AVZ 0.00% 78.0¢ avz minerals limited

I found that comment interesting, and would have hoped NF would...

  1. 9,014 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 16891
    I suspect the 63% estimate quoted is before credits, but agree it is the main cost here and always has been. It is how this cost is reduced that is important. The reduction strategies are around the credits, but the higher transport cost is also in part offset by the lower mine costs (before transport) through the much much better waste to ore ratio at minesite compared to other hard rock plays and the fact that the higher grade itself means you get 20% more plus revenue than most of your other hard rock plays per unit of installed capacity, all other things equal, than say PLS. To illustrate PLS ore grades 1.26% Li20, whereas AVZ as a minimum will grade 1.5% - that means for each 2 mtpa ore feed facility that AVZ will get 20% more 6% grade spodumene tonnes than PLS. In other words, project economics is not just about transport costs.


    I found that comment interesting, and would have hoped NF would have expanded the reasoning. On 24 March 2019, my post number 37867119 in the Understanding Lithium Demand thread I rabbited on about technical grade lithium and the fact in other uses it must have low iron. I suspect in part this is what is been targeted - other uses of lithium, including I suspect the ‘glass’ in solar panels. But also, lithium sulphate monohydrate if that is what is meant here I suspect is what they might be able to use in the concept of lithium sulphur batteries, and if true this does change the parameters here as these types of batteries theoretically have a much higher energy density - read can go longer distances on one recharge - than your typical lithium batteries. But that is a complete guess and not clear what NF is talking about here so probably a question to ask him in future - is he referring to more akin technical grade applications or for input into some other form of battery which is better than ‘hydroxide’ noting hydroxide is better than lithium carbonate.

    All IMO and I could be speaking bollocks as well, so treat this as a complete guess and one I am not treating seriously until NF provides the reasoning in a DFS or some other forum (I.e. on the battery front that is).

    His blazay attitude when he dropped the sulphate word suggests not much thought has gone into this issue, but something I suspect they might be considering. If they are considering it I suspect this ties in with the comment that they might mix some Carriere ore, where in parts it grades 2%, with Roche ore and that might be where the initial thought bubble is alluding to. Just a guess as well.

    All IMO IMO IMO IMO
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add AVZ (ASX) to my watchlist
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.