correct.the HREO under neutral pH (4) are pretty much even on...

correct.

the HREO under neutral pH (4) are pretty much even on Tb, dy at 49%, 48% compared to 48% 37%. The changes are a bit more notable as we slide down the scale, MEI's taper off a little more than averaging 26% recovery from Holmium to Yttrium.

noting that Gd, Tb, Dy are the 3 more important HREO to revenues and so those being close at neutral pH is good. (18% of the revenue) MEI obviously got better Nd and Pr recoveries which do drive revenues quite a lot. (77%). IXR composition means that those 3 elements drive 41% of revenues and thus become equally important to them recover as the NdPr

Everything else (element wise) recovering is fairly inconsequential to the end revenue IMHO so the aforementioned elements, (nd, pr, tb, dy, gd) are definitely the ones of interest for MEI. in that order almost.

largest positive impacts to MEI will be that Nd/Pr at 77% of the revenues even small improvements to those recoveries will have a very positive impact overall.

Additionally if they can figure a way to cut the La down/out the stream like they fortunately found with Ce (obviously very little ionic Ce) that may help to reduce processing costs and/or freeing up downstream capacity. I.e. currently it would be 50% of the total output by mass. 7700tpa La of total 14400T TREO (assuming 12.5mtpa processing).

reducing or eliminating that without sacrificing the other elements means you're back end design/process capacity need only be suited for say 10,00tpa not 14,000. which would save capex/opex I imagine.

Either way, lots of upside considering the first pass of the results.

SF2TH