Agreed, I think an Australian location needs to be preserved as...

Agreed, I think an Australian location needs to be preserved as a possible option for longer. It also has the potential pathway of E25 being accepted as a major project and then accessing the funding for major projects that is available. Both EGR and RNU have gone down this path and it reduces shareholder dilution in sourcing the capital to implement the project.

IMO if E25 can't make the economics work on normal power costs, they need to very carefully consider if HP is even a good idea. Power costs change over time and if the only competitive advance E25 had in HP was power cost, that could be lost. There are a lot of power-hungry industries that will be looking for new low-power homes. If a number of these set up in low power countries, the price of power there will increase.

Fortunately from what E25 has supplied, it doesn't appear costs of power are the only factor. When I multiplied out the quoted volumes and rates, I got $112.5m revenue less $38.2m of costs for $74.3m of margin. This is very close to the stated margin of $73m (for 50kt). Within that $38.2m of planned costs, there were ore purchase costs, production and maintenance, overheads and logistics that are unlikely to vary depending local electricty costs. The $297 for production costs (52% of total costs) also includes the reagents. If reagent costs exceeded power costs, the total power cost for $112m of revenue may be down around or below $10m pa. A big cost, but not one that prevents Australian locations. If the reagents are expensive (and they might be), they could make up 2/3rds or more of the HPMSM production cost (reagents are listed but power isn't) with a consequentially smaller share going to Power costs.