Spoke to Management, page-73

Hi Sharky . . . testing my memory . . . you are the one with the 340 charger in mothballs.

I meant to add to my last post but I was getting called for afternoon tea.

Lignosulphate dispersant was most likely not used at SR as there is no return line and there may have been a problem if they dumped the water containing lignosulphate into Port Latta.

SD is a closed system with a return line so is ideally suited for a chemical dispersant.

On top of saving $550 million to not build a pellet plant in Malaysia, they also may now not require upgrading Albany port facilities to handle cape size ships . . . another huge cost saving.

The use of ptfe / thin walled steel flexible pipe from Dragon Pipes in China increases flow, reduces maintainance, easier to install and also significantly reduces capex.

The use of lygnosulfate dispersant will mean larger particles can be carried in the slurry meaning less grinding in the ball mill . . . another cost saving.

No wonder Michelle said SD is looking "EXTREMELY economic".

I agree . . . SD will rocket the SP . . . I recall reading a MD back some 10 years ago made a similar comment.