Hey Markyboy49, good to see someone looking beyond the obvious. Technological stands still for nobody, something so many investors (and analysts) conveniently forget to consider. I see your 'Two-zone ligand-assisted displacement chromatography' and raise you a 'reusable ionic liquid'...
https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/newsreleases/2021/june/mining-precious-rare-earth-elements-from-coal-fly-ash-with-a-reusable-ionic-liquid.htmlIn terms of low cost, low waste and recyclability the reusable ionic liquid process, requiring only a mild alkaline pre-treatment, sounds a very good idea. Your tech link or mine, there are hundreds of millions tonnes of coal fly ash sitting in waste dumps around the globe. Mining costs are virtually nil, permitting a given, might even get paid for cleaning up old fly ash dumps in the process.
So how does this new tech help AR3? New coal fly ash tech might be transferable to ionic clay, or not. If it is, will ionic clay be cheaper than fly ash to mine and treat? If it is, will AR3's skinny deposits in Oz be more or less economic than thicker, lower strip laterite deposits globally? China will rip-off whatever tech works patents or not lol, and apply it to their thick, high grade deposits no question. The very best western companies like AR3 can hope for is Chinese miners are held to the same environmental cost standards (costs) whether the Chinese are mining in China or Africa, Sth America or any other corrupt jurisdiction.
My point stands I think. AR3 has a high level of tech risk and competition risk from other players. Profit motive alone dictates many new deposits will be developed to fill rising global REE demand, big western government subsidies for supply chain security guarantees it. What is the Murray Basin's clay deposit's advantage and moat against competition? I would want to see materially higher grade, thickness and/or a hydromet tech breakthrough that applies only to this type of ionic clay deposit. REE is not as rare as the name suggests...
Cheers
