Utter garbage CCJ, your fabrications go way beyond the pale, only thing I can't work out is ignorance or intent?
LAMP was first fired up in Dec 2012 and had a string of commissioning problems due largely to physical issues with the plant, most of which I saw with my own eyes May 2015.
That June Q finally produced ~850t on spec NdPrO 2.5yrs after start up.
The main issues were the high failure rates of Chinese made components vs coarse MtW feedstock, ball valves in C&L were lasting just 14hrs, and the physical mgt of volumes thru the multiple stages of SX, two trains of 5500tpa, larger than anything China had at the time.
LAMP floundered for 18 months, then it took AL another 12 months to build the operational efficiencies to bring the plant up to steady state, and I'll let you in on a little secret, she started with a mop and a bucket!
By contrast MP ore has been processed for something like 60yrs and actually produced on spec NdPr in 2011 when Molycorp restarted the legacy plant for a couple of Q's, but stupidly they demolished it as soon as their bright, shiny 19ktpa single train plant was complete mid 2011.
Molycorp never produced on spec oxides from that plant up to bankruptcy mid 2015, so the 200t produced from mid 2023 is the first on spec NdPr produced from the current plant in 12 yrs, which compares rather badly with LAMP 2.5yrs.
Further, I've been told on three separate occasions by very experienced RE operational mgrs that have visited MtP that the plant in the configuration they saw, single 19ktpa train, will never produce oxides successfully, continuous volume, steady state. Remains to be seen what MP have actually done to reconfigure the SX circuits but such tiny quantities 50t (you can't even get that right) & 150t over two Q's strongly suggests that material has been reprocessed multiple times.
So 12yrs and counting MP, we wait with interest to see just how long it will take them to make any sort of commercially efficient volumes steady state on spec.
Expand
(20min delay)