Hi all,
..and I’m posting to pick up another element in the US Ambassador’s speech yesterday at the Paydirt Conference.
It relates to US Security and Defence moneys and as per the earlier post ambassador Kennedy waxed pretty lyrical about this issue
Includimg; “In December, in addition to passing historic AUKUS legislation, the US Congress declared Australian companies eligible for Defense Dept funding on the same basis as their US counterparts under our Defense Production Act. The Defense Department is already working with Australian companies in the US, and can now also provide significant funding for projects here in Australia for needs we cannot meet domestically.“ …etc
… “Ms Kennedy said the US was mobilising a whole-of-government approach to secure critical minerals supply chains from trusted suppliers with high environmental, social and governance standards.
“We can’t let them destroy vulnerable communities and the markets for Australian minerals under the guise of economic development,” she said.
“It’s true that democratic governments often move more slowly than we would like, so it is up to the experts in this room and the private sector in both countries to drive change.”
Asked about Ms Kennedy’s comments on Wednesday, Defence Minister Richard Marles did not explicitly echo her attack but said the resilience of supply chains and the industrial base was critical to national security. “These companies are fundamentally important for Australia’s future,” he said. “The resilience of our resources sector, our participation in critical minerals and rare earths is absolutely central to the role I think we can play more globally but it is absolutely central to our prosperity [and] also our national resilience and therefore our security and we are very mindful of them.”..
Does the focus here include vanadium and, maybe, AVL?
The reason I have included Australian Defence Minister, Richard Marles’, comments is because I think you can draw a not-so-long-bow to to a thematic first recently introduced on this forum through Madeleine King’s radio transcript the other day - where she said she felt international markets were manipulating the price of some critical minerals - (clearly true of nickel and possibly of vanadium as well?).
In that interview she highlighted the importance of VANADIUM batteries, and so did the WA Minister for Mines, David Michael, at Paydirt yesterday.
To tighten the string a little on that not-so-long bow;
The reason I’m feeling particularly positive about a price turnaround here is because;
- the US ‘defence’ line does seem to imply a trigger strong investment, and vanadium batteries are well up there in its’ long term storage trials with CellCube ( 03/10/23 https://www.diu.mil/latest/defense-...rs-with-departments-of-the-air-force-navy-and ).
- Moreover because of our long term partnership with CellCube
PLUS our long term close affiliate - US Vanadium’s supply agreement with CellCube [
- Added (strongly) to the fact US Vanadium’s major owner as per USV thread here ([ TECHMET ]) is a major US government defence investor.
Just a few potential tie ups for us on there?
… Maybe?
cheers
AVL Price at posting:
1.6¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
(20min delay)
