@RichardNixon Agree with what you are saying in general although just want to put a couple of things to you.= about some of your points.
"Imo the biggest threat to LCK is the government and the outrageous and deluded influence the Greens have on energy policy in South Australia."
I think this isn't quite right look at what the energy minister in SA has been reported saying
"State Energy Minister Tom Koutsantonis said the Government had not been approached but, if the proposal was genuine, it would encourage a development application because more gas-fired generation would be good for the state."
Koutsantonis also said gas was a “much cleaner form of generation than coal and an essential component in the transition to a low-carbon future”.
Further if you have a look at the ISP report from Queensland you will see that parnell's view is somewhat biased. And although what he is saying is not necesarilly wrong (i.e. fossil fuels are bad) this is the extreme of that view and the reality is that he does not have a solution ... the solution is the transitional fuel...gas.
I believe also that South Australia is mining friendly
"“I encourage any exploration companies affected by this decision to consider coming to South Australia, where the assessment and approval of projects is left to expert regulators,”
this was after onshore fracking was banned in Vic. And as I've mentioned before the government has so much pressure on it to supply reliable cheap energy their hands are going to be tied.
In terms of raising money - I agree it's a tough environment but from earlier announcements the plan is to pre sell gas contracts which will significantly reduce upfront costs. These contracts are intended to be long term, meaning that they could be quite substantial, couple that with financing it is very much achievable without losing too much dilution. Ponder this for a bit. If LCK are able to lock in a long term contract this will significantly reduce risk of this project in a very short period of time.
(20min delay)