@2Chance, this discussion is probably best kept to the EMH...

@2Chance, this discussion is probably best kept to the EMH forum; but given that it's here...
You are correct in that EMH are slow movers. It is clearly apparent that EMH don't report for the heck of it and do their work very single-mindedly. They believe that the value of their work will be reflected in the share price and this belief is bearing fruit.
I don't know your work or academic background but you seem to have a solid base in your understanding of metallurgy etc.
However, and I say this with all due respect, sometimes a little knowledge can be dangerous.
I don't have your grounding in metallurgy, but I do have a solid grounding in logic and my logic tells me that there is no way on earth that EMH would be pursuing a processing route that would require anywhere near a $2B+ capex.
Consequently, reading between the lines, the sodium sulphate roast option currently being assessed must be cost competitive with L-Max on both a capex and opex basis. And even if it were a little more expensive, given that L-Max is currently not bankable and there is a stoush between LPD and LIT, EMH would be best using a proven processing route that is environmentally friendly.
Either way, KC has got EMH covered - and I'm sure it's at a capex comparable to that touted in the reviewed scoping study which was USD169m rather than the $2B you mention.