Item 1. Business
Item 1. Business.
General
We are a provider of specialty activated carbon technologies, delivering innovative solutions for air and water purification. We provide patented and proprietary technologies for mercury emissions capture to the coal-fired utility sector, and are developing disruptive water purification technologies with a specialization on forever chemicals such as PFAS and PFOS.
Products and Services
Mercury Emissions
We provide mercury capture solutions for coal-fired power plants driven by our patented two-part SEA® process using a powerful combination of science and engineering. Our leading-edge services have been shown to achieve mercury emissions removal at a significantly lower cost and with less operational impact to coal-fired power plants than other used methods, while maintaining and/or increasing power plant output and preserving the marketability of byproducts for beneficial use. We design systems and materials tailored and formulated specifically to each customer’s coal-fired units. North America is currently the largest market for our emissions technologies. The market for mercury removal from power plant emissions in the United States has largely been driven by federal regulations. The MATS rule, proposed by the EPA in May 2011 and which became effective in April 2012, is intended to reduce air emissions of heavy metals, including Hg, from all major U.S. power plants burning coal or oil, which are the leading source of non-natural mercury emissions in the U.S. Our mercury removal technologies and systems achieve mercury removal levels which meet or exceed the MATS requirements with lower cost and plant systems impacts than typical PAC or BAC sorbent injection systems. Our products have been shown to be successful across a myriad of fuel and system types, tunable to any configuration, and environmentally friendly, allowing for the recycling of fly ash for beneficial use.
Our SEA® technology provides total mercury control with solutions that are based on a thorough scientific understanding of actual and probable interactions involved in mercury capture in coal-fired flue gas. A complete understanding of the complexity of mercury-sorbent-flue gas interactions and chemisorption mechanisms allows for optimal control strategy and product formulation, resulting in effective mercury capture. Combined with a thorough proprietary audit of the plant and its configuration and instrumentation, we believe our complete science and engineering approach for mercury-sorbent-flue gas interactions are well-understood, highly predictive, and critical to delivering total mercury control.
We believe that a significant percentage of coal-fired power plants in the United States have adopted and are infringing upon our two-part Sorbent Enhancement Additive (SEA®) process for mercury removal from coal-fired power plants.
Beginning in 2019, we began to actively enforce our patent rights against unauthorized use of our patented technologies, and have since initiated patent litigation in various jurisdictions against multiple infringers, claiming infringement of our patents related to our two-part process for mercury removal from coal-fired power plants. We view such litigation as a last resort. Our goal and overall strategy is to convert infringers to our supply chain of sorbent products for mercury removal, or otherwise license our patents to them on a non-exclusive basis in connection with their respective coal-fired power plants.
Water Treatment
In April 2024, the EPA under the Biden Administration issued the first-ever national, enforceable drinking water standard to protect communities from exposure to harmful PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals”. The rule established legally enforceable MCLs for six PFAS in drinking water: PFOA, PFOS, PFHxS, PFNA, and HFPO-DA as contaminants with individual MCLs, and PFAS mixtures containing at least two or more of PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS using a Hazard Index MCL to account for the combined and co-occurring levels of these PFAS in drinking water. Under the Rule, public water systems must monitor these PFAS and must complete initial monitoring by 2027, followed by ongoing compliance monitoring. Water systems must also provide the public with information on the levels of these PFAS in their drinking water beginning in 2027.
1
Table of Contents
In April 2024, we announced the introduction of our new water treatment business to address the growing potable (drinking) water market with next-generation sorbent technologies. These new solutions are being designed to use significantly less activated carbon, offering a more environmentally sustainable approach to water treatment while maintaining or improving contaminant removal performance. Our products target not only compliance with emerging PFAS regulations, but also broader opportunities in water quality improvement positioning us to serve a large and expanding market.
As part of this strategic pivot, we have invested in the commissioning of two state-of-the-art laboratory facilities—one in Pennsylvania and one in North Dakota—referred to as our “Design Centers.” The Design Centers are dedicated sites for water treatment innovation and development. Together, we believe these facilities represent the only known facilities that have integrated capability in North America to thermally reactivate spent GAC under controlled conditions and subsequently conduct RSSCTs to directly compare reactivated GAC performance against virgin carbon counterparts. This combination allows us to evaluate reactivated GAC as a sustainable and cost-effective alternative to virgin carbon and address key water utility questions including how to optimize media changeout schedules, strategies to reduce operational costs, and provide lab-based validation of treatment performance for PFAS and other contaminants.
These Design Centers will also function as a direct resource for the water treatment industry, offering thermal reactivation, contaminant analysis, and carbon performance evaluations. By enabling municipal and industrial utilities to lower compliance costs and improve operational efficiency, we expect to build strong technical credibility and customer engagement ahead of large-scale market adoption. Importantly, we believe our technology platform is not solely dependent on PFAS regulations as market demand for improved water treatment solutions is broad.
Our investment in our Design Centers also serves as the basis for our planned commercial thermal reactivation plants which we intend to open and operate in the future. Data generated from the Design Centers is being used to define permitting requirements, capital expenditure parameters, and projected operating costs accelerating the commercialization timeline while avoiding costly future reliance on third-party providers.
On May 14, 2025, the EPA under the new Trump Administration announced the agency will keep the regulations for PFOA and PFOS. As part of this action, the EPA also announced its intent to extend the PFOA and PFOS MCL compliance deadlines to 2031 and establish a federal exemption framework. Additionally, the EPA announced its intent to rescind the regulations and reconsider the regulatory determinations for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA/GenX), and the Hazard Index mixture of these three PFAS plus PFBS to ensure the determinations and any resulting drinking water regulation follow the SDWA process.
In light of evolving water regulations and funding dynamics, we believe the Company is well positioned to capture a meaningful share in the rapidly growing water treatment sector.
Marketing and Our Growth Strategy
Mercury Emissions
Our marketing efforts have principally focused on the North American market to date, and particularly the United States.
In the U.S. market, our success depends, in part, on the success of demonstrations performed with utility customers and the resulting contract awards to meet the MATS requirements in the long-term period and its operational performance with EGUs under contract.
In Canada, there are the 2000 Canada-wide Standards for Mercury Emissions and the 2006 Canada-wide Standards for Mercury Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Power Generation Plants among all the provinces which was initially implemented in 2010, with caps in mercury emissions for each of the provinces. We believe that we have the most effective technology for the EGUs and that we maintain a strong patent position for our mercury emissions technologies in Canada.
2
Table of Contents
Our marketing strategy is designed to grow our mercury capture solutions in the North American region by building and maintaining the reputation and trust of our work among its customers - specifically by carrying out successful demonstrations performed with utility customers and the resulting contract awards to meet the MATS requirements in the long-term period and sustaining our operational performance with EGUs under contract - and developing new, and refining our existing, unique emissions technologies. We believe that by offering proven and innovative service offerings, we can attract more customers and partners to our services, creating a network growth effect. We expect that the continuing pursuit of infringers of our patented technologies will yield further licensing and supply agreements.
We believe that these targeted marketing initiatives are the most efficient and cost-effective strategy to sustain the growth of both new and existing customers.
As of December 31, 2025, there were 16 EGUs in the U.S. that use our SEA® technologies and buy product from us.
Other Possible Markets for Our Emissions Technologies
In May 2017, the European Union and seven of its member states ratified the Minamata Convention on Mercury. The Minamata Convention on Mercury is a global treaty to protect human health and the environment from the adverse effects of mercury. This convention was a result of three years of meeting and negotiating, after which the text of the convention was approved by delegates representing approximately 140 countries in January 2013 in Geneva. As of December 31, 2025, 153 countries have joined the Convention. It is expected that over the next few decades, this international agreement will enhance the reduction of mercury pollution from the targeted activities responsible for the major release of mercury into the environment. Specific emissions limits are being developed by the European Union, although the timing of any enactment of such is uncertain. Any such regulations may lead to additional business opportunities for our mercury control technologies within the European Union although we do not currently pursue the European market and have no present plans to enter that market in the near term.
With regard to business opportunities in China and other Asian countries, there currently exists no regulatory requirement that mandates the use of any particular mercury capture or control technology. While regulatory authorities in these regions continue to evaluate air-emissions controls more broadly, the adoption of additional mercury-specific requirements, and the extent to which such requirements could create demand for our technologies, is uncertain and may not occur.
Water Treatment
Initially, we intend to focus our marketing efforts on municipalities that have limited resources and engineering experience and offer shaped activated carbons (including reactivated GAC), testing and consulting services.
While the initial focus for our water treatment technologies will be on the potable water market, we expect that our technologies will also be valuable for industrial wastewater treatment. Industrial wastewater is the liquid waste generated by industrial activities, including manufacturing, processing, and production facilities. It often contains pollutants such as organic matter, heavy metals, chemicals, oils, and other contaminants that must be treated before being discharged into the environment or reused. We believe our water treatment technologies will be well suited to address industrial wastewater challenges, providing contaminant removal and offering a practical pathway to management treatment costs.
We are developing a carbon rejuvenation process, referred to as Carbon Rejuvenation TM , focused on the thermal reactivation of spent GAC. In January 2026, we announced that we have conducted demonstrations of this process with regulated municipal water utilities at our Design Centers, which indicated that our thermally reactivated GAC performed comparably to virgin activated carbon in removing PFAS under the conditions tested. The demonstrations utilized spent GAC sourced from active utility systems and were evaluated against performance benchmarks routinely applied by those utilities. Results met expected treatment standards, which we believe supports the technical and commercial viability of our carbon rejuvenation process as an alternative to virgin carbon replacement.
3
Table of Contents
Our carbon rejuvenation process is expected to restore spent granular activated carbon for reuse, reduce reliance on virgin raw materials while lowering total lifecycle costs for customers through shorter transportation distances, reduce disposal requirements, and regional reuse within utility systems. Unlike traditional centralized reactivation models, our approach will emphasize regional deployment, expected to align with utility priorities around emissions reduction, localized supply chains, capital discipline, rate stability, and infrastructure resilience. We believe this regional reactivation model represents a differentiated solution that integrates environmental benefits directly into operating economics and supports broader commercialization opportunities.
During 2026, we plan to acquire property and construct a facility dedicated to the reactivation of GAC in support of our carbon rejuvenation initiative; however, there can be no assurance that such a facility will be developed on acceptable terms, or at all.
We also recently announced our SEA-IX TM nuclear-grade ion exchange resin product line, marking the Company’s entry into the high-purity ion exchange resin market. The SEA-IX line includes a full suite of resins engineered to meet the purity and performance requirements of nuclear power plant water systems. Due to the higher-grade specifications, SEA-IX resins are also well-suited for coal-fired power plants, industrial wastewater applications and municipal water treatment facilities.
Additional Business Opportunities
We also maintain a license with respect to certain intellectual property owned by Dakin Holdings Ltd., consisting of a proprietary compound of materials engineered to treat a boiler to improve the combustion process and thereby reduce overall emissions, while improving boiler efficiency during the combustion of all types of fuels at power plants (“Dakin IP”). We believe that the Dakin IP can be an effective supplement to our mercury emissions removal business at coal-fired power plants and provide an additional revenue stream utilizing our present infrastructure. However, there can be no assurance that such license will lead to any significant revenues. For additional information, see Part III, Item 13. “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions, and Director Independence”.
Industry Background and Governmental Regulations
The market for mercury removal from power plant emissions in the United States has largely been driven by federal regulations.
On December 21, 2011, the EPA announced MATS for power plants in the U.S. The MATS rule is intended to reduce air emissions of heavy metals, including Hg, from all major U.S. power plants burning coal or oil, which are the leading source of non-natural mercury emissions in the U.S. Existing power plants were granted three years (plus a potential one-year extension in cases of hardship, ruled on by state EPAs where the plant is domiciled) from April 16, 2012 to comply with the new emission limits. The MATS rule applies to EGUs that are larger than 25 MW that burn coal or oil for the purpose of generating electricity for sale and distribution through the national electric grid to the public, and includes investor-owned units, as well as units owned by the federal government, municipalities, and cooperatives that provide electricity for commercial, industrial, and residential uses. At the time that MATS was promulgated, there were approximately 1,250 coal-fired EGUs affected by this rule. Many EGUs have since shut down as a result of regulation and competitive disadvantages to newer or gas-fired EGUs and renewable energy sources (e.g. wind and solar). We believe that at December 31, 2025, there were approximately 400 coal-fired EGUs remaining in the power market which make up the large mercury-emissions control market into which we sell.
In April 2023, the EPA issued a proposal to strengthen and update MATS. Such proposal was finalized and published in May 2024 with an effective date of July 8, 2024 which, among other things, strengthens and updates MATS for coal-fired power plants and tightens the emission standard for mercury for existing lignite-fired power plants to a level that is aligned with the mercury standard that other coal-fired power plants have been achieving under MATS.
On March 12, 2025, the newly appointed EPA administrator under the Trump Administration announced plans to roll back dozens of environmental regulations, including the reconsideration of the MATS regulation. On April 8, 2025, President Trump signed a Proclamation exempting certain stationary sources, identified in Annex 1 of the Proclamation, from compliance with the 2024 updated MATS Rule. As set out in the Proclamation, the President’s exemption lasts for a period of two years beyond the updated Rule’s compliance date -- i.e., for the period beginning July 8, 2027, and concluding July 8, 2029. During the two-year period, these stationary sources identified in Annex 1 are subject to the compliance obligations that they are currently subject to under MATS, as the MATS Rule existed prior to the 2024 update. Annex 1 identifies 47 plant owners and over 60 power plants provided such exemption, which list includes a number of our customers.
In June 2025, the EPA proposed to repeal certain amendments finalized in 2024 to the MATS Rule and return compliance obligations to the MATS standards which existed prior to the 2024 update. On December 23, 2025, the EPA submitted a draft of the final action to the OMB for interagency review under Executive Order 12866. On February 19, 2026, following completion of the OMB interagency review process, the EPA finalized the repeal of the 2024 amendments to the MATS Rule which returned compliance to the 2012 MATS Rule requirements.
4
Table of Contents
The MATS rule identifies two subcategories of coal-fired EGUs, four subcategories of oil-fired EGUs, and a subcategory for units that combust gasified coal or solid oil (integrated gasification combine cycle, or “IGCC” units) based on the design, utilization, and/or location of the various types of boilers at different power stations. The rule includes emission standards and/or other requirements for each subcategory. The rule set nationwide emission limits estimated to reduce mercury emissions in coal-fired plants by about 90%.
In addition to the U.S. federal MATS rule, certain states currently have regulations that limit mercury emissions and are similar to or more restrictive than the MATS rule.
There are several choices of pollution control technologies available to reduce mercury emissions, but they do not all work consistently or cost-effectively for every plant design or for all of the various types of coal. The most common technology employed to reduce mercury emissions is a sorbent injection system which provides for the injection of PAC or BAC into the flue-gas of an EGU after the boiler itself but in front of the ESP. Such injections have proven effective with many coals, especially at reduction levels of 70% or less. At required mercury reduction levels above 80%, these injection systems require substantial injection rates which often have severe operational issues including over-loading the ESP and rendering the fly ash unfit for sale to concrete companies, and at times even causing combustion concerns with the fly ash itself.
Mercury is also removed as a co-benefit by special pollution control equipment installed to remove SOX and NOX. To achieve very high levels of SOX reduction, large, complex, and expensive (with capital costs in the hundreds of millions of dollars for a medium-sized EGU) systems called scrubbers can be installed in the plant exhaust system, typically just before the flue-gas goes up the stack for release. As a co-benefit to their primary mission, scrubbers have been shown to remove significant quantities of oxidized mercury. Mercury is typically found in two basic forms in coal: elemental and oxidized. The amount of each form varies in any given seam of coal and is affected by the other natural elements (such as chlorine) which might also be present in the coal. We believe that about 30‑40% of the mercury in the post-combustion flue-gas exists in the oxidized state for power plants burning low-rank coal and about 60‑70% for power plants burning high-rank coals. Mercury is found in only trace amounts in coal making it difficult to remove from coal or from the flue-gas when combusted with the coal. It is in the burning of millions of tons of coal that these trace amounts become problematic and is why MATS was promulgated.
The other major pollution control system which contributes significantly to the co-benefits of mercury removal is an SCR system which can be installed to achieve high levels of removal of NOX. SCRs are also very large and expensive systems (costing hundreds of millions of dollars in capital costs to install on a medium-size EGU) that are typically installed just after the flue-gas exits from the unit boiler. As a co-benefit, SCRs have been shown to oxidize a considerable percentage of the elemental mercury in many types of coal. If the EGU then has a combination of an SCR and a scrubber, we estimate that the EGU might achieve an over-all reduction of 80‑85% of the mercury in power plants that burn high-rank coals. The exact level of mercury emission reductions depends on the designs of these systems, the types of coal being burned and the operations of the power plant.
We believe that a large percentage of the coal-fired EGUs in the U.S. employ some sort of sorbent injection system to achieve the very low mercury emission levels required by the MATS rule, with either the sorbent injection system as the primary removal method or such a system being employed as a supplemental system to SCR/scrubber combinations to achieve the emission limits.
In the United States, potable water treatment is regulated primarily by the EPA under the SDWA. The SDWA was originally passed by Congress in 1974 to protect public health by regulating the nation’s public drinking water supply. The law was amended in 1986 and 1996 and requires many actions to protect drinking water and its sources-rivers, lakes, reservoirs, springs, and ground water wells. (The SDWA does not regulate private wells which serve fewer than 25 individuals.) The SDWA authorizes the EPA to set national health-based standards for drinking water to protect against both naturally-occurring and man-made contaminants that may be found in drinking water. The SDWA covers water quality standards, treatment processes, and monitoring requirements for public water systems.
The EPA has set MCLs for specific contaminants in drinking water. These include: microbial contaminants like bacteria, viruses, and protozoa (e.g., E. coli and cryptosporidium); inorganic contaminants like lead, arsenic, and nitrates; organic contaminants like pesticides and solvents; radionuclides like radon and uranium; and, disinfectants and disinfection by-products like chlorine and THMs. Water systems must treat water to meet these MCLs or achieve a level that minimizes the risk to public health.
5
Table of Contents
In April 2024, the EPA issued the first-ever national, enforceable drinking water standard to protect communities from exposure to harmful PFAS, also known as “forever chemicals”. The Rule sets limits for five individual PFAS: PFOA, PFOS, PFNA, PFHxS, and HFPO-DA/GenX). The Rule also sets a hazard index level for two or more of four PFAS as a mixture: PFNA, PFHxS, HFPO-DA, and PFBS. Under the Rule, public water systems must monitor these PFAS and must complete initial monitoring by 2027, followed by ongoing compliance monitoring. Water systems must also provide the public with information on the levels of these PFAS in their drinking water beginning in 2027. Public water systems must implement solutions by 2029 that reduce these PFAS if monitoring shows that drinking water levels exceed the MCLs set forth in the Rule. By 2029, public water systems that have PFAS in drinking water which violates one or more of these MCLs must take action to reduce levels of these PFAS in their drinking water and must provide notification to the public of the violation.
The EPA has indicated that once implemented, these limits will reduce tens of thousands of PFAS-attributable illnesses or deaths and will reduce PFAS exposure for approximately 100 million Americans served by public drinking water systems.
The EPA has indicated that compliance with this Rule is estimated to cost approximately $1.5 billion annually. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act has dedicated $9 billion to help communities impacted by PFAS pollution in drinking water. In addition, another $12 billion in Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act funding is available to communities to make general drinking water improvements, including addressing PFAS chemicals. Estimated costs include water system monitoring, communicating with customers, and, if necessary, installing treatment technologies.
On May 14, 2025, the EPA under the new Trump Administration announced the agency will keep the regulations for PFOA and PFOS. As part of this action, EPA also announced its intent to extend the PFOA and PFOS Maximum Contaminant Level compliance deadlines and establish a federal exemption framework. Additionally, the EPA announced its intent to rescind the regulations and reconsider the regulatory determinations for PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA/GenX), and the Hazard Index mixture of these three PFAS plus PFBS to ensure the determinations and any resulting drinking water regulation follow the SDWA process.
In addition to the national standards established by the EPA which states are required to implement and enforce, individual states have the authority to impose stricter regulations than those set by the EPA. Many states have already set their own standards for PFAS, often more stringent than federal standards, in response to the growing public health concerns. States also run their own monitoring programs and inspections to ensure compliance with federal and state regulations.
Patents and Trademarks
Our SEA® technology was originally developed by the University of North Dakota’s Energy and Environmental Research Center. It was tested and refined on numerous operating coal-fired EGUs, with the founder of our wholly-owned subsidiary participating with the Energy and Environmental Research Center on these tests since 2008. The Energy and Environmental Research Center Foundation, a non-profit entity, obtained patents on this technology. Between 2009 and 2017, we maintained an exclusive worldwide license with respect to this patented technology, which applied to various domestic and foreign patents and patent applications. Such formed the basis of our mercury control technology. On April 24, 2017, we acquired from The Energy and Environmental Research Center Foundation all such patent rights, including all patents and patents pending, domestic and foreign, relating to the foregoing technology.
As of December 31, 2025, our patent portfolio relating to mercury removal included 18 granted patents worldwide, consisting of 13 U.S. patents and 5 foreign patents (Canada, Europe and China), with stated expiration dates ranging from January 2026 to September 2034. Between August and October 2025, 13 U.S. Patents and 2 foreign patents relating to mercury removal expired. We continue to maintain a portfolio of patents relating to mercury removal in the U.S. and abroad.
With regard to our water treatment technologies, we have to date filed two provisional patent applications in the U.S. relating to water treatment. We have also filed two PCT applications and one U.S. patent application. However, these applications do not provide enforceable patent rights unless they are successfully granted by the PCT and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. There is no assurance that our pending applications will result in issued patents, or that any patents granted will provide meaningful protection against competitors.
6
Table of Contents
Competition
We operate in highly competitive industries that are characterized by a diverse range of participants, including companies that operate in both the mercury capture and water treatment industries. Our major competitors in the mercury capture and water treatment markets includes companies such as Arq, Inc. (formerly Advanced Emissions Solutions, Inc.), Norit Activated Carbon, Calgon Carbon Corporation, and Nalco Company LLC (also known as Nalco Water, an Ecolab company). Many of our competitors employ larger sales staff and are well established in the market with greater financial and operational resources. However, in most head-to-head tests with competitor products in the mercury capture market, our SEA® technology has consistently performed better in mercury removal, at lower projected costs. We believe that our SEA® technology is superior to offerings of our competitors and, with our highly experienced staff, we have shown that we can compete effectively in this market. In the water treatment market, our competitive strategy will focus on delivering tailored and cost-effective water treatment solutions, innovative technologies, and exceptional customer service to meet the specific needs of our clients. While the industry faces ongoing regulatory and technological advancements, we believe our industry expertise and focus on customer relationships will position us to effectively compete and grow within the water treatment market.
Raw Materials
We buy all of the raw materials needed to implement our technologies and provide our formulated products from third-party suppliers. Suppliers of our raw materials include large companies that have provided materials for decades and have an international presence. When we use PAC as one component of our sorbent material, we buy it in the market from large activated carbon manufacturers. We believe that we have excellent relationships with our current suppliers. If any of our suppliers should become unavailable to us for any reason, there are a number of other suppliers that we believe can be contracted with to supply the raw materials that we need. However, the availability and price of those raw materials can be impacted by factors beyond our control including any price increases due to inflation. If such suppliers cannot meet our demand for such raw materials on a timely basis or at acceptable prices or if we are unable to offset any such increases that might occur with price adjustments to our customers, such could have a negative effect on our operations.
Seasonality
Our products and services for mercury capture are connected to the power market. This market has changed over recent years, creating a greater proportional residential load demand. With this shift in demand and load, we have experienced some seasonal changes in billing cycles as our current customer concentration is in the southwestern United States, where many of our customers decrease capacity in such winter months, unless there are abnormally low temperatures during such winter months. The price and availability of natural gas and renewables can also influence the amount of generation provided by coal-fired plants.
In the water treatment market, we expect there will be a greater demand for our products and services in the summer months when higher temperatures lead to more water usage and warmer temperatures tend to promote algae growth and create ideal conditions for bacteria, viruses and parasites to thrive.
Employees
As of December 31, 2025, we had 14 full-time and 6 part-time employees. Our employees are not represented by labor unions. We believe that relations with our employees are good.
Corporate Information
We were originally incorporated on July 19, 1983 in the State of Utah and subsequently re-domesticated as a Delaware corporation in February 2007. Effective on October 17, 2024, as part of our rebranding, we changed our corporate name from Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. to Birchtech Corp.
Our wholly owned subsidiary, MES, Inc., was originally incorporated in December 2008 in the State of North Dakota. Effective on June 21, 2011, we completed a merger transaction (the “Merger”) whereby MES, Inc. (then called Midwest Energy Emissions Corp.) became our wholly owned subsidiary. As a result of the Merger, our business began to focus on the delivery of mercury capture technologies to power plants.
7
Table of Contents
Our mercury emissions business is sometimes referred to and known as “ME 2 C”®, which is a trademark of the Company.
Our principal place of business is located at 1810 Jester Drive, Corsicana, Texas 75109, which location we have maintained for manufacturing and distribution of our products since 2015. Our telephone number is (614) 505‑6115. Our corporate website address is http://www.birchtech.com.
We do not incorporate the information on or accessible through our website to be part of this report. We have included our website address in this report solely as an inactive textual reference.
Reverse Stock Split
On December 23, 2025, we filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware a certificate of amendment to our certificate of incorporation, as amended, to effect a reverse stock split of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock at a ratio of 1-for-5, effective December 26, 2025. Following the reverse stock split, every five (5) shares of our issued and outstanding common stock were automatically converted into one (1) issued and outstanding share of common stock, without any change in par value per share. No fractional shares were issued in connection with the reverse stock split, and any shareholders who would have received fractional shares of common stock instead were rounded up to the nearest whole number of shares of common stock. The reverse stock split did not affect the number of shares of authorized common stock. The common stock began trading on a reverse stock split-adjusted basis on December 31, 2025. All share and per share information in this report, unless otherwise noted, reflect the reverse stock split.
Available Information
We file with or submit to the SEC annual, quarterly and current periodic reports, proxy statements and other information meeting the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at www.sec.gov . Our SEC filings are also available on our website at www.birchtech.com. Information on or connected to our website is neither part of, nor incorporated by reference into, this Form 10-K or any other report filed with or furnished to the SEC.
We are a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act. We may take advantage of certain of the scaled disclosures available to smaller reporting companies until the fiscal year following the determination that the aggregate market price of our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is more than $250 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter, or our annual revenues are less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the aggregate market value of our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is more than $700 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter.