AVZ 0.00% 78.0¢ avz minerals limited

The Road to Manono, page-307

  1. 9,014 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 16891
    For avoidance of doubt:
    1. The MW capacity for a 2 mtpa ore feed facility and conversion to 6% grade spodumene is likely to be around 18 MW (the Nemaska proposal is 9 MW for 1 mtpa ore feed, so9 MW for every 1 mtpa of ore feed).
    2. Moving to 33,000 tpa of hydroxide requires an additional 58 MW (which is also consistent with the Kemerton figures) is required.

    The DFS for Nemaska is definately a hard read but Table 18.2 (power requirement to produce spodumene concentrate) and 18.3 (power requirement to produce hydroxide) are the key tables. Within this linked article herein there is then a link to the feasibility study - some may want to have a read to understand it I guess and see what those tables are saying (refer: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2018/04/20180406-nemaska.html)

    Last night was my summary of the energy requirements in this post for hydroxide facilities from my above research and poor attempt at maths whilst having VBs - Post #: 34095243 - working of a 90% load factor. (Load factor is an assumption that power sources/maintenance means facilities not run fully at 100% full capacity all the time). Re-posting the linked post as it would appear I have been referenced today so here is the post again.

    Now, and for avoidance of doubt, given the heat requirements for hydroxide - there are two mainsteps, the first a roasting process at 1050 degrees celsius, followed by a cooling process and then followed by a second heating process from recollection at 300 degrees celsius in the production of hydroxide - means you need a reliable and steady power source to produce hydroxide. My calcs were each tonne of hydroxide required 14 MW of total power to produce (if interested in the calcs open up the above embedded post). The most reliable power source is gas (or coal generation of the grid), but if renewables are used (like solar) they must provide a steady reliable power source or significant battery backup storage capacity ( hydro is ok btw so something to look out for). Obviously if working of the grid, well still need a reliable energy source etc given the complexity of the hydroxide process itself. To understand what I have said please refer to page 7 of this link:
    https://investingnews.com/wp-content/uploads/NMX-Stormcrow.pdf

    As I said hydroxide facilities do not need to be built near mine sites as they need to be close to power sources (hence why in WA all proposed hydroxide facilities are a distance away from the mine site, whereas 6% spodumene concentrate is produced at the mine site).

    In terms of the development profile here I see AVZ initially exporting spodumene concentrate, unless power issues can be resolved, and it relying on tin/tantulum and the better quality ore reducing opex costs to address the transport cost issues. As I stated and keep stating I think these factors alone will provide for all up opex costs of US$300 per tonne or less, including transport costs, but I guess the scoping study and PFS will be the basis in any event rather than what I am dribbling. Refer post: Post #: 33724042 and Post #: 33907971

    At the end of the day the scoping study will provide the options etc etc etc for development

    All IMO IMO IMO IMO IMO IMO
    Last edited by Scarpa: 03/07/18
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add AVZ (ASX) to my watchlist
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.