I think you are close to the truth but maybe need to look a...

I think you are close to the truth but maybe need to look a little harder

Eramet isn't spending 100's millions building a low carbon plant because they like "ESG want words'. That hydrogen isn't cheap either, so their operating costs are going to be far higher. They aren't doing this lightly.

They are doing it because EU carbon taxes - estimated to be E75 per tonne in 2026 and E100 by 2030 - will make high carbon products far more expensive to import into the EU.

The comparator also should be with the worst polluter..it is at that margin that it matters

Taking the SVM data - and using rutile vs Iluka's synthetic rutile 3.7tonnes saved per tonne of TiO2 pigment - so roughly E278 per tonne of additional cost for a product that currently sells at E2,800 per tonne. 10% extra on the price, and more like 30% extra at the cost line, without any ESG wank words.

That is material.

Then take escalating gas prices, coal prices, etc etc - Iluka's cost base for producing very dirty synthetic rutile (which they make excellent money from) - is only going up

In addition, there are chlorine and waste cost benefits from using rutile - but as you point out - these are already priced in. The additional carbon costs aren't

Now, lets focus on Rio...possibly the master of the ESG wank word

They self classify their Ti minerals business as a Type 2 business...No carbon in product, and best in class CO2 intensity....well that is an outright lie. They are using a high carbon upgrading process that isn't best in class. Upgrading magnetite wouldn't be best in class - using +65% iron ore is. Same thing here...they should be maximising rutile. They shouldn't;t be using coal fired power for their process - that also isn't best in class.