This probably surprised me the most as it seemed a long but logical transport route. Does this change have anything to do with the resource and production to final product in WA and then effectively exporting through the NT? Is there any royalty or red tape issues, less stakeholders to deal with? Also possible they forgot the true all in cost of double handling to rail and port, have seen this many times.
Perhaps once firm quotes were received for road, port and rail the logical lower cost route for capex and sustaining capex was via WA.
With the new information from RWD and AMN imo the SOP price difference is not really an issue. The real issue is these remote inland lakes need towards US$600/t give or take to look pretty on paper and attract finance. US$550/t is very much a minimum. I would also anticipate JV options for both given capex and limited SOP projects/leverage held outside the majors.
The carrot remains SOP is middle to late stage commodity with an elephant in the room moment if China is serious on capping or reducing Mannheim production due to environmental issues.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
