Ann: Preliminary findings indicate additional mineralisation, page-523

Hi Henry
There are not many comparisons to have between CLQ and AUZ in respect to Capex. Let me give a few examples
CLQ have two autoclaves that are massively oversized for their licensed output , the claves are rated at 2.5Mtpa each so take into account 15% downtime for scheduled and unscheduled shuts 2.125Mtpa each so 4.25Mtpa, there licensed mining processing rate is 2.5Mtpa. But what it means with these large claves is all the infrastructure such as Geho pumps and flash vessels, slurry storage tanks must be sized and designed to the clave size not the licensed output. Here is a post I did on CLQ site on the weekend that I describe how the claves will be required to run and stay compliant with Gov approval

https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/media.3615207/page-322?post_id=33906528#.WzCjVeQUmcw
While having the two big claves their is one bonus , if production falls behind the second clave can ramp to make up. But having this luxury is massively expensive in Capex and Opex terms to have a clave sit for a lot of the year doing nothing.
AUZ have two claves that will be designed for expected SKI OT amounts , they are going to be 1Mtpa each but expected to run 85% of time (which is realistic for these plants) to achieve SKI requirements. As these autoclaves are much smaller the HPAL infrastructure such as previously stated and including slurry preheaters, storage tanks, Geho pumps, flash vessels, bunded areas and aux equip such as switchrooms, transformers, equip much smaller rated will be make the HPAL circuit much cheaper to design and construct.
The acid plant will be much smaller due to different run rates CLQ claim 250kg H2SO4 per tonne of ore so at 2.5Mtpa ore acid consumption per year is 625ktpa H2SO4 not allowing any contingency plus they look like they might be using the H2SO4 for flush/rinsing of IX columns. Goro used HCL which is recoverable H2SO4 is not so add conservatively 100Ktpa for this purpose, so size CLQ acid plant circa 900Kt. AUZ using the stated nameplate 2Mtpa ore at 320Kg per tonne raw ore (from presso) is 640Ktpa which allows for contingency as they are only expecting 1.7Mtpa throughput to achieve for SKI requirements.
As to Capex for infrastructure such as power, water, comms ,roads etc. Auz has grid power and sub-station at Greenvale minesite from previous BHP ownership, the sub-station will prob require upgrading but this is a shared responsibility of mine owner and power supplier. Water is not a remote borefield as Burdekin River only a few Kms away and 2 quite large dams are still at Greenvale minesite and full of water, borefields that are remote are expensive to set up and in the wheat area around Parkes NSW prob quite drilling required and multiple bores with these bores you either run a dedicated power line to them or run gensets , both methods quite expensive. Comms are available in Greenvale via Telstra towers and the minesite is only 5kms from town. This tower may require upgrades but Telstra will pay as to to great larger population that Greenvale will have of perm residents wheras CLQ will prob have to pay Telstra or whatever supplier to erect a tower on site due to the distance from closest town. Public roads, CLQ is surrounded by public roads of which one has to be redirected, also these roads are prob of the single lane variety between farms so will require upgrading to take haulage and transportation trucks.
Due to difference in sizes of the plants but basically using same equipment the power loads will be quite different around prob 25-30Mw diff, so power costs and infrastructure much cheaper.

See below a table that @You30Ate posted on CLQ site (good chart thanks You30)
I wil try to explain some oof the Capex costs are where Auz will differ, see under. Also it displays why market wasn't happy with diff from PFS to DFS.



Mining as you can see is quite cheap, the diff is for waste AUZ is currently expecting a strip ratio of 0.6waste:1 ore wheras as clq are 1.2waste :1 ore.
Recoveries in DFS are approx. the same as AUZ is getting from demo plant.
The process plant is Ore Crushers, Mills,HPAL , IX, Thickners , storage tanks etc as I stated previously AUZ has much smaller plant and claves fit for size of plant.
The reagents is the acid plant and ammonia and limestone (this would include limestone crusher and mill) as main items, also lesser reagents such as flocculant and kero for SX. AUZ acid plant much smaller as also ammonia use.
In what they call direct costs this is everything to build Plant including labour, material and equipment excluding design also for labour usually the cost of accommodation, food and transportation. Labour is your single biggest cost on any mining project.
The Indirect costs are the EPCM staff to oversee construction and design, contractor supervision staff, safety and all administration.
The Contractor O/head and Profit is a odd one but I would say it is the E/I , SMP and Civil contractors profit margin. Not normally done this way .
Services and infrastructure are water, power ,camp, sewerage plant etc.
AUZ will have a much smaller workforce, I have said previously I believe 800 peak workforce for a few months prob 500 average over the build time.
I've got to go now this has been very rushed and my wife getting pee'ed off so I think people get my drift that the two Capexs will be quite different.