https://www.epa.gov/pfas/treating-pfas-drinking-water

The problem with PFAS contamination is well known and documented across the globe . The main issue is related to timing/cost/availability/resources/ROI . The implementation process of new technologies is often very similar to start-ups in terms of the success rate , especially in conservative industries like water and O&G. As an investor , I wouldn't invest in a company that needs a 4-6 years horizon to bring some revenue . Unless ,  it is an upfront business model that is disclosed openly .

I've watched the previous meeting with Jason Dixon , and there are a few points I'd like to mention :

1) PFAS treatment . There are established and well-proved treatment methods for PFAS-contaminated water and soil  . The most common one is MF/UF membrane treatment  + thermal destruction . It is a bit difficult to absorb for a non-technical person , though the bottom line is EGL has no proven technology for PFAS treatment . Pilot with Vic Uni means nothing , and it potentially might take 5-10 years to build a reference list and to start getting sales since this is a very conservative industry .

2) Turmec is a very good company , though this type of solutions requires a lot of investment upfront . Essentially , companies like Veolia and Acciona operate on a premise of BOT ( Build Operate Transfer ). EGL is simply an agent , and doesn't have the same scale to operate in Oz successfully . 

3)  TAPC is a good business, though it won't produce any great revenues/growth . The same goes with the RCR boilers/Baltec lines of business . 

To conclude , I am not sure if this is a good investment case unless the company can demonstrate a solid business plan , and growth trajectory .