Lithium Related News, page-2921

Yes @sqe to flow sheets not being "one size fits all." Whilst there would be plenty of construction, farmland and tech/industrial opportunities to absorb our gypsum, SOP and amorphous silica by-products in, for example, the UK and the Czech Republic, obtaining material quantities of sulphuric acid guided management's past choices of Canada and the UAE. However, the possibility of importing acid for Phase 1 for 3 years implies that not obtaining local supply is not a deal breaker.

Adding all those zeros to our CO₂ emissions makes our processes' cost savings financially tangible. Environmentally, our 11 October "best-in-class" announcement blew me away with the possibility of reducing our already low emissions of 7.46t CO₂-e/t lithium hydroxide to 3.0t CO₂-e/t. Your calculation from the lower estimate of $100 USD/tonne equates to a 5 times premium for clean producers such as Lepidico over the carbon price payable by other processes- such as spodumene roasting? Scaling up, if the carbon price reached $200 USD/tonne, it could well prove uneconomic, as well as defeat the whole ecological exercise of switching to EVs and renewable energy.

I spent 5 minutes this afternoon on EMH's website checking the 49/51% ownership status and a couple of things jumped out at me. These extracts are from Rodney Hooper's Independent Research Report, dated February 2021, surprisingly the most recent paper. EMH previously always ensured plenty of coverage. On page 3:

EMH is now focusing on completing a Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) before the end of 2021and has contracted SMS Group from Germany to complete all aspects of the Front EndEngineering Design (FEED) for Cinovec.

Then on page 14:

To date, EMH has had to complete a wide variety of metallurgical test work using severalindependent process laboratories and consultants, many of which are still ongoing. To de-risk,consolidate and streamline all process and engineering test work, EMH appointed Düsseldorfbased SMS Group Process Technologies GmbH (SMS Group) to steer the project towardscompleting the DFS due early 2022. SMS Group has over 150 years of providing process andengineering solutions to the metals and materials sector globally with an active presence in morethan 50 countries.

It sounds like they're reassessing. Your lateral thinking solution of combining methodologies could save the day, for EMH as well as how many others? I can't imagine industry players are not keeping abreast of their competitors' movements, but if they somehow aren't presently aware of LPD's specs, they certainly will be come Cornish Lithium's pilot plant operation in March. Given their resource is zinnwaldite, how can a) EMH turn a blind eye to lost caesium and rubidium profits? and b) the Czech government not be interested in securing their own strategic supply of these Critical Minerals, especially on the heels of the US highlighting them in their list of 35, the UK government forming an "Expert Committee" last month, etc? This also is from Hooper's report, the second paragraph on page 2:

It should be noted that while CEZ owns 51% of the project, there is a JV nature to the operationalcontrol, whereby the operational management is made up of executives from both shareholders.EMH has effective operational control through the business plan set out before the EMH-CEZinvestment deal. EMH has an effective veto right over any deviation from that business plan.

Worth keeping an eye on. Industry-wide, it will be very interesting watching the movements. Shuffling, juggling? Heavens, but how many of us here are feeling increasingly smug with our LPD investment? Our tech, our management, our potential keep going up another notch with each announcement.