vanadium - what a by-product!, page-17

Tobyjack is clutching at straws. She is quoting Christopher Skidmore, writing in 3 September last year, pushing Energiser as an investment in his newsletter.

Are her tears because Energiser cannot afford to develop two mines, while SYR requires only one? Or because we all now know that the vanadium "contaminant" claim is just rubbish, and that the vanadium at Balama has been proved to be easily separated at the first flotation step, and then available as a very valuable secondary product? The evidence is now plain for all to see, in the published announcements on the metallurgy of Balama. It's worth noting that the term "by-product" seems inappropriate when we are talking about what will be one of the largest vanadium mines in the world.

Tobyjack conveniently forgets to mention that Skidmore, in the same promotional article, admitted that Energiser (Molo mine) has mine-gate costs of $418 per tonne of graphite, plus transport costs of $105 per tonne - probably a function of the lack of infrastructure, which requires that all power be generated at the site, using diesel fuel, shipped in. And that they have no support revenue from vanadium (unless they invest in a complete additional mine!).

Anybody comparing this situation with Balama can see that the economics are poles apart.

Cheers, Prime1