Ann: Quarterly Activities Report, page-159

@tone76
https://hotcopper.com.au/posts/50568832/single
Though your post is level headed, excuse, but I think you mean RD, not RB because My whole discussion is just that about known unknowns (E.g; mysteries of the unfinished and too hard? Scoping Study, unknown process flow and opex in moisture/ dust management/health risks for 100% fines, Fe in fines amenable to reduction for lithium sulphate-monohydrate?, thus BG hydroxide/carbonate achievable?, an alarming 1.75% ROS Mets for 1st 5 years SC stats vs 1.51% feedstock Headgrade, true LOM grades based on questionable METS... ) and even unknown unknowns, as you say.

What i find astonishing is how much belief some here have that the intention stands on its own to ship highly specialized SC for a particular kiln tech to China, but no evidence that this common practice to just use 100^ fines at a converter.

i think we can argue that a lot of companies dish out summaries not the detail. You only have to look at how PLS bent over backward and forward again x7, to show the DER WA gov.au how much it has deliberated about significance of data and issues pertaining to the export of SC6