NTU v. LYC v. the rest, page-38

Hi @ausheds, Sorry, it looks like I missed a section of my response to your post #: 52871345 while I was cutting and pasting my way around the HC algobots.

“nothing like consistent production, which has failed to make even the basic 52% TREO”...

You’re absolutely correct that NTU has failed to consistently produce a 52% TREO carbonate, this can be easily surmised from the 22nd of March announcement of production HRE carbonate exceeding 210 tons.

What can also be easily surmised (if your not just looking for the downside...) is that Dy and Tb content of that carbonate was well above the forecast NTU basket weight, and therefore the shortfall in REO’s were most probably untargeted LREO’s such as Ce & La.

FYI the breakdown is; 211109kg of REC produced containing 103731kg of REO (49.1%), which contained 9751kg of Dy2O3, (9.4%) and 1245kg of Tb4O7 (1.2%), which were both above the forecast recoveries of Dy2O3 (8.43%) and Tb6O3(1.15%). Adjusted for the shortfall of 2.9% REO content forecast in the REC, the Dy2O3 content is 8.88% (+.45%) and the Tb4O7 is 1.13% (-.02%). As these are the principle REO’s targeted in the processing I expect the basket value of the 49.1% REC produced would be greater than that forecast for the 52% REC.

Cheers,
marcus A