Corporate FAQ

1. Haber's current management team has been on the job for almost 4 years now and has made a serious financial investment in the company. What can shareholders expect in 2009?

Please refer to the '2009 goals' that are listed on the company website.

2. We have read about all the meetings with the World Bank, UN, UNEP, Ghana government officials, Suriname officials, US State Department, etc. Is it possible to make a deal with any of these groups?

The company believes that the time spent educating these groups on the advantages of HGP and the STAMP program will ultimately deliver rewards. Given the sheer amount of mercury introduced into the environment by artisanal miners annually (1/3 of the total global emissions - over 1,000 tons a year), the Haber team expects that at least one of the concerned parties will be prompted into action this year.

3. Do you think it will be easier to secure an HGP deal in the US or internationally?

It is far easier to implement an agreement in the US, but the company has many opportunities overseas as well. The main criteria for any deal are that we have enough trained personnel to direct processing operations in the field, and that a sufficient quantity of ore with acceptable value (qualified by thorough testing) is available for economic processing. The company is now prepared to test ores in its Massachusetts processing plant. The plant will also be used as a facility for soliciting joint venture partners and to train personnel for assignments in the field.

4. Does the STAMP program have real potential to eliminate Mercury use in artisanal gold mining?

Yes, it is the only program being discussed that can truly address the problem in its totality. The centerpiece of STAMP is the economic advantage it provides to the small scale miners using mercury. Our program will give them more money than what they currently earn. It seems inconceivable that any small scale miner would want to continue existing practices when Haber will pay them more for their concentrate than what they are making with mercury.

5. We understand that you have proposed that the World Bank make a relatively small - $4.5 million - investment in a demonstration program. What would it take to implement the STAMP program on a large scale basis?

Haber estimates that it would take approximately $30 million to address the problem on a large scale basis. Projections indicate that a program of this size could produce from 150 ounces per day in the first year, progressively increasing to a rate of approximately 1,500 ounces of gold a day by the fifth year. Speaking comparatively, if a large scale mining plant were using cyanide, it is estimated that a capital investment of approximately $200 to $400 million would be required in order to produce the same amount - 1,500 ounces - of gold per day.

6. Are the various gold analysts, newsletters, or Green Gold groups aware of the HGP and STAMP potential?

Yes, many industry professionals and related groups are generally aware of the technology. That being said, we must do more to educate and convince them of the great potential that these products bring to our company, as well as how that their members and readership can capitalize on our successes. Haber is now ready to launch an ongoing professional Investor relations program in order to reach a larger target audience.

7. Have you approached any of the Ban Mercury or Green Gold groups for support?

While we have interacted with various environmentally directed groups in a number of mercury related forums, we have not actively pursued their endorsements. It is Haber's position to not engage in the criticism of any specific mining company or be linked to advocacies in which we have no content control. We spread the company message through press releases, presentations, our web site, and personal contacts, and in so doing, have become well known for our environmentally friendly technology and position on mercury abatement. For instance, the US State Department asked for our input on the US Global Mercury Policy position that was presented by the US government to the United Nations Environmental Program in Nirobi on February 2007. Haber was only one of appoximately 9 for-profit companies in the US who were asked for their input during the three conferences held in Washington, D.C.

8. What is the company's patent position on HGP?

HGP and some other processes developed by Haber are trade secrets. The company has decided it more prudent to control and safeguard our technology than to publish it and then have little or no way to monitor and enforce our proprietary interests on its usage in the field. It is for this reason that the company is only dealing in licensing and joint venture agreements.