LIT 27.8% 2.3¢ lithium australia limited

Difference L-Max (LPD) and SiLeach technology, page-45

  1. 5,982 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 807
    Lepidico made public statements that are critical and false of the Sileach technology and it continues in this forum. “The statements made by the Lepidico board are untrue …..Sileach poses no greater level of safety concern than Lepidico’s L-Max process.” (LIT statement). One can understand the fierce competition going on here but some of these visits by obvious LPD interests are childish. The 2 processes have equal environmental outcomes but neither require roasting so yay! According to Lithium Australia, one of the claims by Lepidico was that Sileach used toxic hydrofluoric acid in its process, (FALSE). Lithium Australia said Sileach does not use hydrofluoric acid and that the main fluorine product is in fact hexafluorosilicic acid, commonly used as a source of fluoride in domestic water supplies. Lithium Australia also said the Federal Government’s Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation , which has been conducting pilot tests of Sileach, had conducted thorough safety investigations and approved the operation of the tests on the basis of negligible hydrofluoric acid risk..
    Last edited by givemethecash: 27/11/17
 
watchlist Created with Sketch. Add LIT (ASX) to my watchlist
(20min delay)
Last
2.3¢
Change
0.005(27.8%)
Mkt cap ! $28.11M
Open High Low Value Volume
2.0¢ 2.5¢ 2.0¢ $268.7K 12.03M

Buyers (Bids)

No. Vol. Price($)
4 363829 2.3¢
 

Sellers (Offers)

Price($) Vol. No.
2.4¢ 160000 1
View Market Depth
Last trade - 16.10pm 11/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ?
LIT (ASX) Chart
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.