or rejected. Other conditions for
valid bids, including suitability, eligibility and account
opening and funding requirements of participating dealers may
vary. As a result of these varying requirements, a bidder may
have its participation or bid rejected by the underwriters or a
participating dealer while another bidder’s identical bid
is accepted.
Potential
investors may receive a full allocation of the shares for which
they bid if their bids are successful and should not bid for
more shares than they are prepared to purchase.
If the initial public offering price is at or near the clearing
price for the shares offered in this offering, the number of
shares represented by successful bids will equal or nearly equal
the number of shares offered by this prospectus. Successful
bidders may therefore be allocated all or nearly all of the
shares that they bid for in the auction. Therefore, we caution
investors against submitting a bid that does not accurately
represent the number of shares of its common stock that they are
willing and prepared to purchase.
Our initial
public offering price may have little or no relationship to the
price that would be established using traditional valuation
methods, and therefore, the initial public offering price may
not be sustainable once trading begins.
The public offering price for this offering is ultimately
determined by negotiation between the underwriters and us after
the auction closes and does not necessarily bear any direct
relationship to our assets, current earnings or book value or to
any other established criteria of value, although these factors
are considered in establishing the initial public offering
price. As a result, our initial public offering price may not be
sustainable once trading begins, and the price of our common
stock may decline.
27
Risks Related to
Our Common Stock and this Offering
There is no
existing market for our common stock, and we do not know if one
will develop to provide you with adequate liquidity.
Prior to this offering, there has not been a public market for
shares of our common stock. We intend to apply to list as common
stock on the NYSE Alternext. However, we cannot predict the
extent to which investor interest in
our company will lead to
the development of an active trading market on the NYSE
Alternext or otherwise or how liquid that market may become. If
an active trading market does not develop, you may have
difficulty selling any of our common stock that you purchase.
The initial public offering price may not be indicative of the
price at which our common stock will trade following completion
of this offering. Consequently, the market price of shares of
our common stock may decline below the initial public offering
price, and you may not be able to resell your shares of our
common stock at or above the price you paid in this offering.
We expect that
our stock price will fluctuate significantly, and you may not be
able to resell your shares at or above the initial public
offering price.
Securities markets worldwide experience significant price and
volume fluctuations. This market volatility as well as general
economic, market or political conditions could reduce the market
price of our common stock in spite of our operating performance.
The trading price of our common stock is likely to be volatile
and subject to wide price fluctuations in response to various
factors, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
market conditions in the broader stock market in general, or in
the alternative fuel industry in particular;
|
| |
| |
•
|
actual or anticipated fluctuations in our quarterly financial
and operating results;
|
| |
| |
•
|
introduction of new products and technologies by us or our
competitors;
|
| |
| |
•
|
issuance of new or changed securities analysts’ reports or
recommendations;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the building of new facilities and the operation of new and
existing facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
sales of large blocks of our stock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
additions or departures of key personnel;
|
| |
| |
•
|
regulatory developments;
|
| |
| |
•
|
litigation and governmental investigations; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
economic and political conditions or events.
|
These and other factors may cause the market price and demand
for our common stock to fluctuate substantially, which may limit
or prevent investors from readily selling their shares of common
stock and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our
common stock. In addition, in the past, when the market price of
a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have often
instituted securities class action litigation against the
company that issued the stock. If any of our stockholders
brought a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs
defending the lawsuit. Such a lawsuit could also divert the time
and attention of our management from our business, which could
significantly harm our profitability and reputation.
If securities
analysts do not publish research or reports about our business,
our stock price could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will in part be
influenced by the research and reports that industry or
securities analysts publish about us or our business. If one or
more of these analysts cease coverage of
our company or fail to
publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the
financial markets, which in turn could cause our stock price or
trading volume to decline. Moreover, if one or more of the
analysts who cover
our company downgrade our stock, or if our
results of operations do not meet their expectations, our stock
price could decline.
28
If a substantial
number of shares become available for sale and are sold in a
short period of time, the market price of our common stock could
decline.
If our existing stockholders sell substantial amounts of our
common stock in the public market following this offering, the
market price of our common stock could decrease significantly.
The perception in the public market that our existing
stockholders might sell shares of common stock could also
depress our market price. These sales, or the possibility that
these sales may occur, also might impede our ability to raise
capital through the issuance of additional shares of our common
stock or other equity securities at a time and at a price we
deem appropriate. We, our officers, directors and holders of
substantially all of our common stock have agreed with the
underwriters, subject to certain exceptions, not to dispose of
or hedge any of their common stock or securities convertible
into or exchangeable for shares of common stock during the
period from the date of this prospectus continuing through the
date 360 days, 270 days or 180 days, as
applicable, after the date of this prospectus, except with the
prior written consent of the underwriters’ representatives.
See “Plan of Distribution.”
Upon completion of this offering, we will have
12,389,791 shares of common stock outstanding. In addition,
exercisable options for 249,560 shares of our common stock
will be held by our employees and others. Our directors,
executive officers and additional other holders of our common
stock will be subject to the
lock-up
agreements described in “Plan of Distribution” and the
Rule 144 holding period requirements described in
“Shares Eligible for Future Sale.” After all of these
lock-up
periods have expired and the holding periods have elapsed,
8,457,412 additional shares will be eligible for sale in the
public market. The market price of shares of our common stock
may drop significantly when the restrictions on resale by our
existing stockholders lapse.
Insiders will
continue to have substantial control over us after this offering
and could limit your ability to influence the outcome of key
transactions, including a change of control.
Our principal stockholders, directors and executive officers and
entities affiliated with them will own approximately 61.7% of
the outstanding shares of our common stock after this offering.
As a result, these stockholders, if acting together, would be
able to influence or control matters requiring approval by our
stockholders, including the election of directors and the
approval of mergers or other extraordinary transactions. They
may also have interests that differ from yours and may vote in a
way with which you disagree and which may be adverse to your
interests. The concentration of ownership may have the effect of
delaying, preventing or deterring a change of control of our
company, could deprive our stockholders of an opportunity to
receive a premium for their common stock as part of a sale of
our company and might ultimately affect the market price of our
common stock.
Some provisions
of Delaware law, our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation, our amended and restated bylaws and our license
agreement with AB-CWT may deter third parties from acquiring
us.
Provisions contained in our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation, amended and restated
bylaws and our license
agreement with AB-CWT and in Delaware law could make it more
difficult for a third party to acquire us. Provisions of our
amended and restated
certificate of incorporation, amended and
restated
bylaws and Delaware law impose various procedural and
other requirements, which could make it more difficult for
stockholders to effect certain corporate actions. Our amended
and restated
certificate of incorporation and
bylaws provide
for, among other things:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
restrictions on the ability of our stockholders to fill a
vacancy on the board of directors;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the authorization of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of
which may be established and shares of which may be issued
without stockholder approval; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals.
|
These anti-takeover defenses could discourage, delay or prevent
a transaction involving a change in control of
our company.
These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make
it
29
more difficult for stockholders to elect directors of their
choosing and cause us to take other corporate actions than those
stockholders desire.
Further, we are the exclusive, worldwide licensee of patents and
patent applications, a subset of which are directed to our
proprietary TCP technology. We license these patents from
AB-CWT, and AB-CWT has the right to terminate this license in
the event we transfer or assign any of our exclusively licensed
rights without prior written consent from AB-CWT, which may
deter third parties from acquiring us.
We do not
anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable
future.
We currently intend to retain our future earnings, if any, for
the foreseeable future, to repay future indebtedness and to fund
the development and growth of our business. We do not intend to
pay any dividends in the foreseeable future to holders of our
common stock. As a result, capital appreciation in the price of
our common stock, if any, will be your only source of gain on an
investment in our common stock.
New investors in
our common stock will experience immediate and substantial book
value dilution after this offering.
The initial public offering price of our common stock will be
substantially higher than the pro forma net tangible book value
per share of the outstanding common stock immediately after the
offering. Based on an assumed initial public offering price of
$13.00 per share, the midpoint of the price range set forth on
the cover of this prospectus, and our net tangible book value as
of
September 30, 2008, if you purchase our common stock in
this offering you will pay more for your shares than the current
net tangible book value and you will suffer immediate dilution
of $8.07 per share in pro forma as adjusted net tangible
book value. As a result of this dilution, investors purchasing
stock in this offering may receive significantly less than the
full purchase price that they paid for the shares purchased in
this offering in the event of a liquidation because you may pay
a price per share that substantially exceeds the book value of
our assets after subtracting our liabilities. If we grant
options in the future to our employees, and those options are
executed or other issuances of common stock are made, there will
be further dilution.
30
SPECIAL NOTE
REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This prospectus contains forward-looking statements that are
subject to risks and uncertainties. All statements other than
statements of historical fact included in this prospectus are
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements give our
current expectations and projections relating to our financial
condition, results of operations, plans, objectives, future
performance and business. You can identify forward-looking
statements by the fact that they do not relate strictly to
historical or current facts. These statements may include words
such as “anticipate,” “estimate,”
“expect,” “project,” “plan,”
“intend,” “believe,” “may,”
“should,” “can have,” “likely” and
other words and terms of similar meaning or the negative of such
terms.
These forward-looking statements are based on management’s
expectations and beliefs concerning future events impacting us
made in light of our industry experience and on our perceptions
of historical trends, current conditions, expected future
developments and other factors we believe are appropriate under
the circumstances. As you read and consider this prospectus, you
should understand that these statements are not guarantees of
performance or results. They involve risks, uncertainties (some
of which are beyond our control) and assumptions. Although we
believe that these forward-looking statements are based on
reasonable assumptions, you should be aware that many factors
could affect our actual financial results and cause them to
differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking
statements. These factors include, among others:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
our limited operating history;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our history of losses;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our inability to implement our expansion strategy;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our inability to obtain financing to implement our expansion
strategy;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our inability to adequately reduce our cash production costs;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our inability to protect our proprietary technology;
|
| |
| |
•
|
increased construction costs making a new facility too expensive
to build or unprofitable to operate;
|
| |
| |
•
|
start-up
problems at new facilities that could result in high costs,
delayed operations or inability to operate;
|
| |
| |
•
|
our inability to obtain sufficient feedstock to operate our
facilities profitably or at full capacity; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
the other factors described under “Risk Factors” and
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.”
|
There may be other factors that may cause our actual results to
differ materially from the forward-looking statements.
Because of these factors, we caution that you should not place
undue reliance on any of our forward-looking statements.
Further, any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the
date on which it is made. New risks and uncertainties arise from
time to time, and it is impossible for us to predict those
events or how they may affect us. Except as required by law, we
have no duty to, and do not intend to, update or revise the
forward-looking statements in this prospectus after the date of
this prospectus.
This prospectus also contains market data related to our
business and industry. This market data includes projections
that are based on a number of assumptions. If these assumptions
turn out to be incorrect, actual results may differ from the
projections based on these assumptions. As a result, our markets
may not grow at the rates projected by these data, or at all.
The failure of these markets to grow at these projected rates
may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial
condition, results of operations and the market price of our
common stock.
31
USE OF
PROCEEDS
We estimate that the net proceeds from the sale by us of the
shares of common stock being offered hereby, after deducting
(i) underwriting discounts and commissions
(ii) estimated expenses payable by us in connection with
this offering and (iii) repayment of the promissory note
issued to Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP described below,
will be approximately $32.75 million, assuming an initial
public offering price of $13.00 per share, the midpoint of the
estimated price range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus. We intend to use approximately $2.1 million of
the net proceeds of this offering to repay the promissory notes,
including accrued interest, issued to Sterling Acquisitions, LLC
in the principal amount of $615,000, Jerome Finkelstein in
the principal amount of $417,500, Harold Finkelstein in the
principal amount of $417,500, Gas Technology Institute in
the principal amount of $150,000 and Eizel 33, LLC in the
principal amount of $400,000. Each of the foregoing promissory
notes has an interest rate of 18% per annum and will mature on
the earlier to occur of
March 31, 2009 or the consummation
of this offering. These promissory notes were issued in
connection with
short-term
borrowings used for working capital. See
“Certain
Relationships and related Person
Transactions-Certain
Related Party Transactions.” We intend to use approximately
$1.0 million of the proceeds of this offering to repay the
promissory note, including accrued interest, issued to Weil,
Gotshal & Manges LLP in lieu of payment of accrued legal
fees and expenses. The estimated net proceeds of approximately
$32.75 million are net of this payment. The promissory note
issued to Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP has an interest rate
of 3% per annum and will mature on the earlier to occur of
March 31, 2009 or the consummation of this offering. See
“Legal Matters.” We intend to use the remaining net
proceeds of this offering for general corporate and working
capital purposes, including the development or construction of
new facilities. We currently have no agreements or commitments
with respect to the development or construction of new
facilities and, accordingly, we are unable to estimate the
amount of proceeds that will be used for any particular project.
Pending the use of the net proceeds described above, we intend
to invest the net proceeds in short-term investment grade,
interest-bearing instruments.
DIVIDEND
POLICY
We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common
stock. We currently intend to retain earnings, if any, to
finance the growth and development of our business, and we do
not expect to pay any cash dividends on our common stock in the
foreseeable future. Any decision to declare and pay dividends in
the future will be at the discretion of our board of directors
and will depend on many factors, including general economic and
business conditions, our strategic plans, our financial results
and condition, legal requirements, contractual restrictions and
other factors as our board of directors deems relevant.
32
CAPITALIZATION
The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and
our capitalization as of
September 30, 2008 on (i) an
actual basis, after giving effect to the seven for one stock
split and a subsequent one for three reverse stock split of our
common stock, (ii) a pro forma basis after giving effect to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
the completion of a secured debt and warrant financing for
aggregate net proceeds of $2.0 million, which was completed
in December 2008;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of preferred
stock into 455,189 shares of common stock in connection
with this offering; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, which
will be in effect prior to the completion of this offering;
|
and (iii) a pro forma as adjusted basis after giving effect
to:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
the sale by us of 2,750,000 shares of our common stock in
this offering, assuming an initial public offering price of
$13.00 per share, the midpoint of the estimated price range
shown on the cover page of this prospectus, after deducting
estimated underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated
offering expenses;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the receipt of the net proceeds from this offering; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
the application of the proceeds, including the repayment of the
promissory note issued to Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP
and the repayment of the promissory notes issued to certain
affiliates in connection with
short-term
borrowings.
|
This table should be read in conjunction with “Use of
Proceeds,” “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial
Data,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our
consolidated financial statements and the related notes thereto
included elsewhere in this prospectus.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
|
|
Actual
|
|
|
Pro Forma
|
|
|
As
Adjusted(1)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
5,258
|
|
|
$
|
7,258
|
|
|
$
|
38,008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
$
|
3,646
|
|
|
$
|
5,154
|
|
|
$
|
3,646
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’ Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share (445,081 shares
authorized, 195,081 shares issued and outstanding;
445,081 authorized, no shares issued and outstanding,
pro forma and pro forma as adjusted)
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share (150,000,000 shares
authorized, 9,184,602 shares issued and outstanding,
actual; 150,000,000 shares authorized, 9,639,791 issued and
outstanding, pro forma; 150,000,000 shares authorized,
12,389,791 shares issued and outstanding, pro forma as
adjusted)
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
|
124
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
146,090
|
|
|
|
146,579
|
|
|
|
179,302
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(117,800
|
)
|
|
|
(117,800
|
)
|
|
|
(118,292
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
28,384
|
|
|
|
28,876
|
|
|
|
61,134
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
|
$
|
33,513
|
|
|
$
|
35,513
|
|
|
$
|
66,263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
To the extent we change the number
of shares of common stock we sell in this offering from the
shares we expect to sell or we change the initial public
offering price from the $13.00 per share assumed initial public
offering price, or any combination of these events occur, our
net proceeds from this offering and as adjusted additional
paid-in capital may increase or decrease. A $0.25 increase
(decrease) in the assumed initial public offering price per
share of the common stock, assuming no change in the number of
shares of common stock to be sold, would increase (decrease) the
net proceeds that we receive in this offering and our as
adjusted additional paid-in capital by $687,500 and an increase
(decrease) of 1,000,000 shares from the expected number of
shares to be sold in this offering, assuming no change in the
assumed initial public offering price per share, would increase
(decrease) each of the net proceeds from this offering and our
as adjusted common stock and paid-in capital by approximately
$13.0 million.
|
33
DILUTION
If you invest in our common stock in this offering, your
ownership interest will be diluted to the extent of the
difference between the initial public offering price per share
and the pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share
of common stock immediately upon the completion of this offering.
Dilution results from the fact that the per share offering price
of the common stock is substantially in excess of the book value
per share attributable to the existing stockholders for the
presently outstanding stock. Our net tangible book value after
giving effect to the seven for one stock split and a subsequent
one for three reverse stock split of our common stock represents
our total tangible assets (total assets less intangible assets)
less total liabilities as of
September 30, 2008, divided by
the total number of shares of common stock outstanding.
Pro forma net tangible book value adjusts net tangible book
value to give effect to: (i) the completion of a secured debt
and warrant financing for aggregate net proceeds of
$2.0 million, which was completed in December 2008; (ii)
the automatic conversion of all outstanding shares of preferred
stock into 455,189 shares of common stock in connection with
this offering; and (iii) our amended and restated
certificate of incorporation. Our pro forma net tangible book
value as of
September 30, 2008 was $28.9 million, or
$3.00 per share.
After giving effect to (i) the sale by us of
2,750,000 shares of our common stock in this offering,
assuming an initial public offering price of $13.00 per share,
the midpoint of the estimated price range shown on the cover
page of this prospectus, after deducting estimated underwriting
discounts and commissions, estimated offering expenses and the
repayment of the promissory note issued to Weil, Gotshal &
Manges LLP; (ii) the receipt of the net proceeds from this
offering; and (iii) the repayment of the promissory notes
issued to certain affiliates in connection with the secured debt
and warrant financing, which was completed in December 2008, our
pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value as of
September 30, 2008 would have been approximately
$61.1 million, or $4.93 per share. This represents an
immediate increase in pro forma net tangible book value of $1.93
per share to our existing stockholders and an immediate dilution
in net tangible book value of $8.07 per share to new investors
purchasing shares of common stock in this offering at the
initial offering price.
The following table illustrates this substantial and immediate
dilution to new investors on a per share basis:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed initial public offering price per share
|
|
$
|
13.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
Increase in pro forma net tangible book value per share
attributable to existing investors
|
|
|
1.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma as adjusted net tangible book value per share after
this offering
|
|
|
4.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilution per share to new investors
|
|
$
|
8.07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes, on the same pro forma basis as
of
September 30, 2008, the total number of shares of our
common stock purchased from us, the total consideration paid to
us, assuming an initial public offering price of $13.00 per
share, the midpoint of the initial public offering
34
price range on the cover of this prospectus, the average price
per share paid to us by our existing stockholders and to be paid
by new investors purchasing shares of our common stock in this
offering.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased
|
|
|
Total Consideration
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Price
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
|
|
|
per Share
|
|
|
|
|
Existing stockholders
|
|
|
9,639,791
|
|
|
|
77.8
|
%
|
|
$
|
146,165,451
|
|
|
|
80.4
|
%
|
|
$
|
15.16
|
|
|
New investors
|
|
|
2,750,000
|
|
|
|
22.2
|
|
|
|
35,750,000
|
|
|
|
19.6
|
|
|
|
13.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12,389,791
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
181,915,451
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above discussion and tables:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
exclude shares of our common stock reserved for future grants
under our compensation plans; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
assume no exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase
up to 412,500 additional shares of our common stock.
|
If the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares
of our common stock is exercised in full:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
the increase in our pro forma as adjusted net tangible book
value per share attributable to existing investors purchasing
shares in this offering would be $0.26, the pro forma as
adjusted net tangible book value per share after this offering
would be $5.19 and the dilution in pro forma net tangible book
value per share to new investors would be $7.81;
|
| |
| |
•
|
the percentage of our common stock held by our existing
stockholders will decrease to approximately 75.3% of the total
outstanding amount of our common stock after this
offering; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
the percentage of our common stock held by new investors will
increase to approximately 24.7% of the total outstanding amount
of our common stock after this offering.
|
Assuming the number of shares offered by us, as set forth on the
cover of this prospectus, remains the same, after deducting
underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering
expenses payable by us, a $0.25 increase (decrease) in the
assumed initial public offering price of $13.00 per share, the
midpoint of the range set forth on the cover page of this
prospectus, would:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
increase (decrease) in our pro forma as adjusted net tangible
book value per share after this offering by $0.06; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
increase (decrease) the total consideration paid by new
investors by $687,500.
|
In addition, we may choose to raise additional capital due to
market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe
we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating
plans. To the extent that additional capital is raised through
the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the issuance
of these securities could result in further dilution to our
stockholders.
35
SELECTED
HISTORICAL CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth our selected historical
consolidated financial and other data for the periods and at the
dates indicated. The selected historical consolidated financial
data for the years ended
December 31, 2005,
2006 and
2007
are derived from our audited consolidated financial statements
included elsewhere in this prospectus. The selected historical
financial data for the year ended
December 31, 2004 is
derived from our audited consolidated financial statements that
are not included in this prospectus. The selected historical
financial data for the year ended
December 31, 2003 is
derived from our unaudited financial statements that were not
included in this prospectus. The selected historical
consolidated financial data for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 and
2008 are derived from our unaudited
consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this
prospectus. In the opinion of management, the unaudited
consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same
basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and
include all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring
adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of our operating
results and financial position for those periods and as of such
dates. The results for any interim period are not necessarily
indicative of the results that may be expected for a full year.
The consolidated financial data for the year ended
December 31, 2005 reflects our acquisition of the portion
of the RES, our joint venture with ConAgra, that we did not
already own in July 2005. Prior to the RES acquisition we used
the equity method of accounting for our 50% investment in RES.
Commencing
August 1, 2005, RES became a wholly-owned
subsidiary and is included in our consolidated financial
statements.
The results indicated below and elsewhere in this prospectus are
not necessarily indicative of our future performance. You should
read this information together with “Capitalization,”
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated
financial statements and related notes.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31,
|
|
|
Nine Months ended September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
261
|
|
|
$
|
589
|
|
|
$
|
485
|
|
|
$
|
863
|
|
|
Total cost of goods sold
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
6,077
|
|
|
|
16,459
|
|
|
|
15,946
|
|
|
|
11,949
|
|
|
|
14,448
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin/(loss)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
(5,944
|
)
|
|
|
(16,198
|
)
|
|
|
(15,357
|
)
|
|
|
(11,464
|
)
|
|
|
(13,585
|
)
|
|
Selling, general, and administrative
|
|
|
2,781
|
|
|
|
2,010
|
|
|
|
3,389
|
|
|
|
5,866
|
|
|
|
5,318
|
|
|
|
4,207
|
|
|
|
5,284
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
1,211
|
|
|
|
1,821
|
|
|
|
2,003
|
|
|
|
1,692
|
|
|
|
1,182
|
|
|
|
870
|
|
|
|
878
|
|
|
Impairment of long-lived assets
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
157
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
13,672
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating loss
|
|
|
(3,992
|
)
|
|
|
(3,831
|
)
|
|
|
(25,009
|
)
|
|
|
(23,913
|
)
|
|
|
(21,857
|
)
|
|
|
(16,541
|
)
|
|
|
(19,747
|
)
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
604
|
|
|
|
724
|
|
|
|
458
|
|
|
|
2,154
|
|
|
|
1,952
|
|
|
|
1,595
|
|
|
|
989
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes and equity in net loss of joint ventures
|
|
|
(3,388
|
)
|
|
|
(3,107
|
)
|
|
|
(24,551
|
)
|
|
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Equity in net loss of joint venture
|
|
|
(5,273
|
)
|
|
|
(1,744
|
)
|
|
|
(7,196
|
)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes
|
|
|
(8,661
|
)
|
|
|
(4,851
|
)
|
|
|
(31,747
|
)
|
|
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
|
(14,946
|
)
|
|
|
(18,758
|
)
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(8,661
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4,851
|
)
|
|
$
|
(31,747
|
)
|
|
$
|
(21,759
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19,905
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14,946
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18,758
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted loss per share
|
|
$
|
(3.47
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.52
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6.85
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.62
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.53
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.94
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.21
|
)
|
36
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31,
|
|
|
ended
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
September 30, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
4,100
|
|
|
$
|
3,521
|
|
|
$
|
10,183
|
|
|
$
|
6,291
|
|
|
$
|
14,349
|
|
|
$
|
5,258
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
|
25,659
|
|
|
|
26,549
|
|
|
|
26,626
|
|
|
|
25,301
|
|
|
Interest in joint venture
|
|
|
10,812
|
|
|
|
13,778
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
15,478
|
|
|
|
17,837
|
|
|
|
37,163
|
|
|
|
34,545
|
|
|
|
41,996
|
|
|
|
33,513
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
173
|
|
|
|
180
|
|
|
|
1,998
|
|
|
|
3,117
|
|
|
|
2,203
|
|
|
|
3,646
|
|
|
Long-term liabilities
|
|
|
2,121
|
|
|
|
1,965
|
|
|
|
1,682
|
|
|
|
1,710
|
|
|
|
1,595
|
|
|
|
1,482
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(20,780
|
)
|
|
|
(25,632
|
)
|
|
|
(57,378
|
)
|
|
|
(79,137
|
)
|
|
|
(99,042
|
)
|
|
|
(117,800
|
)
|
|
Total stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
13,184
|
|
|
|
15,693
|
|
|
|
33,483
|
|
|
|
29,719
|
|
|
|
38,199
|
|
|
|
28,384
|
|
37
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with
the information contained elsewhere in this prospectus under the
caption “Selected Historical Consolidated Financial
Data,” and our consolidated financial statements and
related notes thereto. This discussion contains forward-looking
statements that are subject to known and unknown risks and
uncertainties. Actual results and the timing of events may
differ significantly from those expressed or implied in such
forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including
those set forth in the sections entitled “Risk
Factors” and “Forward-Looking Statements” and
elsewhere in this prospectus.
Overview
We sell renewable diesel fuel oil and organic fertilizers which
we currently produce from animal and food processing waste using
TCP. TCP can convert a broad range of organic wastes, or
feedstock, including animal and food processing waste, trap and
low-value greases, mixed plastics, rubber and foam, into our
products. We began development of TCP in 1997. In 1999, we
commenced operations of our seven ton per day pilot facility for
animal and food processing waste located at our research and
development facility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We commenced
development of our first production facility in Carthage,
Missouri in 2002. The Carthage facility was commissioned in
2005. From 2005 to 2007, we developed and refined the equipment,
procedures and processes at our Carthage facility to bring TCP
from demonstration status to production. Our Carthage facility
currently has the capacity to convert 78,000 tons of animal and
food processing waste into approximately 4 million to
9 million gallons of renewable diesel per year, depending
on the feedstock mix. We commenced commercial sales of our
renewable diesel in 2007. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we produced approximately
1,095,000 gallons of renewable diesel. In 2007, we
commenced production of our fertilizers. In the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008, we produced approximately 223,000
gallons of liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer and
approximately 3,300 tons of solid mineral phosphate
fertilizer. We commenced sales of our liquid nitrogen
concentrate fertilizer in the second quarter of 2008. We are in
our initial phase of introducing our solid mineral phosphate
fertilizer into the marketplace, and the costs of producing our
solid mineral phosphate fertilizer has been written off until a
market and pricing structure can be established.
In December 2000, we entered into a license agreement with
ConAgra for the development of TCP for the conversion of animal
and food processing waste into renewable diesel and fertilizers.
A license fee of $2.3 million was paid to us under that
agreement. Simultaneously, we entered into an exclusive joint
venture and formed Renewable Environmental Solutions, LLC., or
RES, with ConAgra Poultry Company, or CPC, as equal partners, to
commercialize the use of TCP under the license agreement with
our subsidiary Resource Recovery Corporation, or RRC, for
processing animal and food processing waste worldwide. In July
2003, CPC assigned its ownership interest in RES to ConAgra
Foods Refrigerated Foods Co., Inc., or CRF, in conjunction with
the sale of CPC to Pilgrim’s Pride Corporation. In July
2005, CRF’s 50% interest in RES, plus cash in the amount of
$2.0 million was exchanged for 978,689 shares of our
common stock and a warrant, expiring July 2010, to purchase
327,488 shares of our common stock at $30.54 per share. As
a result of this exchange, RES became our wholly-owned
subsidiary and the licensing agreement was terminated. The RES
acquisition was accounted for under the purchase method of
accounting. We allocated the purchase price to the tangible and
intangible assets and liabilities, which were recorded at their
respective fair values. The excess of cost over the fair value
of the identifiable assets and liabilities was recorded as
goodwill. In 2005, we recorded an impairment of goodwill of
$13.7 million, the entire amount of the purchase price of
the RES acquisition that was allocated to goodwill. During the
nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we identified certain
property, plant and equipment which are no longer being utilized
due to process improvements implemented during 2008. We recorded
a charge for the remaining net book value of the assets of
approximately $1.2 million during the nine months ended
September 30, 2008. Prior to the RES acquisition, we used
the equity method of accounting for our
38
50% investment in RES and, as a result, we did not record
revenues or expenses from the operations of RES prior to the
acquisition and only recorded our portion of the net loss of
RES, $7.2 million, for the period in 2005 prior to the RES
acquisition. Beginning in
August 1, 2005, the results of
operations of RES were consolidated into our results of
operations. Accordingly our results of operations for periods
prior to the RES acquisition are not comparable to subsequent
periods.
Our Carthage facility is located next to a Butterball turkey
processing plant, which is the principal source of our
feedstock. We have a supply agreement for turkey food processing
waste for our Carthage facility, which expires in May 2010.
Pursuant to our take or pay
contract with Butterball, we paid
Butterball $1.3 million, $788,000, $1.7 million and
$2.7 million in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008, respectively.
We sell our renewable diesel in the industrial fuel oil market.
Through
December 31, 2007, we sold approximately
3.1 million gallons of renewable diesel produced at our
Carthage facility. In 2008, we entered into agreements with two
customers for 100% of our current renewable diesel production
capacity. One customer, Schreiber, accounted for approximately
72.9% and 78.1% of our revenues in 2007 and the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008, respectively. Dyno Nobel
accounted for approximately 14.3% of our revenues in the nine
months ended
September 30, 2008. We commenced the sale of
our liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer in the second quarter
of 2008.
Our consolidated results of operations reflect principally the
activity in our Carthage facility, which has not operated at
full capacity for the following reasons:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
design and construction deficiencies, including equipment
deficiencies;
|
| |
| |
•
|
limited availability of feedstock;
|
| |
| |
•
|
phased production
ramp-up
during the early operational period;
|
| |
| |
•
|
regulatory inspections and requirements; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
environmental testing.
|
Components of
Revenues and Expenses
Revenues. Our revenues are principally derived
from sales of our renewable diesel. We sell our renewable diesel
on a Btu pricing basis that is competitive with other burner
fuels such as diesel oil or natural gas. The average price per
gallon of renewable diesel we received in 2005, 2006 and 2007
and the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 was $0.48,
$0.14, $0.64 and $1.19, respectively. Although we currently base
the price of our renewable diesel primarily on the prevailing
market price of natural gas, which is the principal industrial
boiler fuel used in the geographic market in which we sell our
renewable diesel, in the future we plan to sell our renewable
diesel in geographic markets where the principal industrial
boiler fuel is No. 2 Heating Oil and, accordingly, set the
price based on the prevailing market price for No. 2
Heating Oil in these markets. We sold approximately 367,000,
1.8 million, 911,000 and 684,000 gallons of our renewable
diesel, respectively, in 2005, 2006 and 2007 and the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008. Sales of our renewable diesel
will be the principal source of revenues for the foreseeable
future. In the third quarter of 2008, we also generated revenues
from the sale of our liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer.
Revenues from the sale of fertilizer are accounted for on a cash
basis as collectability is uncertain. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we sold approximately 235,000 gallons
of our liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer at an average
price per gallon of $0.28.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold
primarily consists of the cost of obtaining feedstock. Our
primary feedstock is the turkey food processing waste that we
obtain under our Butterball supply agreement. We also purchase
other animal and food processing waste and trap and low-value
greases, depending on availability and cost. In certain
circumstances, we do not have to pay for
39
feedstock or we receive payments from feedstock suppliers for
receiving and handling feedstock. To the extent that we receive
payments for handling such feedstock, the amounts we receive
will be recorded as a credit against our feedstock costs and
will reduce our costs of goods sold. We anticipate that the
volume cost of acquiring feedstock will decrease over time.
The other major components of cost of goods sold, which
principally relate to our Carthage facility, include:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
salaries, benefits and other labor costs directly related to the
operation of our Carthage facility;
|
| |
| |
•
|
third-party contractor costs associated with facility
modifications and repairs;
|
| |
| |
•
|
utility and maintenance costs, including natural gas;
|
| |
| |
•
|
transportation costs for feedstock, renewable diesel and
fertilizer;
|
| |
| |
•
|
boiler conversion costs for new customers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
diversion and disposal costs related to the disposal of
contracted feedstock to landfill, when our facility is
non-operational and the cost of disposing of excess water in our
process; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
adjustments to the value of our renewable diesel inventory,
which is stated at the lower of cost or market.
|
We anticipate that our cost of goods sold will increase in
dollar terms as our revenues increase but will decrease as a
percentage of revenues over time as we (i) reduce our
feedstock costs, (ii) reduce our reliance on outside
contractors, (iii) increase our facility capacity
utilization, (iv) reduce our average inventory levels and
(v) reduce water disposal costs.
The principal performance metric that we use to evaluate our
costs of goods sold is our cash production cost per gallon of
renewable diesel. Our cash production cost per gallon is
calculated by dividing our total cost of goods sold less
non-cash charges, such as depreciation and amortization, by the
number of gallons of renewable diesel produced. For the nine
months ended
September 30, 2008, our cash production cost
per gallon at our Carthage facility was $11.18. Our Carthage
facility is our first production facility and was initially
designed to demonstrate the viability and scalability of TCP.
Our Carthage facility was also initially designed to produce
commercial quantities of renewable diesel that would be
sufficient to demonstrate that customers would be willing to
purchase our renewable diesel if sufficient quantities were
available and that our renewable diesel meets performance
characteristics for use in industrial boilers. Our current cash
production cost reflects our relatively high feedstock costs due
to the commercial terms of our historical arrangements with
Butterball and the relatively low output provided by turkey food
processing waste, our current primary feedstock. In addition,
operational inefficiencies caused by the initial design of, and
sub-optimal performance of various equipment initially used at,
our Carthage facility limited the operational availability. This
required us to redesign our plant processes, install replacement
equipment and incur significant labor and maintenance costs.
These operational inefficiencies also required us to dispose of,
rather than process, our feedstock and incur related costs.
In the future, we believe our cash production cost will be lower
than our current cash production cost per gallon as we:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
enter into contractual arrangements for feedstock on more
favorable terms;
|
| |
| |
•
|
purchase high yielding feedstock, such as beef and pork
processing waste and restaurant grease at favorable prices and
otherwise reduce our feedstock costs on a per gallon basis;
|
40
|
|
|
| |
•
|
benefit from economies of scale resulting from the operation of
multiple, larger-scale facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
benefit from lower maintenance costs and improved operational
reliability at our new facilities which will be designed based
on the knowledge gained from the operation of our Carthage
facility; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
reduce our disposal costs for unused feedstock.
|
As a result of these factors, we estimate that our cash
production cost, including the cost of feedstock, of renewable
diesel will ultimately be in the range of $0.85 to $1.60 per
gallon for our larger production facilities. We believe that our
cost of feedstock conversion, which we define as our cash
production cost less the cost of feedstock, will be between
$0.30 and $0.80 per gallon of renewable diesel for our larger
production facilities. Our cash production cost does not give
effect to the $1.00 per gallon renewable diesel mixture tax
credit that we receive from the U.S. government for each
gallon of renewable diesel produced at our facilities that we
sell in the United States. The renewable diesel mixture tax
credit is scheduled to expire at the end of 2009. Net cash costs
per gallon outside of the United States may be materially
different due to variances in feedstock costs, energy costs and
the availability and level of tax credits and cash incentives.
The demand for our renewable diesel is still emerging and does
not currently coincide with our production cycle. While we are
seeking to increase our customer base and demand for our
renewable diesel, we are currently required to hold excess
renewable diesel in inventory. Inventory items are stated at the
net amount that we expect to realize from the sale of our
inventory, which is determined based on the lower of production
cost or the market value of the renewable diesel held in
inventory and is charged to cost of goods sold. Since our
production costs are relatively high at our current stage of
development and the price we receive for our renewable diesel in
the market is relatively low given that the demand and market
acceptance for our renewable diesel is still emerging, the
adjustments to the value of our renewable diesel inventory have
been significant. We expect that the adjustment will decrease in
future periods as we decrease our production costs. In addition,
as demand for our renewable diesel and fertilizers increase, we
anticipate that the market value of our products will increase
and will ultimately exceed our production costs, further
reducing or eliminating the inventory adjustment.
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general and administrative
expenses consist primarily of salaries and benefits for general
and administrative and sales and marketing personnel, sales and
marketing costs, rent and other occupancy costs, travel and
entertainment costs and professional fees. We anticipate adding
office space in the next several years, which will increase our
rent and associated occupancy costs. We expect our selling,
general and administrative expenses to increase significantly as
we hire additional personnel to manage our anticipated facility
expansion. We also anticipate incurring additional expenses as a
public company following the completion of this offering,
including additional legal and corporate governance expenses,
such as costs associated with compliance with Section 404
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, salary and payroll-related
costs for additional accounting and internal audit personnel,
and listing and transfer agent fees.
Research and Development Expenses. Research
and development expenses consist primarily of salaries and
benefits for our research and development personnel and costs
associated with operating our engineering research facility and
pilot facility in Philadelphia. We anticipate that research and
development expenses will increase modestly as we develop TCP to
handle other types of feedstock and seek to improve the
performance and efficiency of TCP.
Other Operating Expenses. Other operating
expenses consist of impairment to property, plant and equipment
and impairment of goodwill associated with the RES acquisition.
As of
September 30, 2008, we had no goodwill on our balance
sheet.
41
Other Income. Other income consists primarily
of renewable diesel mixture tax credit and interest income. We
receive a $1.00 per gallon excise renewable diesel mixture tax
credit from the U.S. government for each gallon of
renewable diesel we sell in the United States. Because we have
no fuel excise tax payable, we receive a direct cash payment in
the amount of the renewable diesel mixture tax credit. Interest
income is based on the amount of our invested cash balances and
prevailing interest rates. We also record grant monies that we
receive in other income.
Critical
Accounting Policies
Our consolidated financial statements included in this
prospectus have been prepared in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States. Note 1
of our consolidated financial statements includes a summary of
our significant accounting policies, certain of which require
the use of estimates and assumptions. Accounting estimates are
an integral part of the preparation of financial statements and
are based on judgments by management using its knowledge and
experience about the past and current events and assumptions
regarding future events, all of which we consider to be
reasonable. These judgments and estimates reflect the effects of
matters that are inherently uncertain and that affect the
carrying value of our assets and liabilities, the disclosure of
contingent liabilities and reported amounts of expenses during
the reporting period.
The accounting estimates and assumptions discussed in this
section are those that involve significant judgments and the
most uncertainty. Changes in these estimates or assumptions
could materially affect our financial position and results of
operations.
Inventories
Our inventories are stated at the lower of cost (determined on a
first-in,
first-out basis) or market. We evaluate our inventories to
determine excess or slow moving products based on quantities on
hand, current orders and expected future demand. Inventory
items, of which we have an excess supply, are stated at the net
amount that we expect to realize from the sale of such products.
The difference between our carrying cost and the net amount we
expect to realize from the sale of our inventory, which is
determined based on the lower of production cost or the market
value of the renewable diesel held in inventory, is charged to
cost of sales.
Impairment of
Long-Lived Assets
We account for our investments in long-lived assets in
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or
SFAS, No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” or SFAS No. 144.
SFAS No. 144 requires a company to review its
long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may
not be recoverable. Factors we consider important, which could
trigger an impairment review, include, among others, the
following:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
a significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which a
long-lived asset is being used;
|
| |
| |
•
|
a significant adverse change in the business climate that could
affect the value of a long-lived asset; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
a significant decrease in the market value of assets.
|
We periodically evaluate the recoverability of the net carrying
value of our long lived assets. An impairment loss is recognized
when the carrying value of the long-lived assets exceeds its
undiscounted future cash flows and its fair value. A loss on
impairment would be recognized through a charge to operating
loss.
42
In early 2005, RES identified certain facility equipment that
was no longer in usable condition or related to an operating
activity that it decided not to pursue. Accordingly, RES
recorded an impairment loss of $5.0 million in 2005. The
assets that were deemed to be impaired were determined to have
no value to RES.
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes using the liability method of
accounting for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,”
or SFAS 109. Under this method, deferred income taxes are
recognized for the future tax consequence of differences between
the tax and financial reporting basis of assets and liabilities
at each reporting period. A valuation allowance is established
to reduce deferred tax assets to the amounts expected to be
realized.
On
January 1, 2007, we adopted Financial Accounting
Standards Board, or FASB, Interpretation No. 48,
“Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” or
FIN 48, which clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in
income taxes recognized in the financial statements in
accordance with SFAS 109. The interpretation prescribes a
recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the
financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. It also
provides guidance on derecognizing, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and
transition. We believe that our income tax filing positions and
deductions will be sustained on audit and do not anticipate any
adjustments that will result in a material change to our
financial position. However, we cannot predict with certainty
the interpretations or positions that tax authorities may take
regarding specific tax returns filed by us and, even if we
believe our tax positions are correct, we may determine to make
settlement payments in order to avoid the costs of disputing
particular positions taken. No reserves for uncertain income tax
positions have been recorded pursuant to FIN 48. In
addition, we did not record a cumulative effect adjustment
related to the adoption of FIN 48.
Stock-Based
Compensation
Effective
January 1, 2006, we adopted
SFAS No. 123(R),
“Share-Based Payment,” or
SFAS 123(R), and related interpretations, which superseded
the provisions of Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 25,
“Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees,” or APB 25, and related interpretations.
SFAS 123(R) requires that all stock-based compensation be
recognized as an expense in the financial statements and that
such cost be measured at the fair value of the award.
SFAS 123(R) was adopted using the modified prospective
method, which requires us to recognize compensation expense on a
prospective basis. Therefore, prior period financial statements
have not been restated. Under this method, in addition to
reflecting compensation expense for new share-based awards,
expense is also recognized to reflect the remaining service
period of awards that had been granted in prior periods.
With the adoption of SFAS 123(R), we are required to record
the fair value of stock-based compensation awards as an expense.
In order to determine the fair value of stock options on the
date of grant, we utilize the Black-Scholes option-pricing
model. Inherent in this model are assumptions related to
expected stock-price volatility, option life, risk-free interest
rate and dividend yield. While the risk-free interest rate and
dividend yield are less subjective assumptions, typically based
on factual data derived from public sources, the expected
stock-price volatility and option life assumptions require a
greater level of judgment which makes them critical accounting
estimates. We use an expected stock-price volatility assumption
which is primarily based on the average implied volatility of
the stock of a group of comparable alternative energy companies,
whose stocks are publicly traded.
43
The weighted average assumptions used for stock-based
compensation awards for each of the periods presented are as
follows:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
2006
|
|
2007
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
Volatility
|
|
63.7%
|
|
65%
|
|
65%
|
|
65%
|
|
Weighted-average estimated life
|
|
10 years
|
|
10 years
|
|
10 years
|
|
5 years
|
|
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate
|
|
4.1%-4.8%
|
|
4.6%-4.7%
|
|
4.7%
|
|
3.3%
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
|
—
|
The following table sets forth the amount of expense related to
stock-based payment arrangements included in specific line items
in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the
following periods:
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
34,192
|
|
|
$
|
12,978
|
|
|
$
|
232,238
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
435,798
|
|
|
|
821,484
|
|
|
|
90,560
|
|
|
|
1,116,268
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
41,176
|
|
|
|
6,209
|
|
|
|
18,432
|
|
|
|
115,315
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
476,974
|
|
|
$
|
861,885
|
|
|
$
|
121,970
|
|
|
$
|
1,463,821
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of
December 31, 2007, there was $208,330 of total
unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested, stock-based
compensation granted under our stock option and restricted stock
plans, which will be recognized using the fair value method over
a weighted average remaining life of approximately
1.5 years.
On
August 11, 2008, we issued options to purchase 210,466
shares of common stock of which options to purchase 110,833
shares of common stock are performance based. We determined the
fair value of the stock options using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model with the following assumptions: fair market value
of common stock of $26.25, exercise price of $30.54, risk free
interest of 3.27%, volatility of 65%, dividend yield of $0 and
life of five years. The fair market value of common shares was
determined using a discounted cash flow approach that uses
recent historical and projected cash flow, comparables to
similar companies and certain discount factors based on
comparable companies. The non-performance based stock options
vest immediately upon issuance. As such, we have recorded an
expense of approximately $1.4 million during the nine
months ended
September 30, 2008.
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenue on the sale of our products when title and
risk of loss has passed to our customer, the sales price is
fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured,
which is generally upon shipment to the customer.
44
Goodwill
In accordance with SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets,” or SFAS 142, we review the
carrying value of goodwill annually and whenever indicators of
impairment were present. We measure impairment losses by
comparing the carrying value of our reporting units to the fair
value of our reporting units determined using a discounted cash
flow method.
At
December 31, 2005, we reviewed the goodwill resulting
from the acquisition of RES and determined that the value was
fully impaired. We followed the provisions of
SFAS No. 142,
“Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets,” or SFAS 142, and performed our annual
goodwill impairment test on the first day of the fourth quarter
of 2005. The goodwill of RES was determined to be impaired as
the carrying amount of RES exceeded its estimated fair value.
The fair value was determined using a discounted cash flows
method.
Results of
Operations
Total Revenues. Revenues increased 77.9% to
$863,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 from
$485,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The
increase was attributable to increased sales to an existing
customer pursuant to an agreement entered into with Schreiber in
March 2008, sales to a new customer pursuant to an agreement
entered into with Dyno Nobel in May 2008, and an increase in the
price of our renewable diesel due to an increase in the price of
natural gas. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2008,
we sold approximately 684,000 gallons of renewable diesel at an
average price per gallon of $1.19, without giving effect to the
renewable diesel mixture tax credit. In the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, we sold approximately 768,000 gallons
of renewable diesel for an average price of $0.63 per gallon,
without giving effect to the renewable diesel mixture tax
credit. In addition, during the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we sold approximately 235,000 gallons
of our liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer at an average
price of $0.28 per gallon. Fertilizer sales are recognized on a
cash basis due to the uncertainty in collectability and
represented 7.6% of revenues, or $65,000, for the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold
increased 20.8% to $14.5 million for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 from $12.0 million for the nine
months ended
September 30, 2007. The increase was
attributable to increased feedstock, disposal and transportation
costs, as well as an increase in cost of natural gas. We
produced approximately 1,095,000 gallons of renewable diesel for
the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 from
825,000 gallons of renewable diesel for the nine months
ended
September 30, 2007. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, feedstock, disposal and transportation
costs totaled $3.6 million and plant operating expenses
totaled $10.9 million. For the nine months ended
September 30, 2007, feedstock, disposal and transportation
costs totaled $3.0 million and plant operating expenses
totaled $9.0 million. The cost of natural gas used to
operate our Carthage facility as a percentage of cost of goods
sold was 6.2%, or $893,000, for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 as compared to 6.9%, or $827,000, for
the nine months ended
September 30, 2007.
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general, and administrative
expenses increased 26.2% to $5.3 million for the nine
months ended
September 30, 2008 from $4.2 million for
the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The increase was
principally due to increased
stock-based
compensation expense from the issuance of stock options on
August 11, 2008. In 2007, we incurred less substantial
professional fees related to a proposed financing transaction
that was not completed.
45
Research and Development Expenses. Research
and development expenses remained relatively consistent and was
$878,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 as
compared to $870,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The increase was a result of the timing
of research and development activities.
Other Income. Other income decreased 38.0% to
$989,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 from
$1,596,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007.
The decrease was primarily due to approximately $400,000 in
grant monies which were received for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007 but were not received in the nine months
ended
September 30, 2008. The renewable diesel mixture tax
credit decreased 11% to $684,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 from $768,000 for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. Interest income received on our
available cash decreased $104,000, which was $219,000 for the
nine months ended
September 30, 2008 compared to $323,000
for the nine months ended
September 30, 2007. The decrease
was primarily due to a lower cash balance available for
investment.
Total Revenues. Revenues increased 125.7% to
$589,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2007 from $261,000
for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The increase was
attributable to $429,000 in sales to a new customer 2007. In
2007, we sold 911,000 gallons at an average price per gallon of
$0.64. In 2006, we sold approximately 1.8 million gallons
at an average price per gallon of $0.14. The average price per
gallon in 2006 was lower than 2007 because we discounted our
prices significantly in 2006 for off-specification fuel sold to
our customers. During the development and commissioning phases
of our Carthage facility and for periods thereafter, we were
unable to obtain consistent quantities of suitable feedstock
and, therefore, were unable to establish sales
contracts with
large customers, which caused wide variations in our revenues.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold
decreased 3.1% to $15.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007 from $16.5 million for the year
ended
December 31, 2006. The decrease was primarily a
result of reduction in diversion and disposal costs resulting
from improved reliability of our Carthage facility and the
availability of lower cost disposal options. For the year ended
December 31, 2007, cost of goods sold included retrofitting
the boiler for a new customer. We produced approximately
1.1 million gallons in 2007 as compared to 1.6 million
gallons in 2006. For the year ended
December 31, 2007,
feedstock, disposal and transportation costs totaled
$4.0 million and facility operating expenses totaled
$12.0 million. For the year ended
December 31, 2006,
feedstock, disposal and transportation costs totaled
$4.4 million and facility operating expenses totaled
$12.0 million. The cost of natural gas used to operate our
Carthage facility as a percentage of cost of goods sold was
7.0%, or $1.1 million, for the year ended
December 31, 2007 as
compared to 6.7%, or $1.1 million, for the year ended
December
31, 2006.
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general, and administrative
expenses decreased 9.3% to $5.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2007 from $5.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The decrease was a result of reduced
salary costs due to management personnel changes.
Research and Development Expenses. Research
and development expenses decreased 30.1% to $1.2 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2007 from $1.7 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The decrease was
primarily the result of costs in 2006 associated with the
development of TCP to handle other feedstock which were not
incurred in 2007.
46
primarily due to lower renewable diesel mixture tax credit
payments as a result of the decrease in gallons of renewable
diesel sold in 2007. Renewable diesel mixture tax credit
decreased to $911,000 in 2007 from $1.8 million in 2006.
This decrease was offset in part by the increase in interest
income, which was $564,000 in 2007 compared to $192,000 in 2006,
and an increase of $400,000 in 2007 from the SEER grant.
Total Revenues. Revenues increased 96.2% to
$261,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $133,000
for the year ended
December 31, 2005. The increase was
attributable to increased sales of renewable diesel during 2006
and our accounting of the results of RES on an equity basis
rather than a consolidated basis for the first seven months of
2005. In 2006, we sold approximately 1.8 million gallons of
renewable diesel at an average price per gallon of $0.14. In
2005, we sold approximately 367,000 gallons at an average price
per gallon of $0.48.
Cost of Goods Sold. Cost of goods sold
increased 170.9% to $16.5 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $6.1 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. Prior to August 2005, we did not record
costs of goods sold. The cost of goods sold incurred prior to
August 2005 was recorded by RES. We produced approximately
1.6 million gallons in 2006 and 949,000 gallons in 2005.
For the year ended
December 31, 2006, feedstock, disposal
and transportation costs totaled $4.4 million and facility
operating expenses totaled $12.0 million. For the year
ended
December 31, 2005, feedstock, disposal and
transportation costs totaled $2.7 million and facility
operating expenses totaled $3.3 million. The cost of
natural gas used to operate our Carthage facility as a
percentage of cost of goods sold was 6.7%, or $1.1 million,
for the year ended
December 31, 2006 as compared to 5.1%,
or $313,000, for the year ended
December 31, 2005.
Selling, General and Administrative
Expenses. Selling, general, and administrative
expenses increased 73.1% to $5.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $3.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. In 2005 we recorded selling, general and
administrative expenses for the five month period after the RES
acquisition, as compared to the full year in 2006.
Research and Development Expenses. Research
and development expenses decreased 15.5% to $1.7 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from $2.0 million
for the year ended
December 31, 2005. The decrease was the
result of a decrease in staffing at our Philadelphia facility in
2006 which was offset in part by the fact that research and
development expenses for 2005 only reflect expenses for the five
month period after the RES acquisition.
Impairment of Long-lived Assets. The
impairment of long-lived assets increased to $157,000 for the
year ended
December 31, 2006 from $1,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2005 and were both due to write-offs of
property, plant and equipment.
Impairment of Goodwill. There was no recorded
goodwill for the year ended
December 31, 2006. The
impairment of goodwill for the year ended
December 31, 2005
of $13.7 million related to impairment of goodwill
associated with the RES acquisition.
Other Income. Other income increased to
$2.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2006 from
$458,000 for the year ended
December 31, 2005. The increase
in other income was primarily due to higher renewable diesel
mixture tax credit payments as a result of the increase in
gallons sold. Renewable diesel mixture tax credit totaled
$1.8 million in 2006, and we did not receive any renewable
diesel mixture tax credit payments in 2005. The remaining
variance in other income was the result of increased interest
income and the elimination of management fees paid by RES prior
to the RES acquisition.
47
Liquidity and
Capital Resources
We have incurred substantial operating losses since our
inception due in large part to expenditures for our research and
development activities, including the development of our
Carthage facility. Our recurring losses from operations raise
substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going
concern. As of
September 30, 2008 (unaudited) and
December 31, 2007, we had an accumulated deficit of
$117.8 million and $99.0 million, respectively. We
have financed our operations through the proceeds from the sales
of equity securities, revenues from sales of renewable diesel
and fertilizer, renewable diesel mixture tax credits and grants.
From 2005 through
September 30, 2008, we raised an
aggregate of $75.7 million in private placements of equity
securities. In December 2008, we completed a secured debt and
warrant financing for aggregate net proceeds of
$2.0 million whereby we issued promissory notes in an
aggregate principal amount of $2.0 million that will mature
on the earlier to occur of
March 31, 2009 or the consummation of
this offering and warrants to purchase an aggregate of
116,667 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of
$30.54 per share. The promissory notes are fully secured by all
of our assets and have an interest rate of 18% per annum. The
warrants are exercisable beginning January 2010 and expire in
December 2013. We determined the fair value of the warrants,
$653,333, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the
following assumptions: a fair market value of common stock of
$11.00 per share, exercise price of $30.54 per share, risk free
interest rate of 1.47%, volatility of 88.13%, dividend yield of
$0 and life of five years. The promissory notes will be recorded
at their relative fair value of $1.5 million and the
warrants will be recorded as additional paid in capital at their
relative fair value of $492,462. We believe that our existing
cash, together with the proceeds of this offering, will be
sufficient to fund our operations through 2009. Without the
proceeds of this offering, we will need to obtain additional
debt and equity financing to fund our operations after
February 2009. We will need to obtain additional debt and
equity financing to implement our expansion strategy in the
future.
In December 2008, we issued a promissory note to Weil,
Gotshal & Manges LLP in the principal amount of
$1.0 million in lieu of payment of accrued legal fees and
expenses. The promissory note issued to Weil,
Gotshal & Manges LLP has an interest rate of 3% per
annum and will mature on the earlier occur of
March 31,
2009 or the consummation of this offering.
In connection with a permitting process for our research and
development facility in Philadelphia, certificates of deposit in
the amount of $156,000 were placed as security for potential
environmental expenses with Pennsylvania’s Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Land Recycling and Waste
Management.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended
|
|
|
Ended
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
September 30,
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities
|
|
$
|
(10,059
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17,924
|
)
|
|
$
|
(17,885
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12,650
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14,927
|
)
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities
|
|
|
(8,244
|
)
|
|
|
(3,100
|
)
|
|
|
(2,320
|
)
|
|
|
(1,833
|
)
|
|
|
(1,644
|
)
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities
|
|
|
24,964
|
|
|
|
17,133
|
|
|
|
28,263
|
|
|
|
28,254
|
|
|
|
7,479
|
|
Net Cash Used in
Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities was $14.9 million,
$12.7 million, $17.8 million, $17.9 million and
$10.1 million for the nine months ended
September 30,
2008 and
2007 and for the years ended
December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005, respectively. The primary increase in the amount
of cash used in operating activities subsequent to 2005 was due
to the RES acquisition. Prior to August 2005, all cash
48
used to support the operating activities was recorded as an
investment in RES. Accordingly, cash used in operating
activities for 2005 only includes cash used by the RES facility
from August through December 2005. Cash used in operating
activities from August 2005 through September 2008 was
primarily used to support the continued operations of our
Carthage facility, for research and development activities at
our Philadelphia facility, and for selling, general, and
administrative expenses.
Net Cash Used in
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities was $1.6 million,
$1.8 million, $2.3 million, $3.1 million and
$8.2 million for the nine months ended
September 30,
2008 and
2007 and for the years ended
December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005, respectively. In 2005, $6.2 million in cash
was used to fund RES. During the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 and
2007 and for the years 2007, 2006
and 2005, cash used to purchase property, plant and equipment
amounted to $1.6 million, $1.8 million,
$2.3 million, $3.1 million and $2.0 million,
respectively.
Net Cash Provided
by Financing Activities
Net cash provided by financing activities was $7.5, $28.3,
$28.3 million, $17.1 million and $25.0 million
for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 and
2007 and
for the years ended
December 31, 2007,
2006 and
2005,
respectively. In 2005 and 2006, cash provided by financing
activities reflected the net proceeds from the sale of equity
securities. In 2007, our cash flows from financing activities
reflected the net proceeds from the sale of equity securities as
well as net proceeds from issuance of convertible debt which
were converted in 2007 and proceeds from the exercise of stock
options.
Off-Balance Sheet
Arrangements
We have no off-balance sheet arrangements.
Contractual
Obligations
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Lease Obligations
|
|
$
|
211
|
|
|
$
|
168
|
|
|
$
|
133
|
|
|
$
|
79
|
|
|
$
|
73
|
|
|
$
|
255
|
|
|
$
|
919
|
|
|
Purchase
Obligations(1)
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
1,241
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
8,455
|
|
|
Other Long-Term Debt
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
1,138
|
|
|
|
1,584
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,944
|
|
|
$
|
3,837
|
|
|
$
|
1,449
|
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
|
$
|
164
|
|
|
$
|
1,393
|
|
|
$
|
10,958
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Purchase obligations reflect our
current feedstock contract with Butterball under which we expect
to take delivery. Our contract was renewed in February 2008 and
will expire in May 2010. To estimate the purchase obligations
under this contract, we used the average monthly purchase for
the nine months ended September 30, 2008 and annualized the
estimate for the period remaining contract period.
|
We and
AB-CWT, a
related party, are jointly and severally liable under a
settlement agreement to pay $10,000 per month to Paul T. Baskis,
one of the original inventors of the technology underlying TCP,
until the last to expire of certain patents licensed to us by
AB-CWT. We
are liable for this payment through October 2012.
AB-CWT has
acknowledged that it is the primary obligor under that
settlement, has made all payments under that settlement and has
stated its intention to continue to make the payments required
under that settlement. However, since we are the principal
source of revenue for
AB-CWT, we
have determined that we should record the payment obligations as
a liability. As of
December 31, 2007, we have a liability
of approximately $437,000 recorded. As
AB-CWT makes
the required settlement payments, we record the reversal of the
prior charge under selling, general and administrative expenses.
We reversed approximately $34,000, $23,000, $28,000 and $112,000
for the years ended December 2005, 2006 and 2007, and the
nine months ended
September 30, 2008, respectively.
49
In December 2008, we completed a secured debt and warrant
financing for aggregate net proceeds of $2.0 million
whereby we issued promissory notes in an aggregate principal
amount of $2.0 million that will mature on the earlier to
occur of
March 31, 2009 or the consummation of this
offering and warrants to purchase an aggregate of
116,667 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of
$30.54 per share. The promissory notes are fully secured by all
of our assets and have an interest rate of 18% per annum. The
warrants are exercisable beginning January 2010 and expire in
December 2013. We determined the fair value of the warrants,
$653,333, using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model with the
following assumptions: a fair market value of common stock of
$11.00 per share, exercise price of $30.54 per share, risk free
interest rate of 1.47%, volatility of 88.13%, dividend yield of
$0 and life of five years. The promissory notes will be recorded
at their relative fair value of $1.5 million and the
warrants will be recorded as additional paid in capital at their
relative fair value of $492,462.
In December 2008, we issued a promissory note to Weil,
Gotshal & Manges LLP in the principal amount of
$1.0 million in lieu of payment of accrued legal fees and
expenses. The promissory note issued to Weil, Gotshal &
Manges LLP has an interest rate of 3% per annum and will mature
on the earlier occur of
March 31, 2009 or the consummation
of this offering.
Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
We are subject to market risk with respect to changes in prices
for natural gas used in our Carthage facility, fuel oil and
natural gas market prices and feedstock prices.
Natural Gas Price
Fluctuation
We are subject to market risk with respect to natural gas which
is consumed in the conversion of waste and has historically been
subject to volatile market conditions. Natural gas prices and
availability are affected by weather conditions, overall
economic conditions and foreign and domestic governmental
regulation and relations. The price fluctuation of natural gas
over the last three years from
December 31, 2005 to
December 31, 2008, based on the New York Mercantile
Exchange daily futures data, has ranged from a low of $4.89 per
MMBtu in September 2006 to a high of $13.58 per MMBtu in
July 2008. Natural gas costs comprised about 8% of our
total cost of sales for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
Further, we are exposed to market risk with respect to natural
gas as we currently price our renewable diesel primarily based
on the price of natural gas.
Crude Oil and
Refined Product Price Fluctuation
We are exposed to market risks with respect to our renewable
diesel sales related to the volatility of No. 2 Heating Oil
and natural gas prices, as we intend to price our renewable
diesel at parity with No. 2 Heating Oil on a Btu basis. Our
financial results can be affected significantly by fluctuations
in these prices, which depend on many factors, including demand
for boiler fuels, prevailing economic conditions, worldwide
production levels, worldwide inventory levels and governmental
relations, regulatory initiatives and weather conditions. The
price fluctuation of No. 2 Heating Oil over the last
three years from
December 31, 2005 to
December 31, 2008, based on the New York Mercantile
Exchange daily futures data, has ranged from a low of $1.27 per
gallon in December 2008 to a high of $4.11 per gallon in
July 2008. The price fluctuation of natural gas over the last
three years from
December 31, 2005 to
December 31, 2008, based on the New York Mercantile
Exchange daily futures data, has ranged from a low of $4.89 per
MMBtu in September 2006 to a high of $13.58 per MMBtu in
July 2008.
In order to manage the uncertainty relating to price volatility,
we have applied a policy of avoiding inventory build and to sell
our renewable diesel as manufactured to meet our commitments.
50
In the past, circumstances have occurred, such as shifts in
market demand that have resulted in variances between our actual
inventory level and our desired target inventory level. We
maintain some inventories of our renewable diesel, the values of
which are subject to wide fluctuations.
Feedstock
We are subject to market risk with respect to the price and
availability of feedstock. In general, feedstock prices in the
United States are influenced by the rate of food processing by
our suppliers, seasonality, weather conditions and impact on
transportation and facility operations, the supply and demand
for use in the animal feed industry, as well as the availability
and pricing of substitute feedstock. Additionally, the effect of
laws and regulations for the use of feedstock in the animal feed
industry will also impact its pricing. Higher feedstock costs
result in higher cost of goods sold and lower profit margins.
Recently Issued
Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162,
“The
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles,” or
“SFAS No. 162.” SFAS No. 162 is
intended to improve financial reporting by identifying a
consistent framework, or hierarchy, for selecting accounting
principles to be used in preparing financial statements that are
presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles. SFAS No. 162 will become effective
60 days following the Securities and Exchange
Commission’s approval of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board amendments to AU Section 411,
“The
Meaning of Present Fairly in Conformity With Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles.” The Company does not anticipate the
adoption of SFAS No. 162 will have a material impact
on its results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
On
April 25, 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position
(FSP)
FAS 142-3,
“Determination of the Useful Life of Intangible
Assets.” This FSP amends the factors that should be
considered in developing renewal or extension assumptions used
to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset
under SFAS No. 142,
“Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets,” or SFAS 142. The intent of this
FSP is to improve the consistency between the useful life of a
recognized intangible asset under SFAS 142 and the period
of expected cash flows used to measure the fair value of the
asset under SFAS 141R and other generally accepted
accounting principles. This FSP is effective for financial
statements issued for fiscal years beginning after
December 15, 2008, and interim periods within those fiscal
years. Early adoption is prohibited. We are currently evaluating
the impact, if any, that this FSP will have on our results of
operations, financial position or cash flows.
Effective
January 1, 2008, we adopted
SFAS No. 157,
“Fair Value Measurements,” or
SFAS 157, for assets and liabilities measured at fair value
on a recurring basis. SFAS 157 establishes a common
definition for fair value to be applied to existing generally
accepted accounting principles that require the use of fair
value measurements, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value and expands disclosure about such fair value measurements.
The adoption of SFAS 157 did not have an impact on our
financial position or operating results, but did expand certain
disclosures. SFAS 157 defines fair value as the price that
would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants
at the measurement date. Additionally, SFAS 157 requires
the use of valuation techniques that maximize the use of
observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.
These inputs are prioritized below:
|
|
|
| |
Level 1:
|
Observable inputs such as quoted market prices in active markets
for identical assets or liabilities.
|
51
|
|
|
| |
Level 2:
|
Observable market-based inputs or unobservable inputs that are
corroborated by market data.
|
| |
| |
Level 3:
|
Unobservable inputs for which there is little or no market data,
which require the use of the reporting entity’s own
assumptions.
|
We did not have any Level 2 or Level 3 assets or
liabilities as of
September 30, 2008. Cash and cash
equivalents and restricted cash of approximately
$3.7 million and $156,000, respectively, included money
market securities and short-term certificate of deposits that
are considered to be highly liquid and easily tradable as of
September 30, 2008. These securities are valued using
inputs observable in active markets for identical securities and
are therefore classified as Level 1 within our fair value
hierarchy.
In addition, SFAS No. 159,
“The Fair Value Option
for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities,” or
SFAS 159, became effective on
January 1, 2008.
SFAS 159 expands opportunities to use fair value
measurements in financial reporting and permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items at fair value. We did not elect the fair value options for
any of our qualifying financial instruments.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141
(Revised 2007),
“Business Combinations,” or
SFAS 141R, a replacement of FASB Statement No. 141.
SFAS 141R is effective for fiscal years beginning on or
after
December 15, 2008 and applies to all business
combinations. SFAS 141R provides that, upon initially
obtaining control, an acquirer shall recognize 100% of the fair
values of acquired assets, including goodwill, and assumed
liabilities, with only limited exceptions, even if the acquirer
has not acquired 100% of its target. As a consequence, the
current step acquisition model will be eliminated. Additionally,
SFAS 141R changes current practice, in part, as follows:
(1) contingent consideration arrangements will be recorded
at fair value at the acquisition date and included on that basis
in the purchase price consideration; (2) transaction costs
will be expensed as incurred, rather than capitalized as part of
the purchase price; (3) pre-acquisition contingencies, such
as legal issues, will generally have to be accounted for in
purchase accounting at fair value; and (4) in order to
accrue for a restructuring plan in purchase accounting, the
requirements in FASB Statement No. 146,
“Accounting
for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities,”
would have to be met at the acquisition date. While there is no
expected impact to our consolidated financial statements on the
accounting for acquisitions completed prior to
December 31,
2008, the adoption of SFAS 141R on
January 1, 2009
could materially change the accounting for business combinations
consummated subsequent to that date.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
“Non-controlling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements — An Amendment of ARB No. 51,” or
SFAS 160. SFAS 160 establishes new accounting and
reporting standards for the non-controlling interest in a
subsidiary and for the deconsolidation of a subsidiary.
Specifically, this statement requires the recognition of a
non-controlling interest (minority interest) as equity in the
consolidated financial statements and separate from the
parent’s equity. The amount of net income attributable to
the non-controlling interest will be included in consolidated
net income on the face of the income statement. SFAS 160
clarifies that changes in a parent’s ownership interest in
a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation are equity
transactions if the parent retains its controlling financial
interest. In addition, this statement requires that a parent
recognize a gain or loss in net income when a subsidiary is
deconsolidated. Such gain or loss will be measured using the
fair value of the non-controlling equity investment on the
deconsolidation date. SFAS 160 also includes expanded
disclosure requirements regarding the interests of the parent
and its non-controlling interest. SFAS 160 is effective for
fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years,
beginning on or after
December 15, 2008. Earlier adoption
is prohibited. The impact, if any, from the adoption of SFAS to
us in 2009 will depend on the development of our business at
that time.
52
BUSINESS
Overview
We sell renewable diesel fuel oil and organic fertilizers which
we currently produce from animal and food processing waste using
our proprietary Thermal Conversion Process, or TCP. TCP can
convert a broad range of organic wastes, or feedstock, including
animal and food processing waste, trap and low-value greases,
mixed plastics, rubber and foams, into our products. TCP
emulates the earth’s natural geological and geothermal
processes that transform organic material into fuels through the
application of water, heat and pressure in various stages. Our
renewable diesel has a significantly higher net energy balance,
which is defined as the ratio of the amount of energy contained
in a fuel to the energy required to produce that fuel, than
conventional diesel, ethanol or other biofuels. Our renewable
diesel does not compete for food crops, uses fewer natural
resources than conventional diesel, ethanol or other biofuels,
and does not contain alcohol. TCP uses conventional processing
equipment, which we believe requires a comparatively small
operating footprint and is relatively easy to permit compared to
other waste processing technologies.
Our first production facility, located in Carthage, Missouri,
has demonstrated the scalability of TCP in an approximately 250
ton per day production operation. Our Carthage facility has the
capacity to convert 78,000 tons of animal and food processing
waste into approximately 4 million to 9 million
gallons of renewable diesel per year, depending on the feedstock
mix used. We also produce fertilizers through TCP. We currently
sell the renewable diesel produced at our Carthage facility as a
fuel for the industrial boiler market, and we sell our
fertilizers to a number of farms in the Carthage area. During
the nine months ended
September 30, 2008, we produced
approximately 1,095,000 gallons of renewable diesel and sold
approximately 684,000 gallons of renewable diesel. We commenced
the sale of one of our fertilizers in the second quarter of
2008. We received an average price of $1.19 per gallon of
renewable diesel sold in the nine months ended
September 30, 2008.
The markets for our products are large. The industrial fuel oil
market in the United States consumes approximately
62 billion gallons of diesel per year in addition to large
quantities of other fuels. We target the industrial steam boiler
and off-road engine portions of this market which consumes
approximately 23 billion gallons of diesel per year. The
North American nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer market is
approximately 26 million tons per year. Because quantities
of renewable diesel and fertilizers produced from each TCP
facility will be relatively small compared to the combined
energy and fertilizer demand of local industrial consumers and
farmers, we anticipate that all of the products from each of our
facilities will be sold within a
100-mile
radius of each TCP facility. In addition, due to evolving
federal and state renewable energy mandates, we believe there is
a significant market opportunity to sell our renewable diesel
into the 43 billion gallon equivalent electrical power
generation market.
We believe that we will be able to achieve profitability by
offering competitively priced renewable diesel and fertilizers
to our customers. As more customers purchase and validate our
renewable diesel, we intend to price our product at parity, on a
per-British thermal unit, or Btu, basis, with No. 2 Heating
Oil. The price of No. 2 Heating Oil on the New York
Mercantile Exchange was $1.44 per gallon as of
December 31,
2008, and the average price of No. 2 Heating Oil over the
last three years from
December 31, 2005 to
December 31, 2008 was $2.25 per gallon. Our renewable
diesel contains approximately 9% fewer Btus than No. 2
Heating Oil on a volumetric basis, and, at parity, we believe
our renewable diesel will sell for a price that will be 9% lower
than the market price for No. 2 Heating Oil. We estimate
that our cash production cost of renewable diesel will
ultimately be in the range of $0.85 to $1.60 per gallon for our
larger production facilities. We believe that our cost of
feedstock conversion, which we define as our cash production
cost less the cost of feedstock, will be between $0.30 and $0.80
per gallon of renewable diesel for our larger production
facilities. We believe
53
our future feedstock costs will vary significantly based on the
type of feedstock utilized and then prevailing market conditions
for feedstock. Our cash production cost does not give effect to
the $1.00 per gallon renewable diesel mixture tax credit that we
receive from the U.S. government for each gallon of
renewable diesel produced at our facilities that we sell in the
United States. The renewable diesel mixture tax credit is
scheduled to expire at the end of 2009. Using the current
feedstock mix at our Carthage facility, for every gallon of
renewable diesel we produce, we produce approximately one gallon
of liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer and three pounds of
solid mineral phosphate fertilizer.
We intend to establish additional facilities close to sources of
feedstock, initially focusing on animal and food processing
waste and trap and low-value greases in North America and
Europe. There are approximately 23.5 million tons of animal
and food processing waste generated annually in North America
and 18.7 million tons generated annually in Europe. There
are approximately 4.7 million tons of trap grease generated
annually in North America. Based on our analysis of optimal
facility sizes, we initially intend to establish TCP animal and
food processing waste facilities that process approximately 500
to 2,000 tons of waste per day and TCP grease facilities that
process approximately 150 to 600 tons of waste per day.
We have entered into discussions with several animal and food
processors in North America and Europe and with municipal
treatment facilities and trap grease aggregators in the
Northeast United States regarding potential construction of new
TCP facilities and retrofitting existing facilities with TCP.
Our growth strategy includes:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
forming joint ventures with waste producers to own and operate
new TCP facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
constructing and operating new wholly-owned TCP facilities;
|
| |
| |
•
|
retrofitting existing animal and food processing facilities with
our proprietary TCP technology; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
licensing TCP to third-party operators.
|
We began development of TCP in 1997. In 1999, we commenced
operations of our seven ton per day pilot facility for animal
and food processing waste located at our research and
development facility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. We commenced
development of our Carthage facility in 2002 and, from 2005 to
January 2007, we developed and refined the equipment, procedures
and processes at our Carthage facility to bring TCP from
demonstration status to production. We commenced commercial
sales of our renewable diesel in January 2007, and we commenced
sales of one of our fertilizers in the second quarter of 2008.
Our Carthage facility is currently our only production facility.
Trends Impacting
our Business
We believe that a number of trends in our markets are converging
to increase demand for TCP and our renewable diesel and
fertilizers.
Global Energy
Supply and Demand
We believe we have entered a period of volatile crude oil and
natural gas prices which we believe is driven in part by changes
in demand for industrial fuels. Geopolitical instability within
the Middle East and other oil exporting regions, along with
risks inherent in long-distance transportation associated with
exporting from these regions, continue to result in risk-related
price premiums. In addition, increased
long-term
global demand for industrial fuels from rapidly developing
nations, such as China and India, have further affected energy
prices. As a result, there is increased focus on the development
of alternative domestic energy supplies, particularly through
the development of renewable sources.
54
Concerns Around
the Diversion of Food Supplies to Fuels
The rising use of land to grow crops for fuel rather than for
food has increased competition for acreage. A report released in
2008, prepared by the Food and Agricultural Organization of the
United Nations and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development, stated that “the energy security,
environmental and economic benefits of biofuels production based
on agricultural commodity feedstocks are at best modest, and
sometimes even negative.” By diverting crops, which have
traditionally been a source for the world’s food supply, to
be used as sources of energy, ethanol and biofuels are driving
up prices and creating food shortages around the world.
Environmental and
Sustainability Concerns
As the world seeks to address increasing levels of greenhouse
gases, particularly carbon dioxide emissions, there is a growing
public policy emphasis on developing sustainable
“green” energy sources. For example, renewable
portfolio standards that obligate retail electricity suppliers
to include renewable resources in their electricity generation
portfolio have been established in 24 states. In addition
to these programs, electricity suppliers producing electricity
through renewable sources are eligible to receive a federal
production tax credit of $0.019/kWh. Renewable fuels standards
have also been implemented on a federal level which mandate
increases in the percentage of biofuels required to be blended
into fossil fuels sold in the United States. As a result, we
believe there is a significant market opportunity for producers
of renewable diesel.
Increasing Demand
for Fertilizers
In recent years, there has been a sharp increase in global
demand for fertilizer, driven primarily by population growth and
changes in dietary habits. As populations and incomes continue
to grow, more food is required from a decreasing per capita
supply of arable land. This requires higher crop yields and,
therefore, more plant nutrients or fertilizers. This trend,
combined with a fixed supply of certain inputs for commercial
fertilizers, including phosphate rock, has led to a steady
global increase in the price of fertilizers. As a result, we
believe there is a significant market opportunity for organic
fertilizers.
Food Safety and
Health Concerns
The animal and food processing industry is under significant
market and regulatory pressure as consumers and regulators
address the growing concerns related to pathogenic and toxic
contamination of the food chain. In particular, the spread of
bovine spongiform encephalopathy, BSE or mad cow disease, is
believed to be caused by the consumption of meat and bone meal
by cattle, which is made from animal carcasses and incorporated
in cattle feed. To strengthen existing safeguards against BSE,
on
April 25, 2008, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
enacted a more stringent law redefining the categories of
cattle-derived products that can be used for animal and pet
feed. In addition, U.S. beef exports have been negatively
affected by U.S. policy regarding animal rendering.
Accordingly, we believe animal and food processors will seek
cost-effective methods for disposal of this waste to address
market and regulatory concerns, thus increasing the supply of
animal and food processing waste. Further, as producers of
organic waste look for other waste processing solutions, we
believe the cost of our feedstock will decrease.
Disposal of Trap
and Low-Value Greases
The discharge of fats, oils and greases, or FOG, from food
service establishments and other industrial processing
facilities creates significant environmental, public health and
operational problems in wastewater treatment facilities
throughout the country. When FOG is dumped into sewers,
wastewater treatment facilities are negatively impacted due to
the hardening of greases in sewer lines and treatment systems.
FOG collected from traps is often mixed with absorbents and then
disposed
55
of in landfills or incinerated, creating other environmental
issues. This issue is compounded by both the distance to legal
disposal sites and the rising cost of fuel. We believe that
municipalities are seeking technologies that can mitigate these
concerns.
Our
Strategy
Our goal is to further expand our production and sale of
renewable diesel and fertilizers from waste. The key elements of
our strategy to achieve this goal include:
Develop New Facilities. We believe that our
success will be driven by producing significant quantities of
renewable diesel. Based on our analysis of optimal plant sizes,
initially we intend to establish TCP facilities that can convert
from 500 to 2,000 tons of animal and food processing waste per
day and produce approximately 8 million to 86 million
gallons of renewable diesel per year, depending on the size of
the facility and the composition of the feedstock. We also
intend to establish grease facilities that can convert from 150
to 600 tons of feedstock per day and produce 3 million
to 46 million gallons of renewable diesel per year,
depending on the size of the facility and the composition of the
feedstock. Due to more stringent regulations in Canada and
Europe regarding animal and food processing waste disposal, we
believe there is greater urgency in these regions to find
effective alternatives to conventional technologies, and the
cost of feedstock will be lower in these regions. Accordingly,
we focus our efforts in these areas. We expect to work closely
with various third-party engineering and construction
specialists to develop and execute plant-specific engineering
procurement and construction plans. Further, we expect to
internally develop a full engineering bid package that can be
used to achieve best costs for procurement and construction
through key processes for TCP-specific construction, including
process flow diagrams, heat and material balances, piping and
instrumentation diagrams and process specific equipment, which
will be used in developing facility construction plans. We
expect to locate future facilities near sources of feedstock and
suitable markets for our renewable diesel and fertilizers. In
addition, we may sub-license TCP to third parties to enable them
to build and operate their own facilities.
Secure Additional Sources of Animal and Food Processing
Waste. Securing steady supplies of feedstock is
critical to our growth and future success. We have targeted
animal and food processing waste as our primary feedstock and
entered into a supply agreement to convert wastes from a
Butterball turkey processing facility in Carthage. We believe
the animal and food processing industries are good sources of
feedstock because they generate significant quantities of
organic wastes that can be converted to renewable diesel using
TCP and are under increasing market and regulatory pressures to
change how animal wastes are handled and utilized. To secure
large and steady supplies of feedstock, we are seeking to enter
into supply agreements with other animal and food processors in
North America and Europe. We may replicate the strategy we
utilized in developing our Carthage facility and enter into
arrangements with other animal and food processors where we
co-locate one of our TPC facilities near their facility to
provide a cost-effective waste management alternative.
Expand our Sales and Marketing Efforts. As
production of our renewable diesel and fertilizers increases, we
plan to expand our sales and marketing infrastructure as well as
begin to collaborate with third parties that have local sales
and marketing expertise near our facilities. The market value of
our renewable diesel will vary, to some degree, by location
based on local market conditions and regulatory regimes. We
intend to make decisions regarding sales and marketing of our
products based on the specific products and locations of our
facilities.
Secure Financing for Future Facilities on Favorable
Terms. Construction of new TCP facilities
requires significant capital investment. We plan to finance our
construction costs through a variety of sources, including debt
and equity financings. Additionally, we plan to work with
governmental entities to secure grants and co-sponsorships of
some of our projects. We believe that the sustainable and
renewable aspects of our business model will be appealing to
these entities and
56
encourage them to assist us in the financing of new facilities.
We also believe that certain aspects of our business model,
including its sustainable and renewable aspect, will enable us
to secure financing on favorable terms, particularly in relation
to fuel refinement and power generation projects. In response to
the growing public concern regarding energy, federal and state
incentive programs have been enacted. For example, tax
incentives, low-interest loans, credit enhancements and federal
loan guarantees for projects that employ advanced energy
technologies that reduce emissions of air pollutants or
greenhouse gases have been enacted to aid the development and
commercialization of renewable energy technologies. We believe
we will benefit from these federal and state programs, and, as a
result, we expect that our construction costs will be
significantly lower than that of other fuel and power generators.
Improve Efficiency and Reduce Costs. We are
continually seeking to optimize TCP to improve the efficiency of
our facilities and to reduce the
per-Btu
costs of producing our renewable diesel. We have developed a
substantial amount of experience during the development,
construction, operation and
scale-up of
our Carthage facility, and we are continually seeking to improve
our technology and facility operations. We are seeking to
improve our average mechanical availability of our new and
existing facilities. In the first nine months of 2008, our
Carthage facility achieved 80% average mechanical availability.
We are targeting operating our facilities at 86% to 90% average
mechanical availability in the future. We believe that as we
start to operate facilities that are designed to handle
approximately 500 to 2,000 tons of animal and food processing
waste per day and 150 to 600 tons of grease per day, we should
benefit from substantial economies of scale and improve our
operating margins because the majority of our operating costs
are fixed and do not vary with production levels.
Develop Potential Future Markets and Applications of
TCP. We believe that there are significant
opportunities to use TCP in different markets and convert other
suitable waste streams into renewable diesel and fertilizers. As
we continue to expand our operations, we expect to make efforts
to penetrate these other areas.
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Potential Markets for TCP. We have conducted
extensive research and testing to evaluate the applicability our
renewable diesel to the electrical power generation market. Our
work with National Grid and Brookhaven National Laboratories
indicates that a blend of our renewable diesel with petroleum
fuel oil would combust effectively in National Grid’s
existing power generation facility. We intend to work with
combustion turbine manufacturers to determine the necessary fuel
treatment systems at our facilities or the modifications to the
fuel delivery systems of combustion turbines in order to cost
effectively generate electricity from our renewable diesel if
sufficient quantities of fuel can be produced.
|
Our renewable diesel may also be effectively used in the
industrial fuel blender market. Industrial equipment intended to
burn petroleum distillate and residual fuel oils are designed to
efficiently and effectively use fuels with specifications
falling within a fairly broad range. Industrial fuel blenders
acquire a variety of on-specification fuels, off-specification
fuels, intermediate or unfinished fuels, and other components
for blending to meet either industry standards or individual
customer requirements. For example, stringent federal and state
limitations on sulfur contaminants in fuels have lead to
significant opportunities for blenders to acquire feedstocks of
various sulfur contents for blending to meet these limitations.
Renewable diesel has relatively low levels of sulfur and
relatively high energy content, so it is particularly valuable
as a blendstock for offsetting other higher sulfur components in
the blend fuel without diminishing the blended fuel’s
energy value to the end-user.
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Potential Applications of TCP. TCP can covert
plastics and other non-metallic wastes into renewable diesel. An
estimated 29.3 million tons of mixed plastic, rubber and
foam waste were generated in the United States in 2006. Although
many of these materials can be
|
57
|
|
|
| |
|
recycled, successful commercial recycling of mixed plastics,
rubber and foam has proven to be difficult due to their widely
varying composition and chemical and physical properties.
Governmental entities are mandating stricter environmental
policies, and industrial processors face growing pressures to
develop and implement productive uses for the waste from their
processing facilities without discharging contaminants and
pollutants.
|
Mixed plastic wastes, which have a higher density of carbon and
lower moisture content, have a higher yield of renewable diesel
than animal and food processing waste. Our testing and research
have shown these materials to be well-suited to our technology.
We are working with the Vehicle Recycling Partnership, or VRP, a
consortium composed of the big three U.S. automobile
manufacturers, to process the non-metallic materials consisting
of mixed plastics, rubber and foam, commonly referred to as
shredder residue, created when discarded automobiles as well as
household and industrial appliances are shredded as part of the
recycling process. We are in the second phase of pilot testing
related to the VRP at our Philadelphia research and development
facility to evaluate the commercial viability of using mixed
plastics that are included in municipal solid waste, or MSW, as
feedstock. Many of these other waste streams can yield more
renewable diesel per ton as well as fuels with higher economic
values than our renewable diesel from animal and food processing
waste. We believe the development of TCP to convert these waste
streams will enable us to lessen our dependency on animal and
food processing waste and enhance the profitability of future
facilities.
Our
Products
We produce renewable diesel fuel oil, a liquid nitrogen
concentrate fertilizer and a solid mineral phosphate fertilizer.
The following table demonstrates the varying numbers of gallons
of renewable diesel, gallons of liquid nitrogen concentrate
fertilizer and pounds of solid mineral phosphate fertilizer
yielded by one ton of different types of feedstock. The physical
properties and qualities of renewable diesel and fertilizers
resulting from TCP, as well as the yield of renewable diesel and
fertilizers, will vary according to the type of organic waste
used due to differing levels of moisture, density and
composition of feedstock. Accordingly, the prices for feedstock
can vary significantly.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solid
|
|
|
|
|
Renewable
|
|
|
Liquid Nitrogen
|
|
|
Mineral
|
|
|
|
|
Diesel
|
|
|
Concentrate
|
|
|
Phosphate
|
|
|
One Ton of Feedstock
|
|
(in gallons)
|
|
|
(in gallons)
|
|
|
(in pounds)
|
|
|
|
|
Poultry Offal
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
Hog and Steer Offal
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
160
|
|
|
Trap Grease (20% fat)
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Restaurant Grease
|
|
|
242
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
Renewable Diesel
Fuel Oil
Renewable diesel generated via TCP is similar to other liquid
fuels with respect to its physical properties and combustion
performance as demonstrated by the table below.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Fuel
|
|
Btu/gal Value
|
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
No. 2 Heating Oil
|
|
|
137
|
|
|
Renewable Diesel
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
Biodiesel
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
Gasoline
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
Ethanol
|
|
|
76
|
|
58
We believe producing renewable diesel from waste has many
benefits, including:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
replacing petroleum products for energy;
|
| |
| |
•
|
improving environmental waste management;
|
| |
| |
•
|
avoiding competition between food and food-to-fuel alternatives;
and
|
| |
| |
•
|
reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
|
Our renewable diesel is marketed and sold directly to commercial
and industrial end-users. We currently sell our renewable diesel
for use in commercial and industrial boilers. Our renewable
diesel contains approximately 9% fewer Btus than No. 2
Heating Oil on a volumetric basis, and, at parity, we believe
our renewable diesel will sell for a price that will be 9% lower
than the market price for No. 2 heating oil. Steam boilers
firing fuel oil or natural gas are the most commonly and widely
used equipment to produce process steam and other heat energy
for a broad range of large and small-scale commercial and
industrial manufacturing facilities. Boilers already configured
to burn fuel oils can burn our renewable diesel with simple
replacement of select components of the fuel delivery system
(e.g., pumps, meters and nozzles). Natural gas fired boilers
require more extensive modifications and additions, such as the
installation of fuel storage tanks and liquid fuel delivery
systems. The one-time cost for converting an industrial boiler
burning fuel oil or a similar boiler burning natural gas to burn
renewable diesel is approximately $50,000 and $100,000,
respectively. We estimate that complete conversion can be
accomplished in less than 30 days for fuel oil boilers and
60 days for natural gas boilers, with the boiler down-time
limited to less than three days. We offer a variety of
arrangements to attract new customers, including funding boiler
modifications or providing a price adjustment for our renewable
diesel as a means of reimbursing the cost of modifications
incurred by a customer. The market value of our renewable diesel
will vary by location based on local market conditions and
regulatory regimes. As producers of organic waste look for other
waste processing solutions, we believe the costs of our
feedstock will decrease, and we may ultimately be able to
generate revenues from tipping fees, which are charges levied
upon a given quantity of waste received at a waste processing
facility.
Our renewable diesel is transported by truck, and renewable
diesel that we produce but that is not sold is stored on-site
and off-site in above-ground tanks.
Organic
Fertilizers
In addition to our renewable diesel, TCP yields two types of
organic fertilizer: a liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer, or
LNC, and a solid mineral phosphate/calcium fertilizer, or SMP.
Our fertilizers are naturally derived, and their content and
values are based upon their nutrient, or N-P-K, value, a
measurement of the nitrogen, phosphates and potassium contained
in the fertilizer on a weight percentage basis. Our LNC is
marketed with a guaranteed plant nutrient content of 6-0-0 and
is registered and sold in Missouri. Our SMP is marketed with a
guaranteed plant nutrient content of
0-14-0 and
is currently registered in Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma as a
commercial fertilizer.
Both fertilizers can be land-applied using commonly available
spreading equipment and transported with conventional
over-the-road truck equipment. For our new facilities, it is
anticipated that all of the fertilizer produced can be sold to
local farms within a
100-mile
radius. Our fertilizers are transported by truck, and fertilizer
that we produce but that is not sold is stored
on-site and
off-site in
above-ground
tanks. We will seek business arrangements with existing
fertilizer distributors in order to capitalize on their
infrastructure, equipment and customer lists. In the future, we
may also pursue partnerships with other fertilizer producers to
blend our fertilizers with their products.
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Liquid Nitrogen Concentrate Fertilizer. LNC is
a concentrated amino acid-based fertilizer which contains a
significant percentage of nitrogen which is an important
nutrient for growing various types of commercial agricultural
crops. Our LNC has been applied commercially at agronomic rates
to corn, wheat, Bermuda hay and pasturelands in southwest
Missouri. LNC performs similarly to other registered commercial
inputs for
|
59
|
|
|
| |
|
nitrogen, such as urea or anhydrous ammonia. We currently sell
our LNC at a discount to the current local nitrogen fertilizer
market. As our LNC gains further commercial validation, we
intend to gradually increase the price per gallon until it
reaches parity with current retail fertilizer prices, as well as
pursue other higher margin sales opportunities.
|
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Solid Mineral Phosphate/Calcium
Fertilizer. SMP is a concentrated
phosphate/calcium fertilizer. Phosphate is a mineral found in
commercial quantities in fossilized marine life deposits and
provides an essential nutrient for plant cell wall development.
SMP has been applied at commercial scale at farms. We recently
initiated a program for commercial sale and application of our
SMP. We expect to sell our SMP as a wet product containing up to
50% moisture. We anticipate selling at a discount to the current
local phosphate fertilizer market. Extensive product drying
tests have been completed on our SMP to demonstrate that it can
also be sold in a dry form, which would reduce freight costs and
the application rate per ton. While our current facility lacks
drying capacity, we anticipate installing drying capacity in
future facilities. As our SMP gains commercial validation, we
intend to gradually increase the price per ton until it reaches
parity with current retail phosphate prices, as well as pursue
other higher margin sales opportunities.
|
Our
Technology
TCP is a non-combustion process for the conversion of organic
waste into renewable diesel and fertilizers. TCP emulates the
earth’s natural geological and geothermal processes that
transform organic material into fuels through the application of
water, heat and pressure in various stages. TCP is not dependent
on enzymes or bacteria. TCP is a continuous flow-through process
and it takes approximately two hours for the key process steps
to yield our products. Further, certain aspects of TCP and our
products have been reviewed and tested by a number of leading
independent organizations, including a life-cycle analysis by
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a fuel analysis by
the Brookhaven National Laboratory. These studies confirmed the
quality and the environmental footprint of our process and
renewable diesel for a number of industrial applications.
Process
Overview
TCP utilizes four distinct steps to convert waste:
1. Preparation. Trucks deliver
waste into a tank at our facility. The waste is prepared into a
slurry by utilizing standard industrial conveyors, screening and
grinding equipment. Once the slurry is
60
prepared, it can either be transferred through a piping system
into on-site
storage tanks for later processing or immediately introduced
into the process. This ability to prepare and store incoming
waste prior to processing provides flexibility to accommodate
high degrees of variability in the delivery times and
composition of wastes.
2. Separation of Organic and Inorganic
Waste. The slurry is heated to a temperature of
approximately 300°F and pressurized to 80 pounds per
square inch, or PSIG, in the first thermal reactor. This step
breaks down organic matter and separates organic and inorganic
materials (minerals) contained in the slurry. The large mineral
particles are removed at this stage and transferred to finished
product separation where they are re-combined with the smaller
particles.
3. Conversion of Organic Waste to Renewable
Diesel. The organic liquid materials and small
mineral particles are then piped to another thermal reactor and
subjected to higher temperature and pressure (e.g.,
480°F and 600 PSIG). In this step, large complex
organic molecules are broken down into smaller simpler molecules
and hydrolyzed, creating a mixture of renewable diesel,
nitrogen-rich water and small mineral particles. The combination
of heat, pressure and time employed in this step assures that
any pathogens contained in the waste are destroyed. Much of the
heat energy applied in this step is recovered as waste heat from
the subsequent conversion step, which is a key factor in the
high energy efficiency of the process.
4. Finished Product Separation. The
mixture of renewable diesel, nitrogen-rich water and small
mineral particles from the conversion step are separated using
conventional separation equipment. First, the small mineral
particles that were not removed during the earlier separation
step are removed from the liquids by decanting. This phosphate
and calcium rich solid mineral is recombined with the larger
particles from the earlier separation step and stored for sale
as our fertilizer. Next, the renewable diesel and nitrogen-rich
water are separated using a centrifuge. The renewable diesel is
piped into storage tanks and held for sale. The nitrogen rich
water is further concentrated into our liquid fertilizer, which
is piped into storage tanks.
As demonstrated by the figure below, TCP is approximately 85%
energy efficient.
Energy Balance
for
1,000 Ton per Day Animal Plant
Overall Energy
Efficiency1
= 85%
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Overall energy efficiency is
defined as the energy content of the end products divided by the
sum of the energy content of the waste input and energy input.
|
61
Our exclusively licensed patents and patent applications are
directed to key elements of TCP, which, we believe,
differentiate our position in the industry. For example, our
patents and pending patent applications describe the handling of
mixed feedstocks in multiple process reaction steps, where each
of those steps is at different conditions, such as pressure and
temperature, with phase separation in between the process steps.
Effective management of these complex interactions is a critical
element in the efficient conversion of waste into renewable
diesel. Additionally, our patents and pending patent
applications describe the use of water in the conversion
process. A water-intensive conversion environment facilitates
the breakdown of chemical bonds while simultaneously suppressing
unwanted, inefficient chemical reactions. We believe that water
usage is a key component in optimizing the process for
converting waste into fuel.
Advantages of Our
Technology
We believe TCP has the following competitive advantages:
Proprietary. We exclusively license seven
issued U.S. patents, five pending U.S. patent
applications and 51 issued
foreign patents and pending
foreign applications, a subset of which are directed to our
proprietary TCP technology as currently implemented, from
AB-CWT, a related company. The patents cover the Process for
Conversion of Organic, Waste or Low-Value Material into Useful
Products, the Thermal Depolymerization Process and Chemical
Reforming Apparatus, the Bench Model Reforming System (both as
to the method and the product) and the Laboratory Prototype
Reforming Flow-Through System (both as to the method and the
product).
We also rely upon trade secrets related to facility operating
conditions, process chemistry, facility design and research and
development experience that we have gained in the ten years we
have worked with TCP.
Easily Deployed. We believe new TCP facilities
can be easily deployed due to several attributes of TCP.
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Conventional Equipment. TCP utilizes
conventional chemical processing equipment, established
operating techniques and proprietary processes combined in a
proprietary configuration. The equipment utilized is easily
obtained and constructed and does not require significant
up-front costs to develop. TCP does not utilize exotic, rare or
expensive chemicals or catalysts.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Scalable and Adaptable. TCP can be configured
to convert various waste streams and volumes by modifying the
sizes and capacities of the equipment (e.g., pipes, pumps, tanks
and heat exchangers). Therefore, we can configure our facilities
to match the market opportunity and available feedstock and
optimize our capital outlays and operating expenses.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Facility Size. Our larger facility design
requires approximately five acres for a 1,000 ton of animal and
food processing waste per day plant, which is a considerably
smaller footprint than required for comparable alternative waste
processing technologies, such as incineration. Trap and
low-value grease facilities require less than two acres due to
the minimal solids loading and handling of materials in the
process system.
|
| |
| |
•
|
Non-Combustion Process. TCP relies on moderate
temperature and pressure to convert feedstock into renewable
diesel, unlike combustion processes that capture the energy
value contained in the waste through incineration or
gasification. Therefore, waste processing utilizing our
proprietary TCP technology results in significantly fewer
emissions of air pollutants, which reduces the costs of both air
emission control equipment and regulatory compliance as compared
to incineration or other waste processing
|
62
|
|
|
| |
|
technologies. Further, our renewable diesel may be stored and
transported while the energy created by incineration and
gasification must be used as produced, which requires a suitable
energy host in near proximity to the source.
|
|
|
|
| |
•
|
Relative Permitting Ease. The process for
obtaining regulatory and municipal permits is traditionally a
significant hurdle in the establishment of new energy-related
facilities. In particular, air emission permits often limit the
size of the facility and may involve lengthy public hearings and
other administrative processes. However, we believe the inherent
characteristics of TCP, such as the use of conventional chemical
processing equipment, relatively small footprint and minimal air
emissions and waste streams, should reduce the length of time
required for the permitting process. For example, the
Environmental Protection Agency and regulatory agencies in
Missouri and Pennsylvania have characterized TCP as a
manufacturing process rather than an incineration process. This
classification may eliminate the need to comply with solid waste
restrictions and meet certain regulatory requirements associated
with incineration processes. An additional benefit that allows
for an accelerated permitting process is that the only
significant effluent produced by TCP using animal and food
processing waste is a water stream suitable for discharge into
municipal water treatment facilities.
|
Ability to Convert Wide Variety of
Feedstock. We believe that TCP’s ability to
convert a wide variety of feedstock into renewable diesel
provides us with a competitive advantage in acquiring the
feedstock for our process. For example, we sometimes compete
with traditional animal and food processors for feedstock.
Renderers convert animal remains and by-products into a protein
feed which is then fed back to other animals. Renderers have
inherent limitations on what can be processed into their
end-products and maintain product value. TCP can process a wide
variety of waste streams simultaneously. As a result, we can
adjust our sourcing efforts for feedstock as market prices for
these feedstock change. We believe this flexibility is a
critical advantage as it affords us with an increased ability to
manage our costs.
Energy Efficient Process. TCP achieves high
product yield and recovery of the energy contained in the
feedstock. Energy requirements are minimal due to the moderate
processing temperatures and pressures used, the short amount of
time required for the process and the recovery and reuse of
waste heat. Our renewable diesel’s net energy balance is
over 7.0. This is significantly higher than that of soy-based
biodiesel at about 3.67 or corn-based ethanol at about 1.25.
Environmentally Friendly Product. We believe
that TCP and our renewable diesel represent a more
environmentally friendly fuel option than a variety of other
fuel alternatives. While ethanol and other biofuel production
processes typically require large amounts of clean process
water, catalysts, chemicals and arable land, which place demands
on natural resources, diesel production using TCP requires
significantly fewer natural resources. In contrast, the majority
of the feedstock used in TCP is considered waste and is
traditionally considered to have little or no economic value.
Moving away from using food crops for energy by developing and
deploying energy solutions that produce renewable diesel and
fertilizers from waste streams provide us with marketable
advantages over processes that use food crops for energy. In
addition, our products are renewable and are considered
“carbon-neutral” as they are created from animal and
food processing waste and do not result in the release of
additional fossil carbon into the environment. Further, wastes
that we use are not disposed of in landfills where pathogens and
harmful chemicals can leach into the ground water. The
temperature and pressure at which TCP operates effectively break
down and destroy pathogens in the waste. The New York State
Department of Health approved the application of TCP for the
treatment of regulated medical waste, and its operating
conditions have been shown to eliminate pathogens such as BSE.
As a result, the renewable diesel and fertilizers that are
generated by TCP can be used safely in a variety of industrial
and agricultural applications.
63
Low Cost of Customer Conversion. Based on our
experience with our customers, conversion of existing heating
oil or natural gas infrastructure to handle our renewable diesel
can be done with relatively simple modifications. Boilers
already configured to burn fuel oils can burn renewable diesel
with simple replacement of select components of the fuel
delivery system (e.g., pumps, meters and nozzles). Natural gas
fired boilers require more extensive modifications and
additions, such as the installation of fuel storage tanks and
liquid fuel delivery systems. The one-time cost for converting
an industrial boiler burning fuel oil or a similar boiler
burning natural gas to burn renewable diesel is approximately
$50,000 and $100,000, respectively. We estimate that complete
conversion can be accomplished in less than 30 days for
fuel oil boilers and 60 days for natural gas boilers, with
the boiler down-time limited to less than three days.
The Carthage
Facility and our Initial Customers
Our first production facility, located in Carthage, Missouri,
was commissioned in February 2005. The Carthage facility was
constructed and initially owned and operated by RES, a joint
venture between us and ConAgra. The facility is adjacent to a
Butterball turkey processing plant. ConAgra subsequently
exchanged its 50% interest in RES for shares of our common stock
and warrants and sold its Butterball turkey business to Carolina
Turkey, a joint venture of Smithfield Foods Inc. and Maxwell
Farms, Inc. The feedstock agreement with Butterball, which
expires in May 2010, requires Butterball to deliver 100% of the
feedstock produced by its facility in Carthage, Missouri, less
40 tons per week. The nameplate capacity of the facility is 250
tons per day, or 78,000 tons per year. The Carthage facility
converts approximately 44,000 tons of animal and food processing
waste from the Butterball facility each year and converts other
supplemental feedstock, including mortalities from egg laying
operations, secondary food processing wastes, trap and low-value
greases and other animal and food processing waste, that we
acquire opportunistically.
The development, construction and operation of the Carthage
facility:
|
|
|
| |
•
|
demonstrated our ability to
scale-up TCP;
|
| |
| |
•
|
helped us win and serve our first customers for our renewable
diesel and fertilizers;
|
| |
| |
•
|
served as a development platform for further refinement of TCP;
|
| |
| |
•
|
provided an opportunity to evaluate and improve process design,
equipment installation and configuration, construction
materials, process controls and other key features of a
continuous process facility utilizing TCP;
|
| |
| |
•
|
enabled us to hire and train personnel and develop operational
expertise;
|
| |
| |
•
|
provided an opportunity to evaluate the supplemental
agricultural and food processing feedstock available in the
Carthage region; and
|
| |
| |
•
|
supported our marketing efforts by demonstrating the efficacy
and efficiency of TCP to convert animal and food processing
waste in a production facility.
|
We have undergone various validation processes, including clean
results from multiple internal boiler inspections by third-party
inspectors conducted after considerable boiler run-time.
Additionally, AP 42 EPA testing was performed to the
satisfaction of the state permitting agency. As a result of
these activities, we have secured customers for our renewable
diesel. Schreiber has committed to two long-term
contracts at
two sites in Missouri for two large industrial boilers and
accounted for approximately 72.9% and 78.1% of our revenues in
2007 and the nine months ended
September 30, 2008,
respectively. Schreiber’s boilers are expected to consume
approximately 1.4 million gallons annually of renewable
diesel. In addition, Dyno Nobel has entered into a two-year
agreement with us to purchase approximately 2.0 million gallons
of renewable diesel and accounted for approximately 14.3% of our
revenues in the nine months ended
September 30, 2008.
Fairview Greenhouse, Inc. accounted for approximately 23.6% of
our
64
revenues in 2007. In the second quarter of 2008, we began
selling our liquid nitrogen concentrate fertilizer to a number
of farms in the Carthage area. Our other fertilizer is currently
registered in Kansas, Missouri and Oklahoma as a commercial
fertilizer.
During our initial operations at our Carthage facility, we dealt
with a number of
start-up
issues relating to original process and equipment design and
inadequate metallurgical selection. In addition, we close our
Carthage facility on an annual basis to conduct routine
maintenance and equipment upgrades. These closures typically
last two to four weeks and can affect our results of operations
for the relevant period. Further, we incurred costs in
connection with diversion and disposal of unprocessed feedstock
and waste water. As a result of the process modifications,
equipment replacements, operating experience and other changes
since commissioning, facility reliability and product quality
control have steadily improved. Our new facilities will be
redesigned based on the operating experience and knowledge we
developed at our Carthage facility. In the first nine months of
2008, our Carthage facility achieved 80% average mechanical
availability, which is the percentage of planned operating hours
that the facility actually operated. We believe significant
improvements in this metric can be realized in the future as a
result of improvements to process piping metallurgy.
Competition
We believe we compete primarily in two areas. The first involves
securing access to an ongoing supply of feedstock for our TCP
facilities. In this regard, we compete with large integrated
animal and food processors and independent renderers, such as
Baker Commodities, Darling International and Griffin Industries,
each of which process inedible wastes from meat and poultry
processors into animal feed, consumer food and fats for
industrial applications. Some of these companies also process
fats and greases from restaurants for recycling.
We believe that the value of our end products, when contrasted
against those of traditional renderers, provide us with an
inherent advantage when competing for the feedstock used in our
process. Renderers’ end products are relatively low-margin
commodity products with limited applications. In contrast, we
believe that the renewable diesel and fertilizers created via
TCP can be sold to a broader array of customers at a higher
margin.
We also compete to secure customers for our end products. In
selling our renewable diesel, we compete against purveyors of
traditional fossil fuels, as well as other alternative energy
providers. We believe that there are several aspects of our
business that provide us with a competitive advantage over
providers of conventional fossil fuels. First, we believe that
the sustainable, “green” aspect of our business, when
contrasted against traditional fossil fuels and their associated
environmental impacts, is appealing to certain customers.
Additionally, we believe that we can compete well on cost. For
example, we believe that prices for our renewable diesel are not
prone to the same risks as traditional fossil fuels. This is a
result of our ability to create renewable diesel from more
widely available sources. In addition, we plan to sell our
renewable diesel to customers within a
100-mile
radius of our facilities, thereby incurring relatively lower
shipping costs. We also compete with other alternative energy
providers, predominantly producers of ethanol and biodiesel. We
believe that we compare favorably to both of these products
given our significantly higher net energy balance, and we can
compete well on cost. We also believe the quality of our fuel is
superior to these alternative products. Recently, there have
been complaints regarding the alcohol content of ethanol and
biodiesel, as alcohol is known to undermine the efficacy of
these fuels. Our renewable diesel does not contain any alcohol.
Lastly, unlike ethanol and some forms of biodiesel, production
of our renewable diesel does not require the use of food crops
as feedstock. Therefore, we avoid many of the unintended
consequences associated with the production of both ethanol and
biodiesel, most notably contributing to rising food prices.
In selling our fertilizers, we compete against purveyors of
traditional fertilizers. Many conventional fertilizers are
produced by large entities with greater financial and other
resources than
65
we do, which can give them a competitive advantage. Similar to
our renewable diesel, we plan to sell our fertilizers to
customers within a
100-mile
radius of our facilities, thereby incurring relatively lower
shipping costs.
Intellectual
Property Rights
Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and
maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection of
both our owned and licensed technologies as well as successfully
defending these patents against third-party challenges, which
may require the cooperation of our licensor. Our patent policy
is to retain and secure patents for inventions and improvements
related to our technologies where commercially warranted.
Currently, all patents and patent applications are owned by
AB-CWT, a related company.
We have an exclusive, worldwide license to the seven issued
U.S. patents, five additional pending U.S. patent
applications and 51 issued
foreign patents and pending foreign
patent applications, a subset of which are directed to our
proprietary TCP technology as currently implemented, from
AB-CWT
through RRC, our wholly-owned subsidiary. The terms of these
patents will expire between
November 1, 2011 and
September 29, 2026 (the latter date assumes patents issue
on pending patent applications). The license grants us the right
to make, operate, maintain, market, sublicense, use, sell, offer
to sell or lease the licensed TCP technology, and related
equipment, TCP process or apparatus, and any modifications of
the foregoing, whether patentable or not, and all methods and
devices for carrying on the TCP technology into practice. We may
also grant sublicenses to business organizations or individuals
that will use the TCP process utilizing the licensed technology,
subject to certain specified conditions. In addition, provided
RRC is in compliance with its obligations under the license
agreement, AB-CWT has agreed to grant to RRC, at no additional
costs, exclusive licenses under any and all patents received on
any modifications of the licensed TCP technology conceived or
actually or constructively reduced to practice or otherwise
acquired during the term of the license agreement or any
extensions, amendments or replacements thereof.
The license is automatically renewable each year and will
terminate upon the expiration of the last to expire patents
licensed to CWT unless RRC provides written notice to terminate
or either party fails to cure a breach, is convicted of an act
of fraud or material dishonesty or criminal activity, RRC
transfers or assigns its licensed rights without AB-CWT’s
prior written consent, RRC fails to pay royalties or in the
event of bankruptcy or insolvency by RRC. Upon the completion
date of each commercial installation of any apparatus, machinery
or device designed to practice the licensed technology
(
“Licensed Apparatus”) by RRC, RRC agrees to pay an
initial one-time license fee in a lump sum amount equal to $2
per day multiplied by the tonnage capacity of each such Licensed
Apparatus multiplied by 365 days. RRC also is required to
pay minimum monthly royalty fees based on the usage of the
Licensed Apparatus in an amount equal to $2 multiplied by each
ton of material actually processed monthly by RRC through the
Licensed Apparatus. RRC has also agreed to pay other fees as
provided in the license agreement. AB-CWT has the right to
terminate this exclusive license for our nonpayment of royalties
or our breach of agreement, if either of which default remains
uncured, or in the event we transfer or assign any of our
exclusively licensed rights without the prior written consent
from AB-CWT. Upon a change of control of
our company, AB-CWT has
the right to terminate our exclusive license, which could have
the effect of delaying, preventing or deterring a change of
control of
our company, could deprive our stockholders of an
opportunity to receive a premium for their common stock as part
of a sale of
the Company and might ultimately affect the market
price of our common stock.
In July 2002, we, along with AB-CWT, entered into a settlement
agreement with Paul T. Baskis, one of the original inventors of
the technology underlying TCP, to terminate a civil action.
Pursuant to the settlement agreement, we and
AB-CWT are
jointly and severally liable to pay $10,000 per month until the
last to expire of certain patents licensed to us by AB-CWT. We
are liable for this payment through October 2012. Further, for a
period ending on the expiration of such patents,
66
Mr. Baskis has agreed not to provide services of any kind
to anyone relating to TCP. Further, in the event that
Mr. Baskis invents or develops any new technology that he
believes to be a substitute or replacement for TCP,
Mr. Baskis is obligated to notify us prior to disclosing or
offering rights in such new invention to any third party and we
have a right of first offer to license or otherwise acquire
rights to such new invention on fair and reasonable terms to be
negotiated in good faith.
We also rely on trade secrets, technical know-how and continuing
innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We
seek to protect our proprietary information by requiring our
employees, consultants, contractors, outside partners and other
advisers to execute, as appropriate, nondisclosure and
assignment of invention agreements upon commencement of their
employment or engagement. We also require confidentiality
agreements from third parties that receive our confidential data
or materials.
Renewable Diesel
Mixture Tax Credit
We benefit from tax credits we receive for being a producer of
renewable diesel. Under the Energy Policy Act, producers of
renewable diesel currently receive a $1.00 renewable diesel
mixture tax credit for each gallon of renewable diesel sold in
the United States. Renewable diesel is defined in the Energy
Policy Act as liquid fuel derived from biomass that meets
certain standards of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
American Society of Testing and Materials. Our renewable diesel
meets this criteria. Because we have no fuel excise tax payable,
we receive a direct cash payment from the U.S. Treasury. The
renewable diesel mixture tax credit is scheduled to expire on
December 31, 2009.
Regulations
We are subject to the rules and regulations promulgated by
various federal, state and local governmental agencies. Our
Carthage facility and our research and development facility in
Philadelphia are subject to rules and regulations set forth by
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, as well as state and
local agencies, which regulate air emissions, odor, storm water,
sewer, water and wastewater. Because of the nature of our
operations, our Carthage facility and our research and
development facility in Philadelphia are exempt from state solid
waste permitting requirements. The marketing of our fertilizers
is regulated by the State Departments of Agriculture, which
control the registration of fertilizer products, licensing of
manufacturers, label information, inspections and various other
aspects associated with the marketing of fertilizers. One of our
fertilizers is currently registered in Kansas, Missouri and
Oklahoma as a commercial fertilizer. We are also subject to
various labor, health and pension regulations, which, among
others, includes the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and
regulations governing employee health and safety set forth by
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. The U.S.
Department of Transportation, as well as state and local
agencies, regulate the operation of our commercial vehicles. In
addition, we are subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of
the Treasury associated with the renewable diesel mixture tax
credit we receive under the Energy Policy Act, and various rules
and regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Research and
Development
Our research and development costs for the nine months ended
September 30, 2008 and years ended 2007, 2006 and 2005 were
$0.9 million, $1.2 million, $1.7 and $2.0 million,
respectively. Our research and development activities include
testing of new waste feedstock, including animal and food
processing waste, trap grease, used oils, shredder residue
waste, cellulosic feedstock and sewage sludge. In doing so, we
research and test composition of matter, chemical pathways,
material handling, metallurgy, equipment selection, fuel
delivery systems and life cycle assessments for continued
refinement of TCP’s application. We also conduct fuel
analysis to determine compatibility,
67
water absorption, storage and thermal stability, pour point,
viscosity, nitrogen and sulfur content and trace elements that
may influence product use.
Employees
As of
December 31, 2008, we had 72 full-time
employees, including seven engaged in research and
development at our Philadelphia facility and 50 at our Carthage
facility. None of our employees are represented by any labor
union nor are any organized under a collective bargaining
agreement. We have never experienced a work stoppage, and
believe that our relations with our employees are good.
Facilities and
Property
We own our Carthage facility located at 530 N. Main St,
Carthage, Missouri, where we lease 2.8 acres of land
pursuant to a lease that is set to expire in April 2027. We also
lease 79,000 square feet in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for
our research and development facility under a lease that is set
to expire in August 2010. Our principal executive offices are
located at 460 Hempstead Avenue,
West Hempstead,
New York 11552,
where we lease 5,395 square feet on a month-to-month basis.
Legal
Proceedings
On
January 11, 2006, the Attorney General of the State of
Missouri filed an action against RES in the Circuit Court of
Jasper County, Missouri seeking preliminary and permanent
injunctions and civil penalties for alleged violations of
Missouri’s odor standard at our Carthage facility and for
alleged violations of our state air permit. We settled this case
pursuant to a consent judgment entered by the court on
June 27, 2006. In conjunction with these claims, we also
resolved an administrative action brought by the Missouri
Department of Natural Resources, or MDNR, relating to a cease
and desist order associated with the alleged violations of
Missouri’s odor standard we received from the MDNR on
December 29, 2005. These matters were settled by RES by
agreeing to pay a $175,000 fine. RES paid $100,000 of the fine
and the remaining $75,000 was suspended for two years unless RES
received additional notices of violation under the Missouri odor
standards. If RES received a notice of violation during this
period, it agreed that the $75,000 suspended penalty would be
used to pay a $25,000 stipulated fine for up to three
subsequently charged violations. On
November 15, 2006 we
received a notice of excess emission that was subsequently
upgraded to a notice of violation. On
December 11, 2006,
RES agreed to pay $25,000 for this violation. Since
November 15, 2006, RES has not received any notices of
violation of the Missouri odor standards, and the two-year
suspended penalty period under the settlement agreement has now
ended.
On
June 5, 2007, a resident of Carthage, Missouri filed a
class action petition against RES and Donald Sanders, the
manager of our Carthage facility, in the Circuit Court of Jasper
County, Missouri on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated. Plaintiff alleges that the odor associated with the
RES Carthage facility creates a nuisance, and that the
defendants are negligent. Plaintiff’s original petition
included a claim of negligence per se that was dismissed by the
court. Plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages,
injunctive relief and attorneys’ fees and costs. The dollar
amount of damages sought was not specified in the petition. On
April 24, 2008, an amended petition was filed redefining
the scope of the class area to three kilometers from our
Carthage facility and adding an additional class representative.
On
November 14, 2008, plaintiffs filed a Motion for Leave
to file a Second Amended petition redefining the scope of the
proposed class to include a global nuisance class within a three
kilometer radius of RES
and/or real
property diminution subclass of two kilometers of RES.
Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on
November 5, 2008. Defendants filed a renewed motion to
transfer venue, motions to strike Plaintiffs’ experts, and
a motion for partial summary judgment. These motions are
currently being briefed and no hearing on them has been
scheduled. We are defending the lawsuit vigorously. We have
notified our insurance
68
carriers of this claim. One insurer has tendered a defense under
a reservation of rights. We intend to pursue our claim for
coverage.
On
January 14, 2008, we received a letter from the MDNR
regarding alleged violations of our air permit and a state
emission limitation. Our consultants submitted a response to the
state on
February 27, 2008, and submitted a protocol for
stack testing.
On
February 7, 2008, Select Insurance Company filed a
petition in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Missouri to seek a declaratory judgment as to
whether Select Insurance Company is required to defend and
indemnify us and Donald Sanders, the manager of our Carthage
facility, in the class action litigation discussed above. A
mediation was held on
November 13, 2008. Following the
mediation, the case was stayed until the earlier of four weeks
after a decision on class certification or
April 30, 2009.
The MDNR has been investigating and continues to investigate the
source of odor in the Carthage Bottoms area. In June of 2008,
the MDNR issued a letter to several businesses in the Carthage
Bottoms area seeking to convene a meeting of all industrial
facilities in the area and stating that the first phase of the
investigation did not identify specific sources for the odor or
chemical compounds of interest. The group meeting with the MDNR
was held on
August 25, 2008. We will continue to cooperate
with the MDNR in this effort.
On
May 23, 2003, RES filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court
of Jasper County, Missouri against Dilling Mechanical
Contractors, or Dilling, the original mechanical contractor for
the construction of our Carthage facility. The complaint, among
other things, alleges claims for breach of
contract, negligence
and fraud stemming from defective welding and other infirmities
associated with Dilling’s work on the Carthage facility. We
are seeking damages in excess of $5.0 million. In July
2003, Dilling filed a countersuit seeking amounts in excess of
$5.0 million from RES. The countersuit asserts, among other
things, that the work Dilling performed exceeded the mechanical
contractor agreement, and it claims damages flowing from
Dilling’s alleged wrongful termination. Because RES
constructed its Carthage facility on property then owned by
ConAgra, Dilling, together with its insulation subcontractor,
have brought additional third party claims against ConAgra in
this proceeding. The third-party claims include the enforcement
of a mechanic’s lien which they have filed in connection
with the land upon which the Carthage facility is situated. The
liens are in the amounts of approximately $3.0 million and
$3.8 million. RES is defending ConAgra in the action and
has agreed to indemnified ConAgra. The case is currently in the
expert discovery phase. The outcome of the dispute cannot be
determined at this time, but we believe that this matter will
not have a material adverse affect on our financial position.
In addition to the matters discussed above, from time to time,
we are party to litigation and administrative proceedings that
arise in the ordinary course of our business. We do not have any
other pending litigation that, separately or in the aggregate,
would in the opinion of management have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
69
MANAGEMENT
The following table sets forth the name and age as of
December 31, 2008 and position of each person that serves
as an executive officer and director of
our company.
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
|
|
Brian S. Appel
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
|
|
Michael J. McLaughlin
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
James H. Freiss
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Dan F. Decker
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
Executive Vice President
|
|
Joseph P. Synnott
|
|
|
51
|
|
|
Vice President of Project Development
|
|
David C. Carroll
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Jerome Finkelstein
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
Director
|
|
David M. Katz
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Saul B. Katz
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Michael D. Lundin
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Ira B. Silver
|
|
|
50
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Michael D. Walter
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
Director
|
|
Suzanne Woolsey, PhD
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
Director
|
Brian S. Appel has been the Chairman of our board of
directors and Chief Executive Officer since he founded our
company in February 1998. Mr. Appel initiated the TCP
research and development facility in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
in 1999. In December 2003, under Mr. Appel’s
leadership,
our company was named to the Scientific American 50,
a list of people or companies recognized for their singular
accomplishments contributing to the advancement of technology,
in the category of energy. Prior to founding
our company,
Mr. Appel was the principal of Atlantis International, an
international trading company. From 1983 to 1985, he was a
principal of Ticket World USA, currently Ticketmaster, where he
was responsible for business development. Mr. Appel is a
member of the American Council on Renewable Energy, an
organization that works to bring all forms of renewable energy
into the mainstream of America’s economy and lifestyle.
Mr. Appel has authored several papers on TCP. He received
his undergraduate degree from Hofstra University.
Michael J. McLaughlin has been our Chief Financial
Officer since September 2008. Prior to joining us,
Mr. McLaughlin was vice president of finance and chief
financial officer for Integrated Resources Holdings, Inc.,
formerly A.T. Clayton & Co., Inc., a paper
distributor, from 1993 to 2008. During his career,
Mr. McLaughlin has held executive positions in different
industries, including consumer products, manufacturing,
distribution and consulting service. He is a certified public
accountant and is a member of the bar of the State of New York.
He received his undergraduate degree in Accounting from
Manhattan College, an MBA in Tax from St. John’s University
and a JD from Pace University.
James H. Freiss has been our Chief Operating Officer
since August 2008 and was previously our Vice President of
Engineering. Prior to joining