Greenmountainman, you raise a question that has tickled my mind for some time.

How ought Pyrogenesis to plan its lobbying, PR, and other longterm advocacy, storytelling, and positioning efforts over time? And, given the bottomless money pit that such efforts can become, how could the Company get actual value for its lobbying/PR/positioning dollar?

The EPA angle you raise is interesting. It triggered this fantasy — if you will humor me…

Remember the $9.2 million contract that the Company is negotiating with the unnamed “large operator of public water systems, whose name will remain confidential for competitive reasons?” Well let’s just fast forward to when Phase 2 (the fully operational land-based system) has achieved some milestone, say it’s millionth gallon of water purified. The Company rolls out a slick celebration event that makes the client look good, that makes the local and state and national electeds look good — and positions Pyrogenesis as the desired state of the art provider of total PFAS destruction.

Anyway… Why bother with a PR vs. a lobbying play? Because it may often be cheaper to sell plasma PFAS destruction services to companies that already have PFAS remediation business pipelines, like Harsco. Or to well-capitalized companies struggling with their own legacy PFAS issues (like the Chemours Company). Those companies have lobbyists that can clear the B2G path for those companies to be able to buy B2B solutions from Pyro.

But if the Pyro DOES have cash to do lobbying on its own in the USA, then (in addition to EPA) it should aim at becoming a technology provider in the bids underway for the U.S. Hydrogen Hubs. (Hat tip to Magbeach2 for posting about these.)

These Hydrogen Hubs are massive opportunities that will geographically cluster off-takers, financiers, producers, transporters, storage providers, etc. The money is big. The Company has multiple ways into the theme: Pyro Green-Gas (landfill gas to hydrogen), the ZCE “turquoise hydrogen” solution it’s developing, plus their stake in whatever hydrogen magic Bernard and co. manage to cook up over at HPQ Silicon.

Final thought — does the Company need to shoulder all the lobbying burdens alone? I say no. Because I don't want Pyrogenesis to spend money and effort to educate the market about the benefits of plasma processes — such as for the destruction of PFAS — only to see a competitor with a torch get a free ride on that education and swoop in and close a sale that could have been ours.

It could be worth engaging in some “co-opetition” with other plasma process players to pool some of their lobbying funds to create something like a “Plasma Institute” or a “Plasma Process Association.” Its job would be to lobby governments all over the world for policies that pave the way for a robust global plasma industry with standards and metrics that Pyrogenesis can, as a lead member, have a big voice in shaping.

Let Monolith pony up some USD. Definitely have Omni Conversion Technologies kick in some CAD. SEID (formerly known as Applied Plasma Physics and a historical partner of Pyro Green-Gas from back in the day when it was AirScience Technologies) can throw in some Norwegian Krone. Keep your competitors close. And have them all clamoring for transmission lines to get built to bring renewable electrons to plasma torches.

I'm guessing PPP & Co. have thought of all of this and more. I mean, you've got these interesting additions to the Board with Government procurement / R&D experience and B2G experience. So...

After once again way too many words, Moneypoet out.