Thanks for posting this table. I think this table is important.
As stated in the report, the Lithium concentration increase does seem fairly inline between Lab and Pond. There's some comments in this thread comparing the number directly - but those posters failed to realise that the feed going into the lab and the pond had slightly different PPM of lithium - this 20% or so difference is reflected at the end of the evaporation. From a lab trial to real life trial - I think this is big news!
I have to bring attention to something not so good though. The values of Na and K going into the laboratory test and the ponds were about the same. However, the resultant reduction of concentration on these in the real life ponds were not the same as observed in the laboratory.
Does anyone have any ideas why? I am not a chemist or a geologist so I am genuinely curious why this is the case!
I may have missed something in either this announcement or the lab announcements earlier that explained why K and Na reductions were so high in the lab tests. Did they keep adding Chlorine into the lab tests? Maybe this is what made the precipitation of Na and K so high in the lab test compared to the pond.
I think these final columns cannot be completely ignored, but my basic knowledge in chemistry tells me that they are not difficult to remove with reagents being added during the evaporation process if they wanted to remove it in the ponds instead of during the actual production processes being investigated. Cost wise - I am not sure how this affects us.
Just my two cents. DYOR and all of this is IMO only.
