I've played around a bit with my spreadsheet to reflect the...

I've played around a bit with my spreadsheet to reflect the electricity cost for MNB at 0.4c/kwh for the first 100MW over the first 5 years, 0.8c for the next 5 years and 1.1c average over 25 years for 200MW. I assumed an electricity cost of 4.5c/kwh for a competitor. That is a lower price than I have found for any other new or planned wind/solar projects. They generally are at or above 5c/kwh. I then assumed a base case ammonia price of $630 which was the base case assumption for the project mentioned at the top note in my spreadsheet below, and I adjusted the figure for "other costs" higher until the competitor's cash profit dropped to breakeven at the $630 base case ammonia price. It's hard to imagine new projects being approved if they won't be profitable at $630/t ammonia. So my "other expenses" should be too conservative meaning MNB's profits will very likely be higher than the numbers below.
At those assumed costs where a competitor at a very cheap renewable price of 4.4c/kwh would be at breakeven, MNB would have a cash profit of A$50mill/year on a first stage 100MW project which should have a capex of around $220m.
More likely the ammonia price holds at a minimum of $1,000/t which would give MNB a cash profit of A$101m/year and allow the competitor to make a profit of around A$51mill. That should be a medium to long term minimum ammonia price until or unless costs are below my assumptions.
When expanded to 200MW, at base case $630 for ammonia, MNB would make a cash profit of A$82mill/year which would jump to a more likely A$185mill at $1,000 for ammonia.
My electricity costs should be accurate but the "other costs" are a bit of a guess that I expect is conservative. What I find useful about doing this exercise is to show how much of an advantage MNB has with their electricity cost over competitors and how much leverage MNB has to a more likely ammonia price of $1,000 compared to $630, with a cash profit increasing from A$82m/year to A$185m/year.
When you add the phosphate profits to these numbers, it's hard to imagine why this company wouldn't be valued in the billions when both projects are in production, even with the most conservative fertiliser price assumptions.
I can't wait to see what the sp does on release of a study on the green ammonia project if it shows numbers like these or better.