- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Spec Play - HGRAF
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:17 pm to MekaWarriors
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:17 pm to MekaWarriors
quote:
It would also ease the permitting.
How does it ease permitting? Wouldn't they have to get new permits in the new locale to manufacture graphene in different states, or jurisdictions? New buildings and permits needed.
Is graphene difficult to transport? I have no idea. That stuff is slicker than whale snot, but are there environmental concerns for transporting pure graphene?
Just trying to figure this out, and as much as I want this to be the "big one", I still try to look for red flags.
2
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:37 pm to Jax-Tiger
quote:
How does it ease permitting?
It likely would not, multiple permits in multiple regions slows it all down and costs more.
Now, if you build each production facility small enough where it stays below some permitting thresholds, then maybe, but it would likely still cost more due to needing infrastructure improvements at each site instead of only one or two.
I can't imagine shipped graphene is any riskier than shipping activated carbon, which is minimal, just needs to be in a sealed container.
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:39 pm to Jax-Tiger
By spreading the emissions sources to other locations it can allow you stay below permitting/reporting thresholds. For example, the generator thresholds for hazardous waste breakdown as follows 2,200+ lbs per month is a Large Quantity Generator (LQG), 220 to <2,200 lbs per month is a Small Quantity Generator (SQG) and then <220 lbs per month is a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG). Reporting and compliance rules change significantly at each tier.
You also have minor and major source air permits depending on the emissions profiles/inventories, even rules for refrigerant handling change depending on the types and volumes.
These are all examples and there are others as well. I have been worked at manufacturing that had facilities literally across the road from each other, but they were owned by different parent companies in order to circumvent certain rules.
You also have minor and major source air permits depending on the emissions profiles/inventories, even rules for refrigerant handling change depending on the types and volumes.
These are all examples and there are others as well. I have been worked at manufacturing that had facilities literally across the road from each other, but they were owned by different parent companies in order to circumvent certain rules.
This post was edited on 9/11/25 at 2:43 pm
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:42 pm to Dock Holiday
quote:
I can't imagine shipped graphene is any riskier than shipping activated carbon, which is minimal, just needs to be in a sealed container.
You are probably correct, Ms Bruere mentioned that they were very similar in the Radius Research interview.
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:51 pm to MekaWarriors
quote:
For example, the generator thresholds for hazardous waste breakdown as follows 2,200+ lbs per month is a Large Quantity Generator (LQG), 220 to <2,200 lbs per month is a Small Quantity Generator (SQG) and then <220 lbs per month is a Very Small Quantity Generator (VSQG). Reporting and compliance rules change significantly at each tier.
I like your though process, but it has a flaw, haz waste generation is not permitting process, and does not apply, apples and oranges.
It's already been stated by them the air emissions are minimal, so likely not major source, so multiple permits slows it all down due to each facility carrying separate minor source permit. They would all be similar permits and each taking review, build, submittal, review and approval times.
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:53 pm to Dock Holiday
quote:
I like your though process, but it has a flaw, haz waste generation is not permitting process, and does not apply, apples and oranges.
I said permitting/reporting. While hazardous waste generation does not require a permit, it does require specific handling and reporting requirements.
You are correct in your statement that multiple minor permits would slow it down, unless they can show an exemption all together and then apply that to each new facility.
This post was edited on 9/11/25 at 2:56 pm
Posted on 9/11/25 at 2:58 pm to MekaWarriors
quote:
While hazardous waste generation does not require a permit
It actually does require a permit/submittal to obtain a generator number, and at that time of filing you declare your status. It's just not a "process" per-se and does not apply to Hydrograph, that was my only point.
Posted on 9/11/25 at 3:03 pm to MekaWarriors
quote:
unless they can show an exemption all together and then apply that to each new facility.
Correct, except they would each need to be able to prove exemption status and not be contiguous i.e., be geographically separated.
Posted on 9/11/25 at 3:24 pm to Dock Holiday
I am interested in more specifics when Ms. Breure stated they were awaiting regulatory approval in the Radius Research interview.
Posted on 9/12/25 at 7:18 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
Even an update citing delays due to permitting, etc. would be nice.
I am not worried about the lack of information at this point. If this was a pump and dump, then they would be blowing smoke up our arse to get the price as high as they can to get it listed on the US Exchange.
If they know there is news coming that is going to move the needle, they can be silent. The hype needs a customer, a production facility, or both to be effective.
We all now what the general time line is, and if they don't deliver with announcements before the end of the year or tangible results by spring, we will have reasons to worry.
Posted on 9/12/25 at 9:30 am to MekaWarriors
Meka,
I like the steady rise this week in HGRAF AND First Graphene.
But I’m nervous that today or Monday, the tranches will come falling down and we will be back at 1.03.
How are you dealing with that?
I like the steady rise this week in HGRAF AND First Graphene.
But I’m nervous that today or Monday, the tranches will come falling down and we will be back at 1.03.
How are you dealing with that?
Posted on 9/12/25 at 10:10 am to dstone12
quote:
I like the steady rise this week in HGRAF AND First Graphene.
But I’m nervous that today or Monday, the tranches will come falling down and we will be back at 1.03.
How are you dealing with that?
I am going to start a graphene thread to discuss the industry as a whole because I have a lot I can discuss on it without distracting from HydroGraph specifically.
Posted on 9/12/25 at 11:32 am to MekaWarriors
Nb4 someone says “I’m loaded up on this dip” to see it go up again next week and next Friday we’re back where we started
Rinse and repeat
Rinse and repeat
Posted on 9/12/25 at 10:14 pm to dallastiger55
I have trouble getting AI to give helpful answers. It generally goes with the easiest, elementary answer that only borders on a real answer.
I started asking about a possible timeline for HGRAF listing on NASDAQ. It bullshitted around, then I finally was able to narrow it down to commit to an answer. IT says that HGRAF should be on NASDAQ by end of 1st quarter, 2026.
I started asking about a possible timeline for HGRAF listing on NASDAQ. It bullshitted around, then I finally was able to narrow it down to commit to an answer. IT says that HGRAF should be on NASDAQ by end of 1st quarter, 2026.
Posted on 9/13/25 at 12:03 am to dstone12
quote:
But I’m nervous that today or Monday, the tranches will come falling down and we will be back at 1.03.
How are you dealing with that?
Not Meka but he has stated he likes this long term. So do I. This is where you have to look the other way and trust the process. Set it and forget it like Ron Popeil. But seriously, this is something that you have to let cook and if that is too nerve wracking (don't blame you!) then maybe lower your position in this.
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:36 am to DoomGuy504
Latest news, September 16, 2025
"HydroGraph Oxygenated Graphene Coating Offers a Breakthrough in Microelectronics Cooling"
LINK
"HydroGraph Oxygenated Graphene Coating Offers a Breakthrough in Microelectronics Cooling"
LINK
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:50 am to Longer Tail Tiger
Is this news or didn’t we already know this?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:59 am to reds on reds on reds
quote:
Is this news or didn’t we already know this?
I think we knew about this as a potential use, but having a peer reviewed study on an actual coating product may be new. Anyone else know about this?
Posted on 9/16/25 at 8:59 am to reds on reds on reds
That underlying study was originally published on July 25 from what I can see, but I do not think it was well known....
Posted on 9/16/25 at 9:58 am to Longer Tail Tiger
I had a feeling they were headed this way! This is outstanding news!
Page 67 of 120
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News