Hi Rocketfish,I think you are correct about carbonate being an...

Hi Rocketfish,

I think you are correct about carbonate being an input to solid state batteries. There are ongoing debates (at industry level) about preferred chemistry but it seems the general push is LiCO2 for that application.

As a LPD investor I am interested in the steps this company goes thru to change rocks into a lithium end product.In the recent promotional interview the LPD MD recently highlighted ‘the fatal flaw’ in L-Max … and that LOH-Max ‘elegantly’ bypasses the problems. Bizarrely he also seemed to suggest hydroxide was ‘our original concept’. Very odd. Perhaps others can better understand that claim.

Seems that LPD might produce carbonate if downstream demand is there… but by first producing hydroxide (via LOH-Max) and then do another step to ‘turn that into carbonate’.

My understanding is that the L-Max technology won’t produce the carbonate, it will only produce an intermediate liquor. There are dozens of processes that can do that (for spodumene) and x1 company that aims to efficiently do same for lepidolite. Getting to an intermediate liquor is not a unique capability.

Commercial value for LPD shareholders seems to be in LOH-Max, and perhaps the next unpatented step that turns hydroxide into carbonate. That is probably why the Lepidico Chair seeks a big chunk of the value. Seems a big conflict of interest, especially give MDs comments that LOH-Max license revenue (not L-Max) will become a major part of the LPD revenue model.

Just my understanding. Happy to be corrected if this is wrong/narrow minded.