Ann: Chief Executive Officer appointment, page-14

While the tech may seem impressive, the biggest problem with Envirosuite IMO is that most companies will not use it unless they are forced to by law as it is more cost effective to just hide any problems and pay the necessary fine if they ever get caught.

The recent Thames Water incident in the UK is the perfect example. The article stated that Thames Water had been issued with the largest fine in UK history for polluting the water supply of a town (if I recall correctly) and this so called 'biggest fine in UK history' was 1 million pounds. While the amount may seem substantial, it probably wasn't very much for a company like Thames Water especially considering the fact that the fine was a once off event and the fact that Thames Water had been operating in that town for many many years and would have made more than enough money from that town to pay off the fine many times over.

Now imagine if Thames had to pay Envirosuite AUD$80,000 per module per annum to eliminate that risk. How many modules would it require to cover that town. It wouldn't take many years for the cost of Envirosuite to exceed the once off 1 million pound fine that Thames Water had to pay. So i'm not surprised that nothing much eventuated after the Thames Water trials.

Don't get me wrong, I am still hopeful that they will hopefully be more successful in the US where the environmental bodies there actually generate revenue from fines issued to company's that breach their environmental responsibilities. Hopefully, Envirosuite can add more value by identifying enviromental offenders more quickly and frequently thereby increasing revenues.

It is however taking a lot longer than I expected and that is frustrating because of the opportunity costs involved.