hrl cost blowout, page-42

Sorry brabus, not sure where you get your facts regarding sulphur and ash content from, but, seems you have mentioned MNM in the reply, I shall refer you to their announcement of the 7th April, 2011 where MNM provided a table of data refuting the high Sulphur content in Bacchus Marsh Brown Coal Reserves. For your benefit I will outline the relevant sulphur and ash contents per site quoted in the table.

Ash, as quoted on a %dry basis is quoted as 1.7 for Yallourn, 1.3 for Loy Yang, 3.0 for Morwell, 3.8 for Angelsea and 7.4 for Bacchus Marsh and Sulphur is quoted on the same basis as .28 for Yallourn, .38 for Loy Yang, .33 for Morwell, 2.85 for Angelsea and 1.74 for Bachus Marsh, so not sure how you are supporting the inverse relationship of sulphur to ash between BM and LY. Clearly BM brown coal is 5.7 times higher in ash content than LY and sulphur is 4.6 times higher in BM brown coal to LY.

http://www.asx.com.au/asxpdf/20110407/pdf/41xxhr56g5dld4.pdf

If you have an updated reference that suggests the ash and sulphur contents are different can you please provide it?

Interesting that you would suggest that MNM will supply coal to blend with brown coal, where will they be supplying the coal from and what type of coal would it be?

If LY aren't going to pay more than $5 a tonne, then how much will they pay?

Just a point that I find interesting in one of your later posts, interesting that you would quote an MOU between japan and dpi but clearly you dismiss an MOU between ECT and the Polish Energy producer ELBIS?

Why would you recognise an MOU under one circumstance but dismiss one under another?