3SOF

__


Geotec Thermal Generators, Inc
http://www.geo-tec.net/

Richcorp Inc.
"We are pleased to announce that we are now a division of Geotec, Inc. (a public company). We are pursuing the gasification of the asphaltite and the other business interests that we have developed in Argentina."
http://www.richcorp.net/
http://www.rich-labs.com/

========== Share Structure == Updated on 03/24/05 ================================================
1. Authorized Common shares: 250 Million
2. Authorized Preferred Shares: 10 Million
3. Outstanding shares: November 19, 2004 = 37,456,723
4. Addition shares issued with 8K filed on 02/28/05:
a. 82 Million common shares
b. 900,000 Preferred converting into 90 Million Common
5. Additional shares issued with 8K filed on 03/18/05
a. 21 Million Restricted shares for 3 Million tons of coal
6. 240 Million outstanding: 37,456,723 plus 82 Million plus 90 Million plus 21 Million plus 8 Million
7. Tradable float: 27,106,697 -- outstanding as of 11/19/04 were 37,456,723 shares less Rick's previous shares of 10,349,992 which are in lock up for five years.
8. Five year lock up and restricted shares: 82 Million plus 90 Million plus Rick's (CEO) previous shares of 10,349,992, equals 182,349,992 shares.
9. 10,000 Preferred issued with 8K of 03/23/05 (Convert into 1 Million common)

** Keep in mind that all but about 27 Million shares are either under a 5 year lock up or restricted.
===============================================================================
State the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common equity, as of the latest practicable date:
210,956,723 shares of common stock are issued and outstanding as of Marc 31, 2005

210,956,723 shares of Common Stock as of August 15, 2005.
===============================================================================

After the Telco Acquisiton was canceled, in August 2004, Geotec management has been moving the company in a new direction.

Some key points:
1. Expanding the management team, bringing in the expertise and talents needed for this new direction.
2. Acquired Kodiak Production, Inc.
3. Acquired assets in the form of millions of tons of coal.
4. Acquired Richcorp, Inc.
5. Shares issued for these acquisitions are in a five year lock up.
6. TecEnergy, Geotec's associated company.
7. Board of Directors approved share buybacks, (a) up to 10 million shares to fund ESOP program; (b)up to 10 million to repurchase and retire.

These seven points might yield a couple themes:
a. Acquire assets to produce income.
b. Limit the number of shares that can be traded.

8K dated July 26, 2005

"As the result of the execution of the Agreement by the parties, Geotec obtains 100% voting control over RICH and its ownership rights to reserves of coking coal in Argentina exceeding 200,000,000 tons, as represented by RICH. Accordingly, the effect of the Agreement is to provide Geotec with the ability to control of over 200,000,000 tons of coke quality coal (asphaltite) and generate revenue to RICH/Geotec from the commercial exploitation of such commodity. The quality of the mined material is represented to be approximate 21-22,000 BTU per ton of asphaltite."

Several pictures of the asphaltite in the area:

Double Veins: These veins of asphaltite are around 29 meters wide and 50 meters in depth.


Impressive amount of asphaltite.


A Vein of Asphaltite exposed by exploratory mining.

For 2005 GETC has been locked between a trading range of Support area at .12-.13 and Resistance area at .18-.20 with most days of small volume, a few zero volume, and some days of nice volume.

Thursday, Aug 29 had volume of 105,600 shares. The MMs took the Bid down to .12 before the market opened and Ask to .15. Trading was on the Bid all day. The Ask was at .15 and then late in the day the Ask moved to .13 and a little while later two trades on the Ask for 6,000 shares. About 95,000 shares traded between 2:51pm - 2:54pm on the Bid. Did the MMs know there was a big seller so they took the quote down?

Closed the day quoted at .13 x .16.

Rec. Time Action Price Volume
3:51:08 PM Ask 0.16  5000 
3:50:42 PM Ask 0.17  5000 
3:50:38 PM Bid 0.13  5000 
3:50:38 PM Ask 0.18  5000 
3:50:38 PM Trade 0.13  5000 
3:50:20 PM Bid 0.12  5000 
3:46:16 PM Trade 0.13  1000 
3:38:18 PM Bid 0.125  5000 
3:09:02 PM Bid 0.12  5000 
2:54:40 PM Trade 0.12  40000 
2:54:18 PM Bid 0.11  5000 
2:54:18 PM Trade 0.12  10000 
2:53:14 PM Trade 0.125  10000 
2:53:10 PM Trade 0.12  10000 
2:52:38 PM Trade 0.12  5000 
2:51:50 PM Trade 0.12  3300 
2:51:50 PM Trade 0.12  13000 
2:51:50 PM Trade 0.12  4800 
2:51:44 PM Ask 0.13  5000 
1:26:44 PM Trade 0.12  1000 
12:12:38 PM Bid 0.12  10000 
12:09:24 PM Trade 0.12  500 
11:19:48 AM Trade 0.12  1000 
9:13:36 AM Bid 0.12  5000 
9:13:34 AM Ask 0.15  5000 
9:13:28 AM Ask 0.18  5000 

  Great info posts.  Have you traded the range at all...is it easy to get in and out w/low volume? Coal is currently yet another good energy play...I'll check this one out. 

Quote from: runforthedoor on September 30, 2005, 09:00:49 AM

  Great info posts.  Have you traded the range at all...is it easy to get in and out w/low volume? Coal is currently yet another good energy play...I'll check this one out. 

I have not traded GETC. The MMs normally keep a wide spread. During 2005 there were a couple times when the Bid briefly moved to the .16-.175 area.

I have been accumulating shares and recently bought more at .15.

Geotec has always had big plans or expectations but they have faced many challenges and were not able to deliver. I will list some of the major ones:
1. In 2000 announced an equity funding which was canceled a couple months later without taking any funds or issuing shares. Geotec learned their stock was being naked shorted. The shares issued with this equity funding could have been used to cover at a much lower price.
2. Geotec issued a couple PRs related to the naked short in their stock.
3. Lawsuit by UltraDiamond. Claimed they had a right to Geotec's technology but the courts ruled completely in Dan Pepe's favor, president of Geotec. Geotec was on hold during this lawsuit since it is difficult to get customers when you may not have rights to the technology.
4. Geotec with no funding, depressed share price tries to form joint ventures with small or start up companies and they would be funding Geotec. None of the joint ventures got their needed funding and none moved forwards with their plans.
5. Geotec went with a plan to acquire TelcoEnergy and Telco needed to get funding to complete the acquisition. Telco did not get their funding as required and the acquisition was terminated.

Geotec is now on the plan I mentioned above in my post of what I consider to be key points.

GETC shareholder gets answers to questions about coal.

You may have read on several boards posts by "Landlord", also goes by "Special-K100" on RB, and his charges concerning Geotec and their Illinois coal. Roatan2 did a wonderful job in getting information and answers.

Read: 1. Letter from Geotec
2. Attachment 1: Bergmann Letter
3. Attachment 2: State of Illinois Tax returns (You will need to follow the link.)

roatan2
Veteran Member
*****
Posts: 7166
Re: GETC-

I had communication with Geotec management to follow up on some false and misleading statements that have been posted on other Internet message boards about the company and its current deals. Below is the response I received to my query from Geotec along with the two related attachments:


=======
Dear xxxxx,

Thank you for your comments and for bringing to our attention the issues of ownership as stated on the Internet.

First, the attached letter from Mr. Joe Bergmann, dated May 9, 2005, clearly states the ownership in the name of Lancaster International. The process is also clearly stated in Mr. Bergmann's letter.

Second, the ownership is certainly confirmed by the attached tax returns for the State of Illinois.

We see no irregularity. We believe this communication verifies the information in our filings with the SEC and any press releases that Geotec has made.

Sincerely yours,

Geotec Thermal Generators, Inc.
======

Attachment 1: Bergmann Letter

Consolidated Resources Group, Inc.
_____________________________________________________________________
5858 W. Atlantic Avenue / Delray Beach, Fl 33484 / 561-265-2382 / Fax: 561-265-1880

May 9, 2005


Mr. W. Richard Lueck, CEO
GeoTec, Inc.
110 E. Atlantic Avenue, Suite 2000
Delray Beach, Fl 33444

Dear Rick:

This letter is in response to our recent telephone conversation as to the ownership of the Fiatt Illinois coal site.

1.) On November 12, 2003. Lancaster International Corporation acquired the Fiatt coal site (approximately 500 acres) in Fulton, Illinois via Quit Claim Deed #34845. On March 19, 2004, a corrected Quit Claim Deed #37808 was recorded with the County. The Quit Claim Deeds give Lancaster International ownership of the property, and all mineral rights and assets thereon. As further proof of ownership of the property, attached are the real estate tax bills issued by Fulton County, State of Illinois to Lancaster International for all eleven parcels into which the site is divided.

2.) The property is currently in receivership by the State of Illinois , which it has been for some time. This gives the State control over what happens on the property, not ownership of the property. Once the permit application is filed and the Reclamation Bond is posted, the State releases control of what is done on the property, because it will have approved the permit application.

3.) The process that is going to be used by the corporation processing the coal will be detailed in the application for the permit and, as previously noted, we are very confident that this process, which requires no water, will be approved by the State and County. The original estimation on the Reclamation Bond was between $12-$15 million dollars. Therefore, the $4 million bond that was communicated by Al Claybourne, is well within the estimate.

It appears that the confusion is between ownership and receivership, and until permit application is filed, with the bond posted, the State of Illinois would technically be in receivership of the property. Hopefully, this clears up any confusion that came about in conversation with Al Claybourne.


Sincerely,

Joseph R. Bergmann
President & CEO

Enc. (Real Estate Tax Bills)
CC: Raymond Lancaster, Lancaster International Corporation

=======================

Attachment 2: State of Illinois Tax returns

http://www.hotstockmarket.com/board/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=Stockstips;action=display;num=1098497986;start=255
(scroll near the bottom of page 18 to read "Attachment 2"!)

My next post will be highlights from the Moss and Johnson report titled "Appraisal" filed as a Document/exhibit with the 8K filed on 02/28/05.

Take special note that the price of the coal, in the report is $20 per ton. This was the spot price of this coal, at the time of the report. Spot price has recently varied between $35 and $39 per ton. Geotec's order for this coal is at $36 spot price. Check the filings, saying it can cost about half that to move the coal.

The government says that it will take $millions to move and reclaim the site in which the coal sits. Geotec will have costs and what might be the net coal prices, as it has to be washed and cleaned before delivery.

The report says that things have to be done to the property...No surprise.

The analysis and engineering work has been done. The value is stated and speaks for itself. The issues are also addressed.

The Illinois government wants the coal moved and the site cleaned. What do you think 18-20 million tons of coal is worth, at $30+ per ton? Is this enough to pay for the cost?

Waste coal, laid up, not worth much?

Is that what it says in the Moss and Johnson report?

EX-99 "Appraisal" of Form 8-K as of 02/28/05 filed 01/03/05
http://www.secinfo.com/d13eFe.z5c.8.htm

Coal Property Appraisal for
Lancaster International Corporation
of properties located in
Fulton County, Illinois, USA

December 15, 2003

Prepared By:
MOSS, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATED, LTD
Consulting Engineers
P.O. Box 3296
Springfield, Illinois 32708-3296
(217) 529-5534

(****** some highlights of the coal value from the Moss, Johnson report *****)

The four Tracks noted earlier in this report and shown in Figure 3 are listed below to identify the volumes of reserves available:

Valuation: Total Tonnage (80%) Recoverable) @$20.00/ton

Track 1:
127 acres, more of less, of surface area
Thickness – 45 feet average
Using 2000#/sht tn
************ Total tonnage - 6,224,635 tons -------------------- $99,594,160

Track 2:
70 acres, more or less, of surface area
Thickness – 70 feet average
Using 2000#/sht tn
************ Total tonnage - 5,336,100 tons--------------------- $85,377,600

Track 3:
130 acres, more or less, of surface area
Thickness – 50 feet average
Using 2000#/sht tn
************ Total tonnage – 7,078,500 tons ------------------- $113,256,000

Track 4:
100 acres, more or less, of surface area
Thickness – 50 feet average
Using 2000#/sht tn
************ Total tonnage – 4,356,000 ------------------------ $69,696,000


*********** TOTAL OF FOUR TRACKS -------------------- 22,995,235 tons

*********** @80% recoverability ------------------------------ 18,396,188 tons

****** Total Dollar Value of Recoverable Reserves ----------- $367,923,760

The ability of the recoverable fines to be used as an acceptable high quality fuel is substantiated by the results of the physical testing conducted on the coal. As received, conditions of the tested coal revealed an ash content of 9 percent to 24 percent. Sulfur ranged from 1.5 percent to 2.97 percent. BTU value range ranged 7910 to 10500. Samples also were tested for volatiles and carbon content. The test showed that this material was capable of producing 33 percent to 38 percent volatiles and 37 percent to 43 percent carbon. Average fusion temperature was 2270 degrees F.

Studies conducted of the processed material prior to burning by the City of Springfield revealed even higher quality results due to the reduction of ash content prior to burning. Therefore, in order to utilize the resources located on the Lancaster International Corporation properties to their highest potential, portable washers, dryers, and/or palletizing equipment are to be used, improving the marketability of the product.

MARKETING:

In reviewing the reports conducted by other firms and the data collected during our investigation, we find that the coal reserves located on the Lancaster International Corporation properties have two principal advantages:

A.      All of the properties lay in the heart of the Western Illinois coal fields where medium quality, average sulfur coal is predominant.

B.      Extensive road networks and river systems provide competitive sophisticated, and dependable modes of transportation to market areas.


APPRAISED VALUE:

The appraised value of the properties owned by Lancaster International Corporation of Maitland, Florida is based on all of the considered factors pertaining to this evaluation.

1, Current value of Land and Improvements:

500 acres of land, more of less
One two-story dwelling & one mobile home
Four large metal buildings

1.      1. 100 ft x 200 ft
2.      2. 40 ft x 80 ft
3.      3. 100 ft x 300 ft
4.      4. 80 ft x 80 ft

Present Market Value ------------------- $500.000.00

2. Surface Reserves Valuation:

Using the present market value of $20.00 per ton times the estimated recoverable tonnage of eighteen million three hundred and sixty-nine thousand one hundred and eighty-eight tons (18,369,188 ) as defined herein, the present market value is determined to be:

Present Market Value ------------------ $367,995,760.00

This appraisal, placing the greatest amount of validity on the Surface Reserves Valuation shown above, determines the market value of the mineral assets, the land and the improvements of Lancaster International Corporation of Maitland, Florida to be Three Hundred and Sixty-eight Million, Four Hundred and Ninety-five Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty and 00/100 Dollars ($368,495,760.00).

US Govt Sponsored Peak Oil Report Draws Disturbing Conclusions

By Michael J. DesLauriers
29 Jul 2005 at 10:46 PM EDT


TORONTO (ResourceInvestor.com) -- A 67-page report released earlier this year on the subject of Peak Oil and sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy drew several conclusions:

1. World Oil Peaking is Going to Happen
2. Oil Peaking Could Cost the U.S. Economy Dearly
3. Oil Peaking Presents a Unique Challenge ("it will be abrupt and revolutionary")
4. The Problem is Liquid Fuels (growth in demand mainly from transportation sector)
5. Mitigation Efforts Will Require Substantial Time
6. Both Supply and Demand Will Require Attention
7. It Is a Matter of Risk Management (mitigating action must come before the peak)
8. Government Intervention Will be Required
9. Economic Upheaval is Not Inevitable ("given enough lead-time, the problems are soluble with existing technologies.")
10. More Information is Needed

Based on the report (Peaking of World Oil Production: Impacts, Mitigation, & Risk Management) we are probably in quite a bit of trouble if, as some analysts suggest, peak oil is already upon us. The study was led by Dr. Robert Hirsch who is a Senior Energy Program Advisor at SAIC (Science Applications International Corporation), and who has had a long career in Energy milieu in a variety of important positions.

3 Scenarios

The study envisions three scenarios for dealing with a peak oil reality: scenario one involves action not taken until peaking occurs, and scenarios two and three deal with action taken ten and twenty years prior thereto. The conclusions follow:

Waiting until world oil production peaks before taking crash program action leaves the world with a significant liquid fuel deficit for more than two decades.

Initiating a mitigation crash program 10 years before world oil peaking helps considerably but still leaves a liquid fuels shortfall roughly a decade after the time that oil would have peaked.

Initiating a mitigation crash program 20 years before peaking appears to offer the possibility of avoiding a world liquid fuels shortfall for the forecast period.
"The obvious conclusion from this analysis is that with adequate, timely mitigation, the costs of peaking can be minimized. If mitigation were to be too little, too late, world supply/demand balance will be achieved through massive demand destruction (shortages), which would translate to significant economic hardship, as discussed earlier."

Based on these conclusions, the global economy could stand to suffer incalculable consequences if peak oil is already upon us. Apparently, the world seems to need at least twenty years notice and a serious coordinated effort in order to truly avoid sever economic pain.

According to Hirsch, "The world has never confronted a problem like this, and the failure to act on a timely basis could have debilitating impacts on the world economy. Risk minimization requires the implementation of mitigation measures well prior to peaking. Since it is uncertain when peaking will occur, the challenge is indeed significant."

Oil Sands

Like many of the other experts whose opinions have been aired through Resource Investor, Hirsch would appear to find the much-vaunted Canadian oil sands inadequate, though admittedly they have the potential make a positive dent in the problem.

The report states, "In addition to needing a substitute for natural gas for processing oil sands, there are a number of other major challenges facing the expansion of Canadian oil sands production, including water81 and diluent availability, financial capital, and environmental issues, such as SOX and NOX emissions, waste water cleanup, and brine, coke, and sulfur disposition. In addition, because Canada is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol and because oil sands production results in significant CO2 emissions per barrel, there may be related constraints yet to be fully evaluated."

"The current Canadian vision is to produce a total of about 5 MM bpd of products from oil sands by 2030. This is to include about 3 MM bpd of synthetic crude oil from which refined fuels can be produced, with the remainder being poorer quality bitumen that could be used for energy, power, and/or hydrogen and petrochemicals production. 5 MM bpd would represent a five-fold increase from current levels of production. Another estimate of future production states that if all proposed oil sands projects proceed on schedule, industry could produce 3.5 MM bpd by 2017, representing 2 MM bpd of synthetic crude and 1.5 MM bpd of unprocessed lower-grade bitumen."

"It is also worth noting that the bitumen yield from oil sands surface mining operations is about 0.6 barrels per ton of mined material, excluding overburden removal. This is similar to the yield from a good quality oil shale, but is less than Fisher-Tropsch liquid yields from coal, which is about 2.6 barrels per ton of coal."

Conclusion

Readers of Resource Investor are far more aware of the energy related challenges ahead than the average man in the street who believes that high oil and gas prices are the result of Iraq, OPEC, and some underhanded, self-serving conspiracy involving Bush, Cheney and Halliburton. Unfortunately, a sound knowledge and understanding of the situation makes us no less vulnerable.

While the specific implications of peak oil remain unclear, there can be no mistaking that any period between involving a lapse in adequate energy supply will be met with economic hardship for the global economy. If peak oil is not upon us already, the chances of minimizing future damage are fair and it is certainly encouraging to know that government authorities are taking the threat seriously. Any way you slice it however, the economy and the consumer are unlikely to escape unscathed through the transition period into other energy sources as the world comes to grips with a new evolving paradigm in satisfying its needs for energy consumption.

http://www.resourceinvestor.com/pebble.asp?relid=11748

The New York Times today reports that Bush officials, supposedly "furious over Saudi Arabia's handling of the investigations after 9/11," nonetheless continue to say that "the alternatives to Saudi Arabian [oil] are fewer today than seemed to be the case just three years ago." But if you look at how the Bush administration is ignoring major domestic oil potential at home, it seems more like the White House is trying to justify its all-too-close relationship with the Saudis.

As the Billings Gazette reported last week, there is a huge potential to turn Montana's massive parcel of coal into oil, using decades old coal gasification technology proven to work. Right now, "Montana has 120 billion tons of state and federal coal reserves under its surface" and "115 billion tons of that coal is recoverable." Using the technology, "one ton of coal would produce 1.5 barrels of diesel fuel." In other words, that is one helluva lot of fuel.

Before you start raising environmental concerns, consider this: the fuels created from gasification "are also clean - no sulfur, mercury or arsenic." Sure, it isn't perfect, but to get us off foreign oil we can't afford to only be pie-in-the-sky - and this is pretty good. Because while coal gasification still produces a gas-based fuel, it is far cleaner than any fuel used today, and the gasification process itself does not create emissions either.

Up until now, America hasn't explored using coal gasification because it is not profitable unless oil is above $35 a barrel. But now oil is at around $60 a barrel, and at that level to stay. Combining coal gasification, with solar, wind, ethanol energy and hybrid technology really means we can get our country off foreign oil. But it is up to our leaders to take the initiative to make it happen.

Saturday, August 06, 2005

On Tuesday, July 26, 2005, the Company executed a Share Exchange Agreement with
Richcorp, Inc., a Florida corporation, and Mr. William Richardson, President of
Richcorp. Pursuant to the Agreement, Mr. Richardson agreed, as owner and/or     
proxy holder for other Richcorp shareholders, to convey and transfer to Geotec,
those shares of Richcorp common stock (referred to as the "Purchased Shares")   
representing the majority voting and all of the equity interest in Richcorp.   
Accordingly, Geotec is acquiring the equity ownership of Richcorp. The Agreement
contains further provisions for the acquisition of all issued and outstanding   
equity interests of Richcorp from remaining Richcorp shareholders. The Agreement
has an effective date of August 1, 2005 and provides that the Purchased Shares 
shall be delivered to Geotec on August 1, 2005.                                 

As consideration for the Purchased Shares, Geotec is tendering ten thousand     
(10,000) shares of its preferred stock (the "Geotec Preferred Stock") to       
Richcorp shareholders. The Geotec Preferred Stock will be distributed on a pro 
rata basis to Mr. Richardson, those shareholders for which Mr. Richardson serves
as a proxy, and all other shareholders of Richcorp that elect to exchange their
equity interest in Richcorp for Geotec Preferred Stock. The Geotec Preferred   
Stock will be issued and held in escrow pending the share exchange scheduled for
August 1, 2006, August 1, 2007 and August 1, 2008.                             

The Geotec Preferred Stock will contain preferences that entitle the holders of
the Geotec Preferred Stock to a pro rata interest in a minimum of 2,100,000     
shares of Geotec common stock, at a minimum, and up to 10,500,000 shares of     
Geotec common stock, based upon a formula for sales and resulting profits of the
Richcorp Division of Geotec. This formula is scaled from $20,000,000 to         
$80,000,000 in annual profits for the maximum shares to be earned.             

The Agreement provides that Richardson and Richcorp shall indemnify and hold   
harmless Geotec for various matters that may arise after execution of the       
Agreement and which relate to conduct occurring prior to execution of the       
Agreement.                                                                     

As the result of the execution of the Agreement by the parties, Geotec obtains 
100% voting control over Richcorp and its ownership rights to reserves of coking
coal in Argentina exceeding 200,000,000 tons, as represented by Richcorp.       
Accordingly, the effect of the Agreement is to provide Geotec with the ability 
to control of over 200,000,000 tons of coke quality coal (asphaltite) and       
generate revenue to Richcorp/Geotec from the commercial exploitation of such   
commodity. The quality of the mined material is represented to be approximate   
21-22,000 BTU per ton of asphaltite, with some deposits exceeding 31,000 BTU per
ton.                                                                           

In addition, Richcorp, Inc. has been pilot the capabilities of Dr. Richardson's
other enzyme based processes for the washing and high grading of Asphaltite The
material is a very rich source of hydrocarbons and has provided excellent       
results in the laboratory with regard to the types of hydrocarbons and the range
of products that can be derived from these hydrocarbons. Testing using formula 
RLP-22, an enzyme formulation has proven that the hydrocarbons can not only be 
extracted, but the resulting products can be virtually metal free, due to       
RLP-22's ability to extract the metals and minerals from the diesel fuel       
produced and the fixed carbons that result from the process.                   

Richcorp, Inc. holds the rights to the enzyme formulations. These formulations 
are produced from industrial fermentations specifically designed to induce or   
inhibit the release of specific types of enzymes into an aqueous solution. These
processes are an Intellectual Property and are protected as a Trade Secret. The
enzyme processes and the supporting mechanical designs work in tandem to produce
a desired result. The desired result may be the accelerated germination and     
growth of plants, the degradation of clays to alter soil structure for a       
properly developed root mass by the subject vegetation, the removal of         
hydrocarbons from soil or the removal of organo-metallic compounds in a fuel   
targeted for the consumer market. Richcorp will provide its technology to the   
commercial market through licensing of the technology for a particular purpose 
and the development of processes for the treatment, remediation or other       
applications that these formulations can be used to correct or change for a     
particular purpose.                                                             

These enzyme formulations are designed to produce enzymes that specifically     
attack the desired molecular bonds to detach the target contaminate. This       
process is realized by the interaction of several enzyme groups known as       
decombinanase, transferase and recombinase.                                     

Further, the Company has studied the gasification capability of the Asphaltite 
and has determined that up to 7.5 Barrels of Oil Equivalent, in gas, may be able
to be produced per ton of Asphaltite. The Company believes that TecEnergy's     
gasification equipment and processes can process about 10 tons per hour of     
Asphaltite, with a 20 hour a day operation. Richcorp's web site is             
www.richcorp.net.

Very nice 8K!

Effective date is August 1, 2005

1. Richcorp, Inc. becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of Geotec. Check out the potential Richcorp brings to Geotec.
http://www.richcorp.net/

2. 200 Million tons of coal.....this coal needs to be mined.
"As the result of the execution of the Agreement by the parties, Geotec obtains 100% voting control over RICH and its ownership rights to reserves of coking coal in Argentina exceeding 200,000,000 tons, as represented by RICH. Accordingly, the effect of the Agreement is to provide Geotec with the ability to control of over 200,000,000 tons of coke quality coal (asphaltite) and generate revenue to RICH/Geotec from the commercial exploitation of such commodity. The quality of the mined material is represented to be approximate 21-22,000 BTU per ton of asphaltite."

3. Richcorp shareholders willing to lock up their GETC shares. Confidence in the performance by Richcorp and Geotec over the next five years.
"Notwithstanding the above, all of the shares earned shall be subject to the same terms and conditions of the Buyer's share lock up agreement, which extends for 5 years, until February, 2010, which has been filed with the EDGAR service, for the Securities and Exchange Commission."

4. The amount of shares isssued to richcorp depends on the profit scale from $20 million to $80 million per year. Richcorp must believe they can reach the high end of the profit targets, thus earning near the max shares possible. Sure gives them an incentive.
"The Geotec Preferred Stock will contain preferences that entitle the holders of the Geotec Preferred Stock to a pro rata interest in a minimum of 2,100,000 shares of Geotec common stock, at a minimum, and up to 10,500,000 shares of Geotec common stock, based upon a formula for sales and resulting profits of RICH. (Scaled from $20,000,000 to $80,000,000 in annual profits for the maximum shares to be earned.)"

Lets look at the coal in Argentina, the high quality, then look at China,  the coking coal in Australia, and Montana coal.

Geotec/Richcorp's asphaltite in Argentina is of higher quality...less sulfur, less ash and higher percent burnable, big difference.

(The following comparison of equivalent barrels output are taken from information in my previous posts)

What are the possible oil equivalents?
1. Canadian Oil Sands and Shale yields = about .6 barrel of oil per ton[/u].

2. Coal = will yield about 2.6 barrels of oil per ton[/u].

3. Asphaltite = the Company has studied the gasification capability of the Asphaltite and has determined that up to 7.5 Barrels of Oil Equivalent, in gas, may be able to be produced per ton of Asphaltite.

4. Montana coal = one ton of coal would produce 1.5 barrels of diesel fuel[/u].

"the effect of the Agreement is to provide Geotec with the ability
to control of over 200,000,000 tons of coke quality coal (asphaltite) and
generate revenue to Richcorp/Geotec from the commercial exploitation of such
commodity. The quality of the mined material is represented to be approximate
21-22,000 BTU per ton of asphaltite, with some deposits exceeding 31,000 BTU per
ton."

"Further, the Company has studied the gasification capability of the Asphaltite
and has determined that up to 7.5 Barrels of Oil Equivalent, in gas, may be able
to be produced per ton of Asphaltite. The Company believes that TecEnergy's
gasification equipment and processes can process about 10 tons per hour of
Asphaltite, with a 20 hour a day operation. Richcorp's web site is
www.richcorp.net."

"Richcorp must compete with a limited number of asphaltite mines in Argentina and
with coking coal from Brazil, China and other locations worldwide. The key and
leading factor of the Richcorp material is the 97% carboneous concentration, and
zero ash concentration, which is unique, worldwide."

Look at the assays and geologist's report - Asphaltite Laboratory Analysis:
http://www.secinfo.com/d13eFe.zxz.d.htm

You have to look at the amount of bitumin in the material:
"The material is a solid bituminous hydrocarbon with high caloric content (8700 Cal) with a fusion point of 175° C, an ignition point of 340 ° and an initial boiling point of 350 ° to 360 °. 0.28 percent ash 38 percent fixed carbon and 61.5 percent volatiles. 99% soluble in Carbon Disulfide. 98% soluble in Toluene."


"As the Billings Gazette reported last week, there is a huge potential to turn Montana's massive parcel of coal into oil, using decades old coal gasification technology proven to work. Right now, "Montana has 120 billion tons of state and federal coal reserves under its surface" and "115 billion tons of that coal is recoverable." Using the technology, "one ton of coal would produce 1.5 barrels of diesel fuel." In other words, that is one helluva lot of fuel."