The first technically correct (nearly) post of this entire...

The first technically correct (nearly) post of this entire thread.

People interested in the nickel laterite "space" would do themselves an enormous service by educating themselves about past laterite failures. Almost without exception, nothing that was spun to the market was achieved - not even close. The majority had very serious, if not fatal technical flaws. Almost all of them have been financial failures.

I don't know much about Cleanteq but two things are immediately apparent.

1) They appear to have no previous experience in minerals processing project implementation and they're taking on one of the toughest gigs in this field. Nickel laterites have a bad-ass reputation because many of the biggest companies with the brightest minds on board have been less than successful. I'm not saying Cleanteq won't pull it off but taking on this type of project as your entry into the game is high risk.

2) This new resin bead process seems to be the differentiator that Cleanteq is putting forward. For the reasons mentioned above, why would you add to the technical risk by introducing an unproven technology? There's a time and a place for testing new technology, and this project isn't it. For my money I would want a plant with unit operations that has been tried and tested commercially.

If the laterite history is repeated for the Syerston project, and Cleanteq does not deliver a technically and financially successful project (and one that meets all the schedule promises - key to establishing financial success), they will get smashed. The same applies for any nickel/cobalt laterite aspirants.

My comments are for general consumption - use or discard as you see fit. Do not confuse this post as downramping - it is my contribution having read most of this thread ( a lot of which is wrong btw).