Hi @Flippa01, Forgive me for posting here. This exact post on the AUZ thread was moderated for being "off-topic" - hoping we can discuss here instead.
Given your experience in the industry, I am intrigued that you are concerned with the scaleup of CLQ's processing technology.
Sunrise is an unusual nickel laterite... it has moderate nickel grades, extremely high cobalt grades, and extremely high scandium grades.The technical team CLQ have put in place has worked on every single nickel laterite project in the world, except one.
Have you spoken with Dr Stephen Grocott about the CLQ processing technology? I have and I can quote the following as of Nov 2019:
- "When talking to some investors, they ask, why have you chosen new technology? When some of the existing elements already fail? I say no, we've chosen this technology because it reduces risk. The first thing people think of when thinking of the historical failures is pressure acid leach. They don't cause the failures. The pressure acid leach is not the cause of the 8 or 9 failures from the 11 or 12 nickel laterite projects. It has been simple things that caused those historical failures. For example beneficiation for Ravensthorpe. For example, it was the thickening and rheological properties that killed the WA operations. The intermediate product caused Ramu (successful nickel laterite project in PNG) to delay to a 4.5 year rampup. The IX technology actually simplifies the process"
- "The IX technology was developed by the Russians. CLQ purchased the rights to the technology in the 1990s. The technology was developed for the Uranium industry and they are fully vertically integrated. I visited them many times when I was working for BHP"
- "Where is risk for a new process? The first supposed risk is mechanical. Scale can be a dangerous existence. However, for these plants, there are something like 20 of them operating in the world already for gold and uranium (for example in Russia). The mechanical process is identical. If there was an Uzbekistan gold plant shutting down tomorrow and CLQ was in Uzbekistan, we would take the adsorption columns and use them in our plant. The design is identical. The mechanics are identical. Mechanically we don't really have a risk. There are many other plants operating in the world with this technology. We don't have a scale-up risk."
- "The second supposed risk is chemistry. Chemistry is easier to scale-up as long as you are not dumb. It doesn't matter whether you are doing it in a jar or a 200 cubic vessel. The molecules don't know the difference. The IX resin we use is almost identical to hundreds of other sites in the world. The cross-linking to ensure the resin is strong is the same as used in Russia. There have been 4 extensive pilot plants with this technology, including by BHP. BHP had previously chosen this as their preferred technology for nickel operations. Why didn't they go with it? Well it was called the GFC. CLQ did the work with BHP. I was the BHP general manager who had to get the funds. When BHP got out of it, CLQ bought it back in a very nice deal. We have hired the world experts. Working for us is the person who invested the U-Column technology who is a Russian. We hired him in the mid-1990s. Earlier this year we hired from South Africa a world-class resin in pulp IX expert"
- "The autoclaves were initially for a nickel project that was not proceeded with. They are oversized and we got them cheap. They are still pressured with nitrogen from when we bought them. Beautiful condition."
Cheers,
T.E.P.
