The Challenges of Bringing Innovation to PCMO

[buster]

Unreal...well not surprising really. Going by molecular structure I can see NOVVI being a IV.

"In June 2024, Lee said that the API informed them that the SynNova base stock was an API Group IV, not a Group III as designated by Novvi. As such, the data provided to API was insufficient to grant their license. At the same time, Novvi says it was hearing from its other customers that their API licenses were revoked without notice or discussion for the same reason. So, although Novvi had successfully navigated the various obstacles associated with launching an innovative non-conventional base stock, and licensed PCMO’s blended with this base stock had obtained API approvals and were available for sale, the API effectively reset the process by now classifying the base stocks as Group IV."

"Consequently, those blending a PCMO with Novvi base stock must now adhere to the guidelines governing an API Group IV – Polyalphaolefin (PAO) program instead of using Group III group guidelines. This adds a new and significant cost burden/barrier to obtaining an API license.

As a point of reference, a Group IV program is estimated to cost between $300,000 and $500,000, in contrast to the $100,000 investment for a Group III base oil interchange program. Marketers and additive manufacturers may be less inclined to undertake significant investments as the justification for such business decisions becomes increasingly challenging."

The Challenges of Bringing Innovation to PCMO

Bringing innovative lubricants to market is a complex process with many inherent and often unexpected challenges. This article examines some of the challenges faced by companies attempting to intro…

jobbersworld.com

 

[Jetronic]

since gp iv is exclusively PAO, there should not be any doubt if an oil is gp IV or not.

How about GTL?

 

[MolaKule]

Unreal...well not surprising really. Going by molecular structure I can see NOVVI being a IV.

"In June 2024, Lee said that the API informed them that the SynNova base stock was an API Group IV, not a Group III as designated by Novvi. As such, the data provided to API was insufficient to grant their license. At the same time, Novvi says it was hearing from its other customers that their API licenses were revoked without notice or discussion for the same reason. So, although Novvi had successfully navigated the various obstacles associated with launching an innovative non-conventional base stock, and licensed PCMO’s blended with this base stock had obtained API approvals and were available for sale, the API effectively reset the process by now classifying the base stocks as Group IV."

"Consequently, those blending a PCMO with Novvi base stock must now adhere to the guidelines governing an API Group IV – Polyalphaolefin (PAO) program instead of using Group III group guidelines. This adds a new and significant cost burden/barrier to obtaining an API license.

As a point of reference, a Group IV program is estimated to cost between $300,000 and $500,000, in contrast to the $100,000 investment for a Group III base oil interchange program. Marketers and additive manufacturers may be less inclined to undertake significant investments as the justification for such business decisions becomes increasingly challenging."

The Challenges of Bringing Innovation to PCMO

Bringing innovative lubricants to market is a complex process with many inherent and often unexpected challenges. This article examines some of the challenges faced by companies attempting to intro…

jobbersworld.com

Well now you know one of the reasons why many blenders avoid API licensing.

 

[buster]

Well now you know one of the reasons why many blenders avoid API licensing.

Exactly

 

[MolaKule]

Unreal...well not surprising really. Going by molecular structure I can see NOVVI being a IV.

"In June 2024, Lee said that the API informed them that the SynNova base stock was an API Group IV, not a Group III as designated by Novvi. As such, the data provided to API was insufficient to grant their license. At the same time, Novvi says it was hearing from its other customers that their API licenses were revoked without notice or discussion for the same reason. So, although Novvi had successfully navigated the various obstacles associated with launching an innovative non-conventional base stock, and licensed PCMO’s blended with this base stock had obtained API approvals and were available for sale, the API effectively reset the process by now classifying the base stocks as Group IV."

"Consequently, those blending a PCMO with Novvi base stock must now adhere to the guidelines governing an API Group IV – Polyalphaolefin (PAO) program instead of using Group III group guidelines. This adds a new and significant cost burden/barrier to obtaining an API license.

As a point of reference, a Group IV program is estimated to cost between $300,000 and $500,000, in contrast to the $100,000 investment for a Group III base oil interchange program. Marketers and additive manufacturers may be less inclined to undertake significant investments as the justification for such business decisions becomes increasingly challenging."

The Challenges of Bringing Innovation to PCMO

Bringing innovative lubricants to market is a complex process with many inherent and often unexpected challenges. This article examines some of the challenges faced by companies attempting to intro…

jobbersworld.com

Interesting since this is what Novii states:
"What API category are SynNova products in and why?
SynNova SSBO is classified as a Group III API base oil. SynNova meets all of the requirements of API 1509 documentation for base oil classification of saturates >90%, aromatics <10%, sulfur <0.03%, and viscosity index >120."

According to their other literature, it's an SSBO which almost sounds like Group V.

SynNova: Sustainable Synthetic Base Oil (SSBO)

100% renewable, plant-derived, synthetic base oil with category-leading stability and performance. Drop-in ready to meet the toughest challenges.

novvi.com

 

[buster]

Interesting since this is what Novii states:
"What API category are SynNova products in and why?
SynNova SSBO is classified as a Group III API base oil. SynNova meets all of the requirements of API 1509 documentation for base oil classification of saturates >90%, aromatics <10%, sulfur <0.03%, and viscosity index >120."

According to their other literature, it's an SSBO which almost sounds like Group V.

SynNova: Sustainable Synthetic Base Oil (SSBO)

100% renewable, plant-derived, synthetic base oil with category-leading stability and performance. Drop-in ready to meet the toughest challenges.

novvi.com

Interesting. Hmmm I don't know.

 

[MolaKule]

Unreal...well not surprising really. Going by molecular structure I can see NOVVI being a IV...

So what is the Novvi Synova molecular structure that proves it is a PAO molecular structure versus a Group III's molecular structure?

 

[buster]

My thought was initially was the purity they mention, but would it be more of a V? I think you're right. Similar to RLI? It sounds like they have the license though.

 

[ScarletKnight144]

Interesting since this is what Novii states:
"What API category are SynNova products in and why?
SynNova SSBO is classified as a Group III API base oil. SynNova meets all of the requirements of API 1509 documentation for base oil classification of saturates >90%, aromatics <10%, sulfur <0.03%, and viscosity index >120."

According to their other literature, it's an SSBO which almost sounds like Group V.

SynNova: Sustainable Synthetic Base Oil (SSBO)

100% renewable, plant-derived, synthetic base oil with category-leading stability and performance. Drop-in ready to meet the toughest challenges.

novvi.com

What confuses me is the molecular structure clearly shows the SSBO is a hydrocarbon, not an ester. If it was an ester, it would go into GP V. So the discussion should be around ‘GP III or GP IV’. Am I missing something?

 

[MolaKule]

@buster "My thought was initially was the purity they mention, but would it be more of a V? I think you're right. Similar to RLI? It sounds like they have the license though."

I was hoping you had a link to the exact Synova molecule.

"At this time, Evolve reports that the API has not directly offered a rationale for its decision, nor has it engaged in discussions with them. Jason Wells, the Chief Technical Officer of Novvi, stated, “During a brief discussion with API, the organization indicated that its decision was based on product stewardship information related to the European Union’s Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), which they believe aligns more closely with PAO. Novvi has been seeking a follow-up meeting for several months to discuss the reasoning behind categorizing SynNova as Group IV and has requested a follow-up meeting to go through Novvi’s rationale for categorizing SynNova as Group III. Wells said he was surprised that API acted without prior consultation with either Novvi or its customers.”

My comment: When has the EU ever cared about the health of the US chemical industry or supported US innovation?

"Novvi states that it sought the advice of some of the world’s leading base stock specialists concerning its classification decision and that the product aligns with the criteria for a Group III base stock. Additionally, its production method and the licensed process technology are typical of a Group III base stock."

The API needs to state publicly and by what method they used to determine Synova was a group IV. So far, apparently the API only have some garbage from the European Union’s Registration, Evaluation, Authorization, and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) group, and haven't actually analyzed it themselves.

If I were Novii, I would send samples of the Synova base stocks to leading Physical Chemists in North and South America and Belgium and have them use not only FFTIR, but NMR Carbon and NMR hydrogen analysis in order to settle this issue.

Addendum: See Figure 3 of this paper for an example of a C-NMR Spectrum of Lube Base Oil

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jpi/48/6/48_6_365/_pdf/-char/en

[It appears that the Synova lubricant has its basis as trans-β-farnesene, produced by fermentation and synthesis].

 

[ScarletKnight144]

Hey @MolaKule, the farnesene molecule was an earlier form of Novvi's base stock, but not SynNova. See https://novvi.com/products/synnova/ and then the TDS.

 

[MolaKule]

Hey @MolaKule, the farnesene molecule was an earlier form of Novvi's base stock, but not SynNova. See https://novvi.com/products/synnova/ and then the TDS.

OK.

So has this PAO vs Group III issue been settled?

"What API category are SynNova products in and why?
SynNova SSBO is classified as a Group III API base oil. SynNova meets all of the requirements of API 1509 documentation for base oil classification of saturates >90%, aromatics <10%, sulfur <0.03%, and viscosity index >120."