Of the DFS's and BFS's released by the current crop of Vanadium...

Of the DFS's and BFS's released by the current crop of Vanadium developers, I have the most confidence in the DFS from VR8. This is because their DFS numbers were largely consistent with their PFS, apart from some small costs increases which are understandable from inflation etc, and were also consistent with their original scoping study. There were no big surprises. In addition, VR8 assumed a V2O5 price (US$9.50/lb) which was lower than used by the others (US$10.50/lb), and they still generate some impressive NPV's and predicted cash flows. As management said in interview, they didn't need to use high V2O5 prices to generate sound financial numbers. Finally, the DFS says they haven't needed to include any potential credits due to the sale of co-products (TiO2) in their opex estimate. If they decide to produce co-products and sell them, their effective opex could be even lower. So the VR8 V2O5 production plan and financial model are relatively simple and straight forward, which I see as a big plus for them. I think the updated DFS from TMT looks very good, but they still need to release their updated financial model. The AVL BFS looks to represent a marginal case to reach a positive FID. Both TMT and AVL managements have made a big issue about the big benefits of their co-products toward reducing opex, which concern me if they have difficulties either refining these products, and/or securing offtakes at their required prices. Surely the viability of these Vanadium projects should stand or fall on the economics of the V2O5 production alone ?

All IMHO, DYOR