May 13, 2012

More Insiders Buying at Maxwell Technologies

Tom Konrad CFA

As a quick follow-up to my valuation of Maxwell Technologies (NASD:MXWL), it was not just CEO David Schramm who has been buying over the last couple of days.  An astute reader brought my attention to five more insider filings on EDGAR:

Insider Position Date Shares bought Holdings Increase
David Schramm CEO 4/30 5,000 217,564 2.4%
Mark Rossi Director 4/30 20,000 84,664 30.9%
Robert Guyett Director 4/30 11,000 (option exercise) 78,664 16.3%
Yon Jordan Director 5/1 5,000 33,997 17.2%
David Schramm CEO 5/3 2,000 219,564 0.95%
Burkhard Goeschel Director 5/3 5,000 27,997 21.7%
Mark Rossi Director 5/4 5,000 89,664 7.7%

I’d normally ignore Mr. Guyett’s option exercise, as it does not greatly increase his exposure to MXWL’s share price, given that director options are often well in-the-money.  However, 5,000 of Guyett’s options had an exercise price of $7.44, and the other 6,000 had an exercise price of $6.2.  None of these options were due to expire in the next year.

By exercising these options, Guyett not only tied up his $223,200 of his cash for more than a year, he also gave up his right not to use these options.  That right would be useful if MXWL’s share price fell below his exercise price, so he’s saying he is absolutely confident that MXWL will not fall below $7.44 in the next year.  Further, he is choosing to pay tax on the immediate gain from exercise in 2012 rather than put it off until 2013.

That’s the downside.  What is the upside of exercising the options now?  I can think of two:

  1. If Guyett holds the stock for more that a year, and sells it at a profit, he will be taxed at the (lower) long term capital gains rate.  This makes sense if he expects MXWL to be significantly higher a year from now.
  2. (This was my reader’s theory:) He may think this is the cheapest price he will see for the stock before the options expire in June and December of 2013, so there is less immediate  tax involved in exercising them now.

Most likely, his decision was motivated by a combination of the two factors.  That means Guyett is supremely confident MXWL will not fall below $7.44, and he’s pretty sure it will be significantly higher next year.

He’s not alone.  Between the four of them, these insiders just put $628,350 down that says MXWL is headed up.

What do you think?

Disclosure: Long MXWL

This article first appeared on the author's Forbes.com Green Stocks blog.

DISCLAIMER: Past performance is not a guarantee or a reliable indicator of future results.  This article contains the current opinions of the author and such opinions are subject to change without notice.  This article has been distributed for informational purposes only. Forecasts, estimates, and certain information contained herein should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment product.  Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed.

advertise here




May 12, 2012

The Week In Cleantech: Solar Companies at Firesale Prices, and More to Come - 5/12/2012

Tom Konrad CFA

May 7: Auction of Uni-Solar Fails to Draw a Qualified Bid

As if there weren't enough bad signs for the solar industry these days, Energy Conversion Devices (OTC:ENERQ.PK) is cancelling the auction for United Solar Ovonic LLC (A.k.a. Uni-solar) as a going concern because of the failure to receive a qualified bid in the court-approved bankruptcy proceeding.  The companies have retained an auction services firm to prepare for the sale of Uni-solar's assets.

May 8: Earnings Misses Hide Strong Revenue Trends at Ameresco (AMRC) and Pike Electric (PIKE)

Ameresco (AMRC) and Pike Electric (PIKE) reported earnings before the market open, and both missed analyst expectations, yet showed strong underlying strength in revenue growth.  I went into more detail on Ameresco here.

Pike chart.pngLast week, I predicted that Pike would have a strong quarter because of strong earnings announcements and revenues at Quanta Services (PWR) and MasTec (MTZ). 

While the earnings number was a slight disappointment, coming in at 6 cents compared to a predicted 8 cents, the underlying trend was strong.

While the mild winter led to a large percentage drop in storm repair revenue, down $10 million from $16 million to $6 million,  Pike’s core business showed strong year-over year growth, and even made up for the storm repair shortfall.  Core revenue was up $19 million to $157 million from $138 million the previous year.

Pike initially opened down 11 cents at $8.01 on the earnings headline, but finished the day up 19  cents at $8.31 after the market had had a chance to sort out the difference between recurring core revenues and the highly variable storm repair work.

May 9: Westinghouse Solar Bought by Australia's CBD

This morning, CBD Energy (ASX:CBD) and Westinghouse Solar (NASD:WEST) announced an all-share merger which will give Westinghouse shareholders and preferred shareholders 15% of the combined company on an as-converted basis.  Westinghouse will gain the benefit of CBD’s financial strength, much needed because all solar manufacturers are struggling with declining prices and margins, as well as better access to global markets.

CBD will gain a foothold in the North American market, where it hopes to leverage Westinghouse’s existing relationships to sell not only for solar, but for CBD’s industrial energy efficiency products and energy storage systems. 

Finally, CBD shareholders will gain the improved liquidity of a US stock market listing and Westinghouse's assets at a firesale price.  Based on prices at the close on Tuesday  ($0.40 per share for WEST, A$0.05 per share for CBD), the share swap amounts to a 50% haircut for Westinghouse common  shareholders.

May 10: MEMC's Earnings call shows there is more pain in store for solar stocks

Yesterday, I wrote about the signs we might look for in MEMC Electronic Materials’ (NASD:WFR) first quarter earnings call that would indicate a revival for solar stocks.  Cliff’s notes: There’s more pain ahead.

The signs to look for were:

  • The first signs of improving cash flow and margin expansion.
  • Progress towards MEMC’s stated goal of getting wafer production cost down to $0.20 a watt. One potential bullish sign would be if management signaled an even more aggressive $0.15 per watt goal.
  • Continued growth in SunEdision and and external distribution channels. Any slowdown here would be a very bearish sign.

This is what we got:

Gross margin fell to 10% from 11.6% in the previous quarter, and 18% for all of 2011.
  • The company “made progress” on reducing production costs, but their “cost reduction efforts are not finished.”  No mention was made of adopting more aggressive cost reduction goals.
  • SunEdison’s pipeline of projects under construction fell to 147MW from 255MW in the previous quarter.  Solar project sales declined 60%.

I’d score that about a half point out of three, for the “progress on cost reduction.”  Any way you slice it, it looks bad.  Other bad signs:

  • Weak revenue outlook for the rest of the year.
  • Loss per share was 26 cents, 10 cents below analyst expectations.
  • Revenue declined 15.6% from Q1 2011.
  • Margins continued to slip.

Look for a further decline in most solar stocks.  There will be a bottom, but Q1 2012 was not it.

Also...

LSB Industries (NYSE:LXU) and Waterfurnace Renewable Energy (TSX:WFI, OTC:WFIFF) both introducing much more efficient geothermal heat pumps (EER 40.) More here.

May 11: New Flyer (TSX:NFI, OTC:NFYEF) Sees Strengthening North American Transit Bus Market

  • New Flyer(TSX:NFI, OTC:NFYEF) says that more transit agencies are putting out tenders for transit buses during first quarter conference call, but the market remains very competitive.  They expect selling prices to stabilize, but not increase for the rest of the year.
  • A123 (AONE) Systems expects to spend $6.68 million recalling potentially defective battery packs.
  • Investors don't understand Lime Energy's (NASD:LIME) strategy.  More here.

Next Week: Alterra (TSX:AXY, OTC:MGMXF) and Ram Power (TSX:RPG, OTC:RAMPF) report first quarter earnings.

Disclosure: Long AMRC, MTZ, NFYEF, LIME, WFIFF, LXU, MGMXF, RAMPF

Tom Konrad Ph.D. CFA is Editor of AltEnergyStocks.com, and a blogger on Forbes.com, where his notes were first published.

May 11, 2012

Solar Gets Boring

Tom Konrad CFA

300px-Assurant_Logo[1].png

Assurant, Inc. (NYSE:AIZ) is announcing  insurance for solar development projects today.   Are you bored yet?

Insurance always puts me to sleep, but the solar industry has left a lot more investors crying into their pillows than nodding off into gentle slumber.  That’s what happens when a sector, on average, falls 73% in a year, as the Guggenhiem Solar ETF (NYSE:TAN) has.  And many investors in individual solar stocks are weeping harder, from even larger percentage losses.

But that does not mean that the solar industry does not have a bright future, and one such bright sign is (try not to yawn) insurance for developers.  Solar is becoming a “normal” industry.

To date, developers of mid-size (100kW to 3 MW) solar projects often have difficulty finding financing for them because the projects are too small for financiers to spend much time doing due diligence, and there are a number of risks that they don’t have much experience with, such as the risk that panels from different manufacturers may break or not perform as well as expected, and the manufacturers may not have the financial strength (especially in the current climate of solar industry consolidation.)

Now Assurant has teamed with a number of leading solar industry players to offer Assurant Solar Project Insurance to address these risks at all stages of project development.

Boring?  Sure.  But a little ennui is just what the doctor ordered for the recently much-too-exciting solar industry.


Disclosure: None

This article was first published on the author's Green Stocks blog on Forbes.

May 09, 2012

Renewable Diesel Roundup

Jim Lane

Emerald Biofuels announces new 85 million gallon, drop-in renewable diesel project in Louisiana. Why is renewable diesel scaling up so effortlessly?

Partial view of the Dynamic Fuels plant in Geismar, Louisiana

Today, the Digest’s round-up on new capacity, R&D, testing, distribution and new feedstocks for renewable diesel.

In Louisiana, Emerald Biofuels announced that it will build an 85 million gallon renewable-diesel refineries at a Dow Chemical (DOW)site in Plaquemine, Louisiana. The company will use Honeywell’s (HON) UOP/Eni EcoFining process technology for the production of Honeywell Green Diesel Fuel.

Emerald and Dow are finalizing a site lease and a site services agreement for Dow to provide a number of services and utilities to support Emerald’s operation. The site has ship, barge, rail and truck access, and Emerald will be capable of both receiving and shipping by all four modes of transportation. The UOP Ecofining process, developed in conjunction with Italian refiner Eni SpA, uses catalytic hydroprocessing technology to convert natural oils and animal fats to Honeywell Green Diesel Fuel.

The product is chemically indistinguishable from traditional diesel fuel, features a high cetane value, excellent cold-flow performance and reduced emissions over both biodiesel and petroleum-based diesel. Green diesel can be run without blending and offers value as an upgrading stock for petroleum refiners seeking to enhance their existing diesel fuels while also expanding their diesel pool.

Emerald has retained Fieldstone Private Capital Group, Inc. to assist in completing the financing of the Plaquemine refinery and expects to have the financing closed later this year. Final engineering and the construction cycle are to begin immediately upon financial closing.

The Impact

What is it with Louisiana? It seems like at-scale renewable diesel projects have never found a a better home. There’s the Dynamic Fuels project – 75 million gallons in Geismar; the 137 million gallon Diamond Green Diesel project under construction in Norco, as a JV between Valero and Darling, and now this one, clocking in at 85 million gallons.

If and when all three are completed, that’s 297 million gallons of capacity in the one state.


Ah, well its that mother of inland transport, the lower Mississippi, that really is the story here. All three plants find themselves in the heavy shipping corridor between Baton Rouge and New Orleans.

One side note. Emerald Biofuels, Diamond Green Diesel, Sapphire Energy. I think we’re done with the precious stones now, though ruby’s still out there. Cubic Zirconia is available.

Renewable diesel – 3 reasons it really, really matters.

  1. It’s a drop-in biofuel, requiring no infrastructure change – and there are generally no limits on its distribution except those imposed by cost and geography, and the size of the global diesel pool itself, which could absorb capacity from  hundreds of advanced biofuels projects.
  2. It’s renewable, here now, made at home, and at-scale today. No need to wait for the promise of algal biofuels, or other hot technologies still in the process of commercializing at scale. More than 600 million gallons of capacity already exists – Dynamic Fuels plant in Louisiana, and three from Neste Oil in Rotterdam, Singapore and Finland.
  3. In the case of Dynamic Fuels, Diamond Green and Emerald Biofuels, all three projects can utilize animal waste residues – a classic case of turning low-value, noxious feedstocks into high-value molecules.

Around the Horn: Let’s look at the latest from around the world in renewable diesel.

New Capacity

In Texas, Darling International (DAR) announced that Diamond Green Diesel LLC, its previously announced joint venture project with Valero Energy Corporation, has secured financing for the planned construction of its renewable diesel facility in Norco, Louisiana.  Financing will be provided internally by a subsidiary of Valero Energy Corporation.

According to the project’s sponsors, the facility will be capable of producing over 9,300 barrels per day or 137 million gallons per year of renewable diesel on a site adjacent to Valero’s St. Charles refinery near Norco, Louisiana.  The facility will convert grease, primarily animal fats and used cooking oil supplied by Darling, and potentially other feedstocks that become economically and commercially viable, into renewable diesel. Completion of the facility is anticipated just as 2013 gets underway.

KiOR (KIOR) began construction of its first commercial scale facility, located in Columbus, Mississippi, in the first quarter of 2011.  The approximately $190 million facility is expected to create several hundred direct, indirect, and induced jobs during operation, and over 500 jobs on site during peak construction. Production is scheduled to commence in the second half of 2012. KiOR’s process produces refinery intermediates for the production of renewable diesel.

In New Mexico, Joule Unlimited announced last November it is ready to start construction on a biofuels demonstration plant in New Mexico. Joule Unlimited Inc. plans to convert sunlight and carbon dioxide waste into biofuel at the planned facility in Hobbs, which is expected to begin operations in 2012. New Mexico state officials say Joule has the potential to expand its operations to create 500 new jobs in Hobbs by producing up to 75 million gallons of renewable diesel and 125 million gallons of ethanol per year.

Last September in the Netherlands, Neste Oil (NEF.F) inaugurated Europe’s largest renewable diesel facility in Rotterdam with an annual production capacity of 800,000 metric tons that was built at a cost of $913 million. The facility uses the company’s NExBTL technology that allows it to use a wide variety of oils, greases and fats as feedstock.

Key distribution deals

In Finland, Neste Oil (NEF.F) reports that they sold their first batch of NExBTL renewable diesel to the US market.
“We are very pleased to see that legislation on renewable fuels and our ability to meet the import regulations for these types of fuels are progressing in various markets,” said Matti Lehmus, Neste Oil’s Executive Vice President.  The release did not specify who they sold to, or any financial details such as volume or the amount of sales.  The fuel was produced at the company’s Porvoo refinery in Finland from waste fats.

In Virginia, Dynamic Fuels and Mansfield Oil Company have signed an agreement to supply renewable diesel to Norfolk Southern Corporation, one of the nation’s largest transporters of coal and industrial products. Norfolk Southern has primarily been using a 100% pure Dynamic Fuels renewable diesel at its Meridian, Mississippi rail yard since early January.

R&D

In Washington, the DOE is making up to $15 million available to demonstrate biomass-based oil supplements that can be blended with petroleum.  These “bio-oil” precursors for renewable transportation fuels could be integrated into the oil refining processes that make conventional gasoline, diesel and jet fuels without requiring modifications to existing fuel distribution networks or engines.

In February, Royal Dutch Shell announced that it has built a next generation biofuels pilot plant at Shell’s Westhollow Technology Center in Houston, USA, to produce drop-in biofuels rather than ethanol. It uses a thermo-catalytic process technology licensed from its commercial partner Virent, which is similar to the process being used at the Virent pilot plant in Madison, Wisconsin, USA. The Westhollow plant will explore the use of a range of feedstocks, starting with sugars and with the completion of an expansion currently under way, non-food cellulosic alternatives, leading to the production of a range of products, including gasoline, diesel and jet fuel.

Market expectations

Among fuels, 50 percent of executives said they expect cellulosic ethanol to reach 1 billion gallons by 2020, down from 67 percent in the last survey. Other fuels that were expected to break the billion gallon barrier by 2020: renewable diesel (down sharply from 67 to 51 percent), and aviation biofuels at 48 percent.. Algal fuel was flat at 28 percent, compared to 29 percent in the previous poll.Vehicle and ship testing

In California, Volkswagen of America announced partnerships with Solazyme (SZYM) and Amyris (AMRS) to evaluate emissions reductions and demonstrate the performance of TDI Clean Diesel technology when powered by advanced biodiesel and renewable diesel fuel.

Under the respective agreements, Volkswagen will provide both companies with two products each—the new 2012 Passat TDI and 2012 Jetta TDI—in order to closely examine the effects that the fuels produced by Amyris and Solazyme will have on Volkswagen clean diesel technology and the environment.

The 12-month evaluation period will equip Volkswagen engineers with valuable data that will aid in the ongoing enhancement of TDI Clean Diesel technology and help the brand to develop more efficient, cleaner burning diesel powertrains for future products.

In California, Solayzme (SZYM) says the USS Ford, a U.S. Navy Frigate fleet ship, successfully journeyed from its home port in Everett, WA to San Diego, CA using Soladiesel HRD-76, Solazyme’s 100% algal derived renewable marine diesel fuel. The voyage was fueled using 25,000 gallons of a 50/50 blend using Soladiesel and petroleum F-76 in the ship’s LM 2500 diesel turbines, and marks the first demonstration of the alternative fuel blend in an operational fleet ship.

Feedstocks

In California, Ceres (CERE) reports their sorghum hybrids were successfully processed into renewable diesel by Amyris (AMRS), under a U.S. DOE grant. The pilot-scale project evaluated both sugars and biomass from Ceres’ sweet sorghum hybrids grown in Alabama, Florida, Hawaii, Louisiana and Tennessee.

Disclosure: None.

Jim Lane is editor and publisher  of Biofuels Digest where this article was originally published. Biofuels Digest is the most widely read  Biofuels daily read by 14,000+ organizations. Subscribe  here.

May 08, 2012

SolarCity Files for IPO under Cloak of Secrecy

Debra Fiakas CFA

180px-Calmly[1].jpg
Image by Olga Palma via Wikimedia Commons
On the first word of an initial public offering investors flock to the Securities Exchange Commission website to get financial details on the heretofore private company.  Earlier this week solar energy solutions provider SolarCity Corporation announced its IPO plans, but investors will have to wait a while to get a look behind the SolarCity curtain.  The company is among the first to take advantage of a new “confidential” registration for emerging growth companies.

The process is provided for by The Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act) signed into law by President Obama in early April 2012.  Any emerging growth company that has never had an IPO date is allowed to submit a registration statement to the SEC for a non-public review.  The filing must be nearly complete so there is no skimping on lawyers to draft the document or auditors to tote up the numbers.

SolarCity will have to file a public document before heading out for the first roadshow.  So eventually we will learn how much revenue SolarCity makes from helping businesses and homeowners install solar panels on their roofs and whether there is any profit in it  -  just not this week.

One thing we might know already is that SolarCity has some cash in the bank.  Earlier this year SolarCity raised $81 million through a private offering.  Venture investors Silver Lake Kraftwerk and Valor Equity Partners led the deal.  That money was slated for a sales and marketing program and possible acquisitions.

I think it will be worthwhile to stay tuned for the SolarCity deal.  BrightSource Energy scrapped its plans for a public offering, but I believe SolarCity will come through.   Its venture partners are well connected in the capital markets. Not to mention that Chairman Elon Musk and CEO Lyndon Rive have the right experience and plenty of financial incentive to see an IPO through to the end.

Just between you and me, BrightSource’s concentrating solar technology seems a great deal more exciting than SolarCity’s rooftop panels and assorted energy savings ideas.  Without the benefit of financial metrics from either of them, I am guessing that SolarCity is much closer to turning a tidy profit.  That means SolarCity shares might be quicker to trade against real earnings.
  
Neither the author of the Small Cap Strategist web log, Crystal Equity Research nor its affiliates have a beneficial interest in the companies mentioned herein.

Playing Defense: Contamination and the jitter effect in advanced biofuels

Jim Lane

Introducci%C3%B3n_de_la_caricatura_%27Jungle_Jitters%27[1].png

Is evidence mounting that advanced biofuels companies need to tout their defensive schemes as much as their offense? Markets jitters suggest so.

Kevin Quon wrote recently in Seeking Alpha, “the most essential attribute to the fuels market is the ability to scale the technology to the desired level needed.”

Well put. In biofuels terms, that’s playing offense.

Now, making sure that you are making an environment that’s safe for your target molecules and organisms, and as hostile as possible for everything else? That’s playing defense.

Meanwhile, some evidence is piling up that advanced biofuels companies, especially those involved in fermentation systems, will need to be more articulate now, than in the past, in detailing their defensive schemes.

Heretofore, it’s generally been all about the offense, message-wise, all about path to scale, steel in the ground, about ‘getting there’. Less about staying there.

What can these pesky contaminating microvarmints do? They can eat your highly-engineered magic bug. Or, sugar hogs, they can eat all the food. They can slow down your process. Or, they can have so many children that they crowd out everyone else. Or, they can poison the well with a waste by-product that dilutes your critical titers and yields.

In the end, they can eat your company alive too, by causing companies to fall short of their scale-up production targets. Or, a problem in one company can become the presumed potential risk at another.

Hence, why we can expect a lot more interest – after years of “offense, baby, offense”, to see a lot more interest in who’s running the defense.

Jitters in the markets

Call it the Amyris (AMRS) effect – after the company that has struggled with the issues more than any other, in its pursuit of world-class scale. Why is it important? For one, poor post-IPO performance by the handful of companies that have made it through the IPO gate, is bound to impact the chances of others to come through later.

The decline in advanced biofuels share values, post-IPO, is a well-told story. But let’s look at it in some depth.



Here, you see the story. Collectively (though at different times) the seven companies that got out in this IPO wave started with a cumulative market cap of just under $5 billion, and quickly rose to a cumulative high-point of just over $7 billion. All good news. But then the rose came off the bloom, and a long slide started last summer, that has brought the collective value to well under $3 billion.

Hence a lot of questions amongst US institutional investors about whether advanced biofuels are ready, despite their impressive developmental record, for the public markets.

Let’s look at it in some depth though, by looking at the four fermentation stocks versus the three that are not fermentation based.



There, we see that the fermentation technologies had about 55 percent of that initial, IPO market cap. Today, they have just 42 percent share. So, there’s a sharper discount on the fermentation stocks than the non-fermentation equities.

One last chart.



Here, we see that, initially, amongst the fermentation stocks, that Solazyme (SZYM) at IPO had about 40 percent of the collective value. Today, that figure has risen to around 56 percent – increasingly, the fate of the sub-sector is hanging on the boys from South San Francisco.

Ask the leaders

There’s a meeting this week – part of the MIT Club’s “Energy & Clean Tech Series” that will be held tomorrow in Menlo Park, CA, that may well see a raftful of tough questions on the subject. On the program tomorrow evening – Amyris CEO John Melo, Solazyme CEO Jonathan Wolfson, Cobalt CEO Bob Mayer and LS9 Chairman Noubar Afeyan. Key intersecting point of those technologies – they’re hot, they’re fermentation-based, and all of them are on the march towards scale. It’s a $45 ticket for non-members – could be one of the hottest tickets this spring.

What about Solazyme and scale? In his Seeking Alpha note, Quon goes on to add, “Solazyme has been running at a commercial scale through contract manufacturers since 2007 reaching a level of 75,000-liter fermentation tanks. The company’s Peoria facility has 128,000-liter tanks. The company’s ramped-up production has thus far been linear across the 4 levels it’s achieved. The company is slated to eventually scale up to a range in the ballpark of 750,000-liter tanks.”

Then, the vital contention, “Most of the technology risk usually occurs at much earlier levels than what Solazyme (SZYM) has already achieved,” Quon wrote.

Is that true, for Solazyme or any fermentation technology?

Broadly put, that’s real – there are a hundred bombs that can sink a technology while still in the lab, only a handful that can plague it moving through that last critical 10X step-up from, say, 75,000 liter fermenters to 750,000.

A year ago last February, we reported an announcement on scale-up from Amyris (AMRS). They indicated that they had completed multiple runs of its fermentation process using its engineered yeast to produce renewable farnesene, in 100,000 and 200,000 liter capacity fermentors. These runs were completed through contract manufacturing operations in North America and Europe. The results of these fermentation runs, including yields, were consistent with previous runs at smaller scale.” The company had pointed towards the use of 600,00 liter fermenters in the future at its Usina São Martinho project.

By December of last year, though, problems with the ramp-up in capacity became highly apparent at Amyris, which struggled to reach its intended throughput volumes.

Why clarify?

Worries about the scalability of fermentation-based technologies are beginning to circulate – a direct contamination of the space, based on the jitter effect created over at Amyris.

A friend of the Digest writes: “I was in Brazil last month and got an earful about that from a very high up there on [Amyris]. If their shiny high grade fermenter was not up to snuff they are really in trouble…having worked in nice university labs and clean room pharmaceuticals they did not know what was awaiting them in the down market dirty world of biofuel. You can’t make biofuels with anything you got to keep that clean.”

There are two polar views one can take of that comment: Panicked alarmism, or a lonely voice in the wilderness leading us back to real expectations. Perhaps, and probably, the truth lies between those extremes.

But, regardless of merit, the comment can be taken as a general one that scrutiny is going to increase on technology risks inherent in the last few scale-up steps for fermentation technologies.

Contamination – that’s our educated guesstimate on what is going wrong at Amyris. The fermenters – or elsewhere in the tangle of pipes and liquids that form an integrated biorefinery – may well be able to start-up, and stay running for a while – but unanticipated critters make an appearance, and gain a foothold. Causing, at the least, yields to come down – in some cases, causing the crash of a system.

It’s a risk that is widely understood with outdoor, “open” systems, such as growing micro algae in ponds, at scale, and at costs that make sense for the fuel markets.

Opportunistic, invasive critters have been around for a long, long time. In macro-scale agriculture, they are called things like weeds or pests – and herbicides like Roundup have been deployed for years to control weed levels. At the micro-level, micro-agriculturists haven on the whole, a lot less experience in the Defense against the Dark Arts.

That’s proving worrisome for investors. It could well be the case that all this is a case of early-stage company shareholder jitters. But it does indicate that companies need to communicate, even more effectively than ever, how they are running their defensive schemes.

For example, in advanced biofuels companies – you see a lot of roles related to scale-up. VP, Manufacturing, VP, Business Development, CTO, and so on. But that’s changing quickly. Who specifically is the master of the Defense against the Dark Arts – and what and how are they doing? That might go a long way to calming investor jitters.

Disclosure: None.

Jim Lane is editor and publisher  of Biofuels Digest where this article was originally published. Biofuels Digest is the most widely read  Biofuels daily read by 14,000+ organizations. Subscribe  here.

May 07, 2012

Amyris drops the biofuels bomb

Management shake-up en route to execution, profit

Jim Lane
Amyris[1].jpg

The hammer drops in Emeryville. Company president Portela, CTO Renninger, general counsel Tompkins out; new CFO, reshuffle and promotions within.

After an 90% stock plunge, Amyris responds. We look at the drama of who’s in and who’s out – but also beyond – to execution and profitable production.

In California, Amyris (AMRS)  announced a major management reshuffle as the company contends with its ambitions for growth, difficulties in ramping up production to meet the goals originally set after its IPO, and a share price that has dropped from a high of $30.78 to yesterday’s $2.83.

Who got the sword?

In the reshuffle announced days prior to the company’s Q1 earnings call on Tuesday, three key executives are out: Mario Portela, President of Global Operations and Chief Operating Officer; Tamara Tompkins, Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary; and Neil Renninger, Chief Technical Officer. Dr. Renninger will remain as a member of Amyris’s Board of Directors. Amyris CFO Jeryl Hillerman was also replaced this week by Steve Mills in a long-contemplated move.

“We are realigning our management team as we pursue our current production ramp up. We are committed to achieving profitable, predictable operations,” said Amyris CEO John Melo.

New management roles

Peter Boynton will lead business development activities;  Gary Loeb will serve as Amyris General Counsel and Corporate Secretary;  Mark Patel is being promoted to Senior Vice President of Commercial Operations, responsible for leading products strategy and sales growth; Ramesh Raman is being promoted to Senior Vice President of Global Manufacturing, responsible for manufacturing and supply chain; and Christine Ring will lead legal technology strategy and intellectual property.

Continuity in R&D, Science, strategic partnerships, and corporate affairs

Joel Cherry will remain as head of R&D; Joel Velasco will continue his role leading external communications and policy as well as strategic partnerships;  Paulo Diniz will continue to lead Amyris Brasil while expanding his responsibilities in strategic partnerships; and Jack Newman will remain as the Chief Science Officer.

The View from the Street

Raymond James equity analyst Pavel Molchanov, wrote an evocative note on the shake-up.

“Having withdrawn production guidance in February and announced a dilutive ”emergency” equity raise in March, Amyris is in rough shape. The stock’s year-to-date decline of over 70% makes it by far the worst performer in our alt energy coverage universe. In this context comes news that Amyris is reshuffling its executive ranks, with the head of operations, chief technical officer and general counsel leaving the company. Concurrently, Steven Mills becomes the new CFO, though the CFO change had been in the works since last year. CEO John Melo appears to retain the board’s support at this point.

“While management changes (and we suspect layoffs too) are probably inevitable given the company’s current condition, ultimately the solution to the recent scale-up difficulties needs to be a technical/operational one, not just cost-cutting. The stock’s recent meltdown suggests that the market may see bankruptcy as a realistic scenario. While in no way minimizing the challenges faced by the company, we think that there is ample cash on hand to sustain operations into 2013 – but the stock could remain in the penalty box until there are clear signs of progress in commercialization.

The cast changes, the show must go on

It’s a sweeping announcement, right before the earnings call, but there’s little to be gained by focusing on the drama of who’s in and who’s out. Worth pointing out that the dancers now out in front were all promoted out of the Amyris chorus line.

The pressure is on CEO John Melo to articulate – to investors, and as soon as possible – what the specific problems are at the fermenters. If there is a basic flaw in the technology platform, firing the general counsel won’t solve anything. If there’s no basic flaw, then as a public company, Amyris will be expected to resume guidance to Wall Street and meet those forecasts, or John Melo will certainly be the next to mount the guillotine.

It is fair to note that the company, judging from share price, is facing an extinction-level threat in investor confidence based on its scale-up difficulties. Faced with similar circumstances, other boards have prepared whole layers of management for atonement via the hara-kiri. By contrast, the Amyris board has taken a “salvation lies within” approach, blessing a change in the technical team leadership consisting of one promotion and one co-founder exiting a management role but retaining a seat on the board. That takes cojones. Let’s hope their faith proves out.

Melo and the team certainly know all this better than the Digest, and are doubtless going to tackle this task, starting next week with investors via the company’s quarterly earnings call. Expect Melo to put the ‘night of the long knives’ quickly behind the company, and focus the message on products, technology and partners, which remain impressive – and on a streamlined, execution-oriented management team.

Disclosure: None.

Jim Lane is editor and publisher  of Biofuels Digest where this article was originally published. Biofuels Digest is the most widely read  Biofuels daily read by 14,000+ organizations. Subscribe  here.

May 06, 2012

Clean Energy Stocks Gone With the Wind

Tom Konrad CFA

Unenchanted April

After a great January, the last three months have not been kind to clean energy stocks.  While my model portfolios are still in positive territory (+5.4% and +0.9% for the unhedged and hedged portfolios, respectively), and are above my clean energy benchmark (The Powershares Wilderhill Clean Energy ETF, -3.4%), they have again fallen behind my broader market index, the Russell 2000 (+7.3%.) 

Gone_With_The_Wind_title_from_trailer[1].jpg
Gone with the Wind trailer, public domain

Gone With the Wind

April saw the chances of an extension of the federal Production Tax Credit (PTC) for wind diminish significantly when Congress failed to attach it to the payroll tax cut extension.  In an election year, the chances of a stand-alone PTC extension getting through Congress look slim, despite the massive numbers of layoffs expected in the wind industry without an extension.  Even if the PTC is extended next year, the diminished wind industry capacity will be felt for years to come.  It's already being felt by wind stocks, and, I believe, other clean energy stocks are reacting in sympathy.
11 for 12 Apr.png

Stock Notes

Clean Energy Developers

  • The greatest pain was felt among my group of clean energy development companies, most likely because developers are the most direct beneficiaries of clean energy subsidies such as the PTC.  Hardest hit was Finavera Wind Energy (TSXV:FVR,PINK:FNVRF), which lost 43%.  On April 30, Finavera fell over a third, although the CEO confirmed that there had been no change in the company's prospects.  Perhaps some large investor feared some bad news would come out in Finavera's annual report on May 1, but I found little of note which had not already been released.  It's worth pointing out that Finavera's prospects should not be hurt and might even be helped by a failed PTC extension, since Finavera has no US projects, and the companies projects in Canada might benefit from cheaper wind equipment which might have been used in the United States had the PTC been extended.
  • Western Wind Energy (TSXV:WND, PINK:WNDEF) also has little exposure to the lack of a PTC extension, since most of this company's value is in wind projects which were commissioned before the PTC expiration, and a solar project the company is developing in Puerto Rico.  Yet Western Wind has also been experiencing a sell-off on no news, although part of this may be due to an unsubstantiated smear campaign on blog comment sections and bulletin boards.  One (also unsubstantiated) rumor has it that a group of Toronto hedge funds are trying to force a quick sale far below the company's current valuation, perhaps to Algonquin Power (TSX: AQN, PINK:AQUNF) which made a low-ball offer last October.
  • Alterra Power (TSX:AXY,PINK:MGMXF) also declined significantly on no news.  Alterra also has little exposure to the US wind market, and operates mostly internationally and has more of a focus on run-of-river hydropower and geothermal.

Other News of Note

  • Bicycle manufacturer Accell Group (ACCEL.AS) announced a successful conclusion to its talks to buy out Raliegh.  
  • Waste Management (WM) (along with several competitors) announced disappointing first quarter results.  At the time I wrote that the subsequent sell off might lead to another attractive buying opportunity, partly because I liked the reasons earnings fell short. WM has since declined from slightly over $36 to slightly under $34, and I have placed a limit order to add to my position at a little below the current price.  If the decline continues, I intend to continue to add to my position.  I like WM in the long term for the company's sustainability initiatives and healthy (4.2%) and well-protected dividend.
  • Last Thursday, Lime Energy (NASD:LIME) announced a contract with Central Hudson (which happens to be my electric utility) to handle the utility's direct install energy efficiency program.  I wrote that this validated Lime's strategy, but the stock has yet to get any love from investors as a consequence.

Conclusion

Investor disappointment with the lack of political support of clean energy seems to be translating into a broader disappointment with clean energy stocks in general.  Values continue to get better in those clean energy stocks which are not dependent on subsidies.  I think cautious buying is in order, but I also think it likely that the political climate for clean energy will continue to worsen this year, so it is probably best to keep the majority of your funds in cash while waiting for more enchanting values to blow our way.

DISCLOSURE: Long WFIFF, LIME, RKWBF, WM, VE, ACCEL, NFYEF, FNVRF, WNDEF, MGMXF, AQUNF, short IWM and SPY.

DISCLAIMER: Past performance is not a guarantee or a reliable indicator of future results.  This article contains the current opinions of the author and such opinions are subject to change without notice.  This article has been distributed for informational purposes only. Forecasts, estimates, and certain information contained herein should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment product.  Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed.

Top Questions to Ask a Venture Capitalist in the First Pitch

David Gold

Katherine Connors ceremonial pitch 8
Katherine Connors, Miss Iowa USA 2010 throws the ceremonial first pitch.  Source: Cathy T, via Wikimedia Commons
You landed your first pitch at a venture capitalist’s (VC) office. You’ve practiced the pitch and have your laptop fired up to deliver. So, like a sprinter at the sound of the gunshot, you dive in hard and heavy to make sure you get through the deck. After all, you might only have one chance to excite them with your company’s story. Inevitably, with all the questions the VC throws at you, time expires before you even think about asking questions of your audience.

             Don’t let that happen to you.  The more you learn about your prospective investor and where you stand with them, the more productive your meeting will be.  Start off by asking questions. You may be very surprised at how many VCs are willing to spend time answering them. And be sure to watch the clock and leave time at the end to ask key closing questions. Presuming you’ve already asked the questions from my last post, Top Questions to Ask a Venture Capitalist in the First Five Minutes, here are some of the questions you should consider asking as part of the pitch session.

Question to ask before the pitch:

Tell me about yourself and how you got into venture capital?

             If you have done your homework, you should already know something about the attendees in your meeting. Check the firm’s website, LinkedIn page and other sources to learn more about them. If you already have the information, why ask this question? First, asking this question helps to create touch points with your audience. Maybe you went to the same university, had the same major, worked a similar job in the past or know someone who may have worked with them. You may have already identified the touch points from your research, so asking this question gives you the opportunity to talk about those connections. Second, the more you know about what motivates your audience, how they think and what makes them tick, the better you can tailor your story to include things that will resonate with them most.

On what percent of your investments were you the lead investor?

            The journey of raising venture capital has a required starting point: finding a lead investor. Some funds lead many investments, while others are designed to be followers. That doesn’t mean that the meeting is a waste of time if the fund usually follows. Followers can be valuable, but you are looking for different things out of them. An interested follower can be leveraged to help you find or close your lead investor. A lead investor can deliver you a term sheet.

How often do you co-invest with others and how many different funds have you syndicated with in the past?

             In forming your syndicate of potential investors, it is important to understand which investors may prefer to invest alone, and which would want co-investors. The number of funds that a firm has co-invested with is an indicator of how well connected they are in the venture capital world.  A well-connected firm is usually more helpful  in bringing in additional co-investors. This is usually true no matter if  they are a lead investor or a follower.

Questions to ask after the pitch:

If I call the CEOs of your portfolio companies, what will they tell me about your fund?

             Raising investment capital is like marriage without the option of divorce. It is critically important to understand what it would be like to work with your prospective investor.. Good investors respect entrepreneurs that are as concerned about that relationship as they are about the money coming into the bank.

Where do you see the strengths and weaknesses in our management team?

             In a venture investment, little is more important than discussions about the roles of the management team. Would you really want to take investment capital from a firm that has a starkly different view of your management team than you? The earlier you start to understand your alignment on this issue the better.

How high is your interest in our company compared to your other investment opportunities?

             Entrepreneurs often make the classic mistake of presuming that funding will follow once they convince the venture fund that their business, team, market, technology and plan are exciting. But venture capital is a relative sport. No firm can do unlimited investments during any given time frame. So, which companies get selected for investment is relative to the other deals in the fund’s pipeline. It is better to know in a first pitch that the venture’s interest is tepid than to falsely believe there is high interest. The key measuring stick of their interest is understanding how their attraction to your company compares to others.

What are the key things you need to be convinced of to commit to visiting us?

             One of the classic tenants of a good sales process is “always be closing.” Yet, so many entrepreneurs deliver their first pitch and leave the meeting with enormous ambiguity about whether there will be any next steps. You can be certain that no fund is going to get to a term sheet without visiting your company. So, this is a key milestone you need to focus on achieving after the first pitch. Venture capitalists can suck you dry with information requests. Understanding what hurdles you need to get through in order to get them to commit to such a visit provides focus for the next steps you need to take.

David Gold is an entrepreneur and engineer with national public policy experience who heads up cleantech investments for Access Venture Partners (www.accessvp.com).  This article was first published on his blog, www.greengoldblog.com.

May 05, 2012

EV Dreams and Industrial Metal Nightmares

John Petersen

The hardest part of blogging about the energy storage and vehicle electrification sectors is coping with ideologues who are so enthralled with their myopic EV dreams that they can't see the industrial metal nightmares that make those dreams impossible at relevant scale in the real world. They whimper, whine and complain about the obscene prices charged by diabolical oil companies and gush over how safe, quiet, clean and secure life will be when plug-in cars with immense battery packs are common as wildflowers in an alpine meadow and getting cheaper every day.

The fly in their soothing balm for the ills of humanity is that electric vehicles and the batteries to power them require immense amounts of nonferrous industrial metals for electric motors, batteries and other essential components.

To begin with, the prices of industrial metals are more volatile than oil prices and they usually increase faster. The following graph offers a seven-year comparison of market prices for Brent Crude and a basket of industrial metals represented by the Dow Jones UBS Industrial Metals Index (^DJUBSIN).

5.5.12 Crude-Metals.png

Nothing in that graph leads me to believe oil prices and industrial metals prices will decouple in the foreseeable future and make dreams of significantly cheaper EVs possible. Technology can do marvelous things with electronic devices made from bits of silicon and plastic. It has little or no ability to improve the efficiency of electric drive components or reduce the cost of large quantities of industrial metals used to make those components. There's always room to nibble around the edges, but electric motors and batteries have been around for a long time and they're not going to get much better.

Simply stated, the dream of falling EV prices is impossible because the underlying technologies require massive inputs of industrial metals.

To make matters worse, global production of energy resources is two orders of magnitude greater than global production of industrial metals. The following table is derived from published industry data and summarizes annual global production of energy resources on both a gross and a per capita basis.


Production
Per Capita

(Metric tons)
(Kilograms)
Coal 7,229,000,000
1,032.71
Oil 4,866,000,000
695.14
Natural Gas 1,880,000,000
268.57
Uranium 42,700
0.01
   All energy resources 13,975,042,700
1,996.43

The next table is derived from statistics published by the USGS and summarizes global production of iron, steel and all major industrial metals on both a gross and a per capita basis.


Production
Per Capita

(Metric tons)
(Kilograms)
Iron & Steel 1,500,000,000
214.29




Aluminum 44,100,000
6.30
Chromium 24,000,000
3.43
Copper 16,100,000
2.30
Manganese 14,000,000
2.00
Zinc 12,400,000
1.77
Titanium 6,700,000
0.96
Magnesium 5,900,000
0.84
Lead 4,500,000
0.64
Nickel 1,800,000
0.26
Bromine 460,000
0.07
Tin 253,000
0.04
Molybdenum 250,000
0.04
Antimony 169,000
0.02
Rare Earths 130,000
0.02
Cobalt 98,000
0.01
Tungsten 72,000
0.01
Niobium 63,000
0.01
Vanadium 60,000
0.01
Arsenic 52,000
0.01
Lithium 34,000
0.00
Silver 23,800
0.00
Cadmium 21,500
0.00
Bismuth 8,500
0.00
Gold 2,700
0.00
Mercury 1,930
0.00
Graphite 925
0.00
Platinum Group 399
0.00
Beryllium 240
0.00
   All nonferrous metals 131,200,994
18.74

The ratios are simple if you forgive a little rounding. For every 100 pounds of energy resources, our planet can produce ten pounds of iron and steel and one pound of nonferrous industrial metals. If you'd rather tighten the focus to oil and the specific industrial metals highlighted in red that are essential for electric drive components, the ratio works out to eleven ounces of industrial metals for every hundred pounds of oil.

The numbers simply can't work. When demand for a particular metal reaches a tipping point where it exceeds supply, the outcome is always the same; a price spike that lasts until supply and demand are brought back into balance. We’re already going through the first modern example with rare earth metals. Their prices increased by more than 1000% over the last couple years and the market is responding by developing new mines that will hopefully bring supply and demand into balance at a higher metal price over the next few years. Until balance is restored, metals that were relatively cheap and available before the inflection point will be difficult to obtain and prohibitively expensive.

All of the metals produced last year were used to make the necessities and luxuries of life for the planet's seven billion inhabitants. There is no slop or surplus in the industrial metals supply chain and while production of some metals can be increased with massive investments in new mines and production infrastructure, the required level of new investment can only increase price pressures and make metals that are very expensive today even more expensive tomorrow. There is no way to insure that incremental metal production will be dedicated to a particular use and there are plenty of competitive uses.

Just last week a group of technology titans including Google executives Larry Page and Eric Schmidt announced the launch of Planetary Resources, a venture that hopes to mine asteroids for industrial metals. While I can't comment on the business merits of their new venture, the fact that these men are investing their own money in off-planet exploration for industrial metals that the earth can't produce in sufficient quantities speaks volumes.

The bizarre theory of electric drive as packaged by EVangelicals and their eager commercial accomplices at Tesla Motors (TSLA), Nissan Motors (NSANF.PK), General Motors (GM) and others is that humanity can increase its consumption of scarce industrial metals including copper, manganese, nickel, rare earths, cobalt and lithium for the sole purpose of giving EV owners the dubious luxury of replacing energy from oil with energy from coal, uranium and natural gas. The idea that all natural resources are worth conserving never even enters the picture.

EVs cannot change global production of energy resources or the emissions from using those resources. Since the planet only has one atmosphere, the idea that moving emissions from Point A to Point B is somehow "virtuous and green" has all the intellectual integrity of a no peeing zone in a swimming pool.

The world currently produces enough industrial metals to make a few electric vehicles for eco-royalty who don't care whether their choices make economic sense. It cannot produce enough industrial metals to make affordable electric vehicles, or for that matter make enough electric vehicles to put even a tiny dent in global oil consumption.

No matter how the ideologues and their commercial accomplices twist, distort and spin the facts, electric vehicles cannot make a society or the world a safer, quieter, cleaner or more secure place to live. They're selling snake oil promises based on the gullibility of politicians and the general public and the absurd proposition that humanity can waste materials that are a hundred times scarcer than the energy resources ideologues want to replace.

On a micro-scale, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids are feel-good eco-bling for the emotionally committed and the mathematically challenged. On a macro-scale they use more energy, emit more CO2 and are more expensive than established HEV technology. They're unconscionable waste and pollution masquerading as conservation.

I'm a lawyer, a battery guy and a policy geek. I know that six billion people on our planet want to earn a small piece of the lifestyle one billion of us have and take for granted. I also know that as a result of the information technology revolution, about half of the six billion have access to electronic data and understand for the first time in history that there is more to life than mere subsistence. Even if we assume that they'll only become consumers at 5% to 10% of purchasing power parity, the increased pressure on water, food, energy and every commodity you can imagine will be immense beyond reckoning. The big challenge will be creating enough room at the table so that we can avoid the unthinkable consequences of inaction.

I like hybrid vehicle technology because it minimizes waste of both gasoline and other natural resources. I'd like it even more if it were tied to a compressed natural gas fuel system that would eliminate dependence on imported oil, but that's a different discussion. I'm also a big fan of micro- and mild-hybrid vehicles that use less robust electric motors and simpler batteries to reduce waste for the masses that can't afford to upgrade to an HEV. I'm deeply offended by P.T. Barnum class hucksters that use the false promise of electric vehicles to create bloated market capitalizations and lead investors down a primrose path that's certain to end in massive losses for the gullible.

Disclosure: None.

May 04, 2012

The Week In Cleantech - Orion, Great Lakes, Solazyme, Gevo, Lime, Quanta, and MasTec:May 5, 2012

Jeff Siegel and Tom Konrad

April 30: Orion Energy Systems (OESX) Triples Stock Buyback

TK:
  • Sometimes microcap stocks fall just because no one is paying attention.  The directors of Orion Energy Systems (AMEX:OESX) clearly think their company is one such.

    Orion is an energy management company with a focus on high efficiency lighting systems and alternative energy system integration in commercial buildings.  The company is profitable, with a trailing Price/Earnings ratio of 18, a Price/Sales ratio of 0.5, and sold at less than half of book value ($4.05) when the market closed on Friday at $1.93.

    The energy management industry has seen increasing competition and eroding margins recently, which accounts for Orion’s recent drop in earnings, and in turn partly accounts for the company’s rock bottom share price.

    But company insiders clearly feel the sell-of has gone too far.  In February, two directors  were buying Orion stock in the $2.60 to $2.70 price range.

    Now, with no net debt, and net cash of $11M ($0.48/share), the board has tripled their previously announced share buyback program to $7.5M.  With analysts expecting continued profits in a range of 3 to 5 cents a share in 2012, and 7 to 16 cents in 2013, and long term growth of 35% per year, the company looks very cheap (relative to book value) for a growth stock.

    A cheap green stock with substantial growth potential in an industry which is economic without subsidies?

    Sounds like a good deal to me.

May 1: Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Scraping Bottom

TK: gldd dredgeI follow Great Lakes Dredge and Dock (NASD:GLDD) because it’s involved in many industries which will gain from Peak Oil and Global Warming:

  • Beach nourishment and levy building will gain from more flooding and sea level rise
  • Harbor and dock work will gain as more freight shifts to more fuel-efficient water based transport.
  • Offshore wind power requires extensive marine construction.

Today, the company reported first quarter income of 2 cents, compared to analysts’ expectations of 10 cents.  That should cause the stock (which has been rising strongly since I bought it last year) to sell off sharply over the next few days.

I sold some at the open today, but plan to buy back in to probably a bigger position after the market digests the bad news.  I like this one long term, and the miss was largely-attributable to one-off factors.  In addition, GLDD’s backlog built up significantly this quarter, which is good for the long term outlook.

That said, the stock is not exactly cheap compared to expected earnings of $0.47 cents for 2012, especially since those are likely to be revised down to $0.39 given the $0.08 earnings miss.  Trailing twelve month earnings are $0.26.  At $7.35, that’s a P/E of 19 for 2012, and a trailing P/E of 26, with long term growth expected at about 10%.

UPDATE: GLDD traded up to $7.52 intra-day before heading down around 2pm and closing at $6.91.  I took the opportunity to unload the balance of my holdings at $7.40.

Also: Assurant launches insurance for solar project developers.

May 2: Solazyme (NASDAQ:SZYM) Pops on Deal with Dow

JS:

Solazyme, Inc. (NASDAQ:SZYM) announced this morning that it and the Dow Chemical Company (NYSE:DOW) have entered into an offtake agreement that allows Dow to purchase all of Solazyme's non-vegetable microbe-based oils for use in dielectric fluid applications. The length of this deal runs through 2015.

Solazyme and Dow have also entered into a multi-year extension of a current joint development deal that allows Dow to provide additional development work on Solazyme's tailored algal oils. Solazyme is up about 5% in premarket.

As I've mentioned in the past, I'm not really a fan of biofuels – both as an investment and as a serious contributor to our energy and climate problems. It's definitely one tool in the shed, but it's not going to give us the most bang for our buck. That being said, Solazyme is one of the few biofuel players that I believe will still be around three years from now. It's partnership with Chevron and its ability to generate a few bucks in the food and cosmetics space gives it a little more flexibility than most of its competitors.

Last month, Solazyme hit my initial price target of $16. At which time, most who held out for that target, took their winnings and moved on. Right now, the stock is trading around $11.35. Although today's announcement could offer some support, I'm hesitant about re-visiting this one at these levels.

TK:

May 3: Has the Gevo (GEVO) hour come?

TK:

  • Gevo (GEVO) reports 1Q Earnings, transitions ethanol plants to isobutanol.  More here.
  • Lime Energy (LIME) strategy validated by utility contract win.  More here.

May 4: 2012 looks to be the Year of the Strong Grid

TK: Quanta Services (PWR), MasTec (MTZ) beat expectations this week.  Other Strong Grid stocks may benefit.

Disclosures:

  • TK - Long MXWL, LIME, MTZ, OESX.
  • JS - No positions.

Jeff Siegel is Editor of Energy and Capital, where his notes were first published.
Tom Konrad Ph.D. CFA is Editor of AltEnergyStocks.com, and a blogger on Forbes.com, where his notes were first published.


Featured Companies





Share Us






Subscribe to this Blog

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Subscribe by RSS Feed



Search This Site


Certifications and Site Mentions

Wealthtrack



Wall Street Journal


Seeking Alpha Certified

New York Times

Twitter Updates