Scandium, Cobalt, and Water Purification: Clean Teq Holdings,Volume 2, 20182017 was a year of tremendous accomplishment for Clean Teq Holdings in every respect.
We saw remarkable achievements in mine construction, in finance, and in market development, with landmark contracts in every business segment;
We saw a complex business appear as if by magic, including business offices on four continents, and the launch of business website in the water division;
We were informed of superb existing and newly-formed strategic partnerships,
with the likes of Airbus, Peng-Xin Mining, Chinese state and power entities, Chinalco, and Multotec;
We were witness to a major off-take agreement with a leading battery manufacture;
We learned of an astute acquisition of a controlling interest in a VRB business by Mr. Friedland;
We learned of deep and valuable research and development support at prestigious universities and manufacturers;
and we became sure of unseen low-cost manufacturing contacts and alliances.
And oh-by-the-way, we got a listing on the TSX.
The company inspires confidence and optimism. Robert Friedland has a deep long-term strategy, and he knows what he is doing.
I am not sure what is more impressive: His strategic vision, or his managerial talent in executing it.
Clean Teq is a company that is worth following. It is by far my largest position.
There are a lot of companies with good concepts. But Clean Teq has a deep and brilliant strategic concept which is at the heart of major world trends; a revolutionary technology; and a management that executes flawlessly.
**
GOING FORWARD: SUITABLE TOPICS FOR THIS THREAD
1. CLEAN TEQ HOLDINGS, CLEAN TEQ WATER, and their interests, or related companies.
2. Miners and producers of COBALT, VANADIUM, SCANDIUM; also nickel, zinc, graphite, lithium, rare earths, silica, and manganese.
3. WATER PURIFICATION, especially when tied into mineral extraction therefrom.
4. “TECHNO MINERS” and other innovators in mining and material extraction
See notes below on thread and topic overlaps, which are unavoidable.
**
One year ago this week, I wrote an article on Clean Teq Holdings. It was a speculative company, but
one with a visionary and proven leader, dramatic potential in specific, attractive commodities,
innovative methods and IP for mineral extraction, and big ambitions in water purification.
Clean Teq Holdings defied easy categorization, and continues to do so.
One year later, Clean Teq has not disappointed. Clean Teq has exceeded all reasonable expectations.
**
If you need background on Clean Teq, I refer you to the predecessor of this thread: “Scandium, Cobalt,
and Water Purification: Clean Teq Holdings”, where you will also find the guidelines and rules for this
thread; and to the Clean Teq and Clean Teq Water websites, which warrant close examination.
OUR BIAS AND BASIC VIEW
This thread is for those who believe in the coming EV wave, light weighting of transport, and most importantly,
in the importance of energy storage and batteries of all scales;
and also, it is for those who believe that the disruptions caused thereby will be rapid.
Because of this opinion, it follows that the existing viable battery technologies and the materials needed
for them are important. We anticipate rapid change; we subscribe to the Tony Seba “Disruption Scenario”,
that suggests disruptiv changes are occuring faster.
If you disagree with the Disruption Scenario, or the eventual proliferation of EVs,
that is fine; but please do not debate it on this thread. The thread is for those who believe in the future of battery power,
and in the immediate opporunities in commodities related to batteries and energy storage.
We will be able to see in shortly whether we are right or wrong in this belief.
If it takes longer than we think, we will complain about ”being early.”
My perspective is for the next five years. That is “long term”. This is not a trading thread.
Occasionally short-term opportunities are appropriate to call out,
but short-term trading is not the emphasis here.
On the other hand should restrain ourselves from too much attention
to developments and materials for technologies that are likely to take longer than five years to have an impact.
We are looking for investable ideas, not 10 year forecasts on the Future of Civilization.
So let’s keep it down on hydrogen fuel cells and molten salt batteries for a couple of months.
**
NOTES ON THREAD AND TOPIC OVERLAPS
Our assumption is that Li-NCM, VRB’s, and zinc batteries are going to be the main battery formats purchased,
installed or contracted for in the near-term, hence the commodities needed for them are of interest.
New battery technologies are better discussed on the #batteries thread ,
unless they involve a vertical commodity/battery producer.
We are interested in what is going to have an impact in five years.
For example, if you are convinced that Google is about to conquer the world with a molten salt battery,
then come on over here and recommend Morton Salt as a buy-out candidate.
But debate whether molten salt batteries have a future, and when, on the #batteries thread.
News that shows increasing penetration on solar are relevant,
as they confirm the importance of large-scale energy storage.
But we would like to know who is getting the contracts and what type of battery they are using.
There is going to be some unavoidable overlap. Nickel and manganese sources are swing metals,
sometimes they may be better discussed on the Hard Asset thread as base metals.
If you make a post on the wrong thread, don’t worry too much, there are
no fines or jail time. I do it myself all the time and I understand it can be confusing.
You can also use Travis’ new cross-reference gizmo.
Long $CTEQF $CLQ Clean Teq Holdings
This is a discussion topic or guest posting submitted by a Stock Gumshoe reader. The content has not been edited or reviewed by Stock Gumshoe, and any opinions expressed are those of the author alone.
Clean Teq and positioning with China
Important policy statement by Chairman Xi, China to be a leader in developing “Ecological Civilization”. Huge implications for Clean Teq.
Somebody should tell Bob. He’ll be glad to hear about it. Ha ha.
And look what comes up when you google Pu Neng.
A little name change. Pu Neng is now VRB ENERGY SYSTEMS. How timely.
http://www.vrbenergy.com/
Very interesting and regards vrb energy, if you click the Chinese symbol on their web site it still comes up – http://www.punengenergy.com/about.aspx?id=270
‘Vanadium reserves worldwide exceed 63 million MT, according to the US Geological Survey’s latest report on the metal.’ ‘Which countries have the largest vanadium reserves? Interestingly, the three countries with the greatest reserves are also the largest vanadium-producing countries. ‘
‘1. China
Vanadium reserves: 9 million MT
China has the largest reserves of vanadium and produced 42,000 MT of the metal in 2016. The country also consumes the most vanadium and has the fastest-growing rate of vanadium consumption. Indeed, between 2006 and 2014, China’s vanadium consumption grew by 217 percent.
About 91 percent of vanadium produced in China is used to make steel. According to Roskill’s most recent Vanadium Quarterly Review, Chinese steel production will grow by 0.2 percent annually to 2025.
2. Russia
Vanadium reserves: 5 million MT
Russia, like China, extracts vanadium from slag produced by steel smelters or as a by-product of uranium mining. In 2016, Russia produced 16,000 MT of vanadium.
In April, Russia’s minister of industry and trade, Denis Manturov, told Metal Bulletin that the country’s government is planning to significantly increase the nation’s vanadium production. A spokesman for Manturov said it will achieve this expansion by paying subsidies to the country’s largest vanadium producers and providing tax breaks.
3. South Africa
Vanadium reserves: 3.5 million MT
Vanadium production in South Africa came to 12,000 MT last year, and was hindered by the closure of an iron and vanadium mine in 2015.
The mine closure forced a major vanadium product producer to suspend its operations, and left the country with just two major vanadium producers. Additionally, a private vanadium products producer in Austria that relied on imported vanadium from South Africa is expected to have reduced output moving forward.
Honorable mentions
Australia has 1.8 million MT of vanadium reserves and the US has 45,000 MT. The US Geological Survey notes that all of the US demand is met by imports from other countries, even though the US has enough domestic resources to supply most of its domestic needs. Data on the total amount of vanadium reserves in Brazil is not available, but the country produced an estimated 6,000 MT in 2016.’
Now I ask: if China already has so much Vanadium, why are they scouring the world for more? It can only be that they intend to build a huge number of batteries to power its more remote regions without laying a huge central spider web grid fuelled by other more polluting methods.
Very interesting Sarah., especially the tiny mention of Brazil, home to what is I believe the only pure Vanadium mine in the non-Communist world (please correct me if wrong). Largo Resources Ltd (TSX:LGO) has just raised funds for an increase in production at Maracas Menchen mine in Bahia state, Brazil. It produced 2,214 MT of V2O5 in Q1 2018, a 7% y-on-y increase . Maybe small by China standards, but at least its new supply. That’s my Vanadium play for 2018. Long LGO, IVN and of course CLQ
This ties in with China’s “Ecological Civilization”
China announces a major ecological civilization policy and Jiang Zhao-Bai is flying around Australasia in a private jet hob-nobbing with heads of state, just before
the Clean Teq BFS is going to be announced.
RF looking pretty good. Some guys get all the luck.
http://chinareadyandaccredited.com/top-chinese-business-leaders-accompany-president-xi-to-g20/
Look at what is happening:
China’s Chairman announces a major “Ecological Civilization” initiative.
Jiang Zhao-bai in a high-profile junket in Australia and New Zealand.
Pu Neng changes its name to VRB Energy Systems.
And the Easpring capital raise April 27.
CLQ high-profile trade exposure and initiation of coverage by analysts.
The stage is set and the lights are going down !!
PU NENG/Sparton: While its encouraging that PU NENG has been awarded the China VRB contract plus significant funding by HPX, has anyone any idea what the value of their contract is or whether China is kicking the tires of any other VRB companies? It could just be a showcase loss leader hoping to tempt China into buying a gazillion of them. Chinese are fickle and tough customers. At this point in time, what’s the 18% Sparton owns actually worth?
I think there’s plenty of time before I’ll be inclined to increase my toe in the water position.
Not recommending Sparton Resources.
I do not believe there is a lot of risk in the valuation; the risk is in the intentions and capabilities of Sparton management, i.e. Lee Barker.
Sparton has 121 million shares. Today it was 5 cents a share. That’s about a $6 mil cap.
RF controls 82% of Pu Neng via HPX and has put over $90 million into it.
18% of $90 mil is about $16 mil.
Pu Neng is the world leader in VRB, so they say; they have 50 installs worldwide, and seven active projects (four in China and three in Australia).
Friedland installed Eric Finlayson as CEO, who is now “actively pursuing low cost vanadium” to supply
Pu neng’s “growing pipeline of projects”.
So Pu Neng is solid. Sparton Resources, not so much.
Take a look at this. CLQ co-chair Jiang Zhao Bai.
http://chinareadyandaccredited.com/top-chinese-business-leaders-accompany-president-xi-to-g20/
Talk about all the pieces coming into play….!!
What would you do? I bought about 180,000 shares of PGM a while back and now it is worth about 1/3 of what I paid for it. I am thinking I should have sold when CLQ was down around $0.70 (US). At that point both CLQ and PGM were at about 50% of what I paid for them. If I had done that, Id probably be fine. Based on what I pick up on the shoe and HC, nothing but blue skies for CLQ. I am at the point where I should just hold on to PGM or sell and put the remainder in CLQ. The only reason I didn’t do it before is because it always appeared to be that PGM followed CLQ at about 10%. Meaning if CLQ was $1.00, PGM was $0.10. We all know markets can change in a very short amount of time as well. So, I have no Idea what to so at this point. My PGM is worth maybe $10,000. Peanuts as it relates to the $25K i’ve lost so far on it. I’m kind of new at this, so I kind of don’t know where to go with it. Obviously my mistake was not exiting PGM three weeks ago. What would you do?
No point to regrets. Look at the 1 yr chart. Theres strong support at .08. My guess (and its only a guess) is that it can only head north.
Sorry, that should have been 2yr chart. But then youre left with a choice. Set an exit price and be happy if it makes it or hang fire for a buyout. In the end its your money….only you signed the check.
My feeling is that just as the stock tanked, it could rise with the tides just as well. PGM shareholders hear zero news from BOD, so its hard to tell whether the stock will wind up in the toilet or rise with the sector.
$PGM … gumdaddy, a few questions to help you arrive at your own decision. Aside from the share price and the recent management change, have there been any fundamental changes in the company? How much of the price drop was more in concert with other Aussie resource stocks? If you apply technical analysis in your buying/trading, what do the charts (as Sarah mentioned) indicate to you? Have you attempted to contact PGM investor relations? On that last question, I saw some Hot Coppers posters received responses and some did not; but, you may get lucky. Please keep us posted on any news you get, as I also hold a position, albeit only a fraction of yours.
Other than the departure of Robert Mosig, I dont think there has been a fundamental change. Maybe that was a significant change. I cant tell for sure. It appears the share price has dropped along with a lot of other miners for no significant reason, and possibly the sentiment on the HC forums is just frustration, for which we shouldn’t make “emotional decisions”. I’d agree with many, that we shouldn’t sell in an emotional manner. Its just at this point, I am pondering “is the $ best served where it sits, waiting/hoping for a rebound to the positive”, or, “am I better served with 10,000 more shares of CLQ”.
It would depend on whether or not you only invest in the future hopes of small companies, or mix ’em up and also keep established or at least operating ones as well.
I lost most of my money chasing the dream, and should have kept a good mix in the portfolio. My mistake. But that is how I see it now, after my unfortunate decisions.
gumdaddy, what any one else would do, and what is right for you, may be a lot different. A lot of it depends on your other personal circumstances and objectives, and your finances; we do not know. We do not know how much distress the loss causes you, or how serious it is to your situation.
So it is really improper for us to give advice, as we are unqualified as aadvisors and unfamilar with your situation.
Let me just give my opinion on the respective companies.
PGM…management, I believe, has made a mistake in switching over to scandium as a focus, because they are not capable on their own of developing the market. However the intrinsic value of the deposit is there, and as a speculative holding at current prices I think it is decent. There could be a buyout or a white knight at some point; but as an organic entity I do not think they can pull out of it on their own.
A transaction is needed, and this cannot be predicted with any certainty. My opinion is that it is undervalued, but that it might continue that way for a long time.
CLQ…obviously CLQ gets my top marks in nearly every category. I invested more this week even though I am already overweight. I think the company has a great future.
If I had $10,000 to invest, I would put it into CLQ.
**
It is a bad game for us to make a recommendation. We could see an announcement next month that CLQ is buying PGM.
So you could sell PGM this week at 9 cents, and buy CLQ, and in a month CLQ could announce an offer that they are giving 15 cents a share and a quarter share of CLQ for PGM, and CLQ stock could drop on account of the dilution, just after you have exited PGM.
Ugh. Unlikely; but it could happen.
Or, CLQ could bomb next month on a high capex for Sunrise,
and PGM gets a scandium takeoff and triples.
I’m sorry for your losses on PGM.
I have had them too, and they hurt.
Very curious as to what you decide, let us know.
Best wishes.
Thanks Nuzz. I’ve been thinking about this for the past few days, and overall the past several months as I watched this stock decline. I feel like the stock might decline a bit more, but eventually will come back as the market for the underlying assets matures. I’d like to move out of my position, however, if I do, then I’ve surely lost what I’ve invested. CLQ has two years before production and based on the movements of stock, both up and down, I am hoping for a point where CLQ moves down enough and PGM moves up enough where it makes more sense to vacate PGM and move $ to CLQ. My PGM is depressed so much that it might as well be considered a write off. Perhaps I wait for the next directors report which should be out in the next couple of months. Here is a link to last years. You have probably looked at it already. https://www.platinaresources.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Annual-Financial-Report-June-2017.pdf . I do want to thank you for all of your research and dedication to this thread. Your posts certainly help keep followers heads in the game while the SP goes through its ups and downs. I will be adding to CLQ over the next year or so in anticipation of year 1 production, hopefully finding the dips along the way. Thanks again for what you do. Cheers.
Late reply but I’d hold for definite as can’t see this going much lower *famous last words* seriously though nothing has really changed FA wise imo. I’m not adding but am in other plays now. All this obviously dependant on how much your investment here is size wise overall. …
$EUC Tolga Kumova @KumovaTolga tweet:
“The team is drilling away in the adits. Can’t wait to get up to site and see the activities.”
Euc asx Deanbob interesting three months ahead of them.
Extra land site acquisition positive.
$MGX lp
I just found this piece, and didn’t see it anywhere on here:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-03/fmc-is-about-to-find-out-how-much-big-lithium-is-worth-with-ipo
Also, don’t forget this MGX announcement about their own spin off coming up:
https://www.mgxminerals.com/investors/news/2018/354-mgx-minerals-announces-record-date-for-dividend-of-zincnyx-energy-solutions-shares-provides-public-listing-update.html
Pu Neng and VRB Energy
OK here’s a wrinkle I just found out. VRB Energy operates in China as Pu Neng.
So VRB Energy is the trade name outside China, Pu Neng is the operation inside China.
HPX, Friedland controlled and private, owns the majority of VRB Energy/Pu Neng.
I do not know if it is possible to invest in VRB Energy; I have inquired and will inform.
News release from Cleanteq:
‘Dear Clean TeQ News Subscriber,
Bloomberg has recently published an interesting article titled, Gas Guzzlers Set to Fade as China Sparks Surge for Electric Cars, which discusses the rapidly expanding global electric vehicle market and the continuing importance of China in driving this growth.
Notably, the article quotes the author of a recent report as saying, “China’s EV policies are reshaping the corporate strategies of global car makers such as Toyota and helping its battery makers get into the supply chain for global automakers.’’
Clean TeQ believes that China’s ability to deliver on their stated EV ambitions will require deeper integration across the entire battery supply chain – from mining and raw material supply all the way through to auto manufacturing.
A link to the article can be found below:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-21/gas-guzzlers-set-to-fade-as-china-sparks-surge-for-electric-cars
Regards
Investor Relations
Clean TeQ
Seems to me that China is ramping up EV production in lock step with CLQ’s mine development.
Guys. Why is Clean Teq making this news release ? To educate us on the EV revolution ? Do we need CLQ to tell us how many EVs China is going to sell in seven years ? Who the hell following CLQ is not aware of the EV revolution ?
Here is the crux of the annoucement:
“Integration from mining….all the way through to auto manufacturing.”
“….China’s EV policies are reshaping the corporate strategies of global car makers such as Toyota and helping….battery makers get into the [global auto ]supply chain…Clean TeQ believes that China’s ability to deliver on their stated EV ambitions will require deeper integration across the entire battery supply chain – from mining and raw material supply all the way through to auto manufacturing.”
This is advance notice of major announcements coming.
This is informing that CLQ will have new JVs and partners. I would say that this presages an automaker coming in for project equity on a new Aussie cathode plant, or Clean Teq, or new projects, or some combination.
Question: why is TOYOTA specifically mentioned in a Clean Teq news release ??
To plug them ?
The Easpring deal is still up in the air. Additional partners could be brought in.
We have already noted the interminable length of time that “negotiations have been ongoing” with Easpring.
The Bloomberg video shows a graph of the battery costs having halved and expecting it to go to 100 dollars (A$?). Even though CLQ ‘s costs are less than others, this must affect their profits.
This is the reason why one should look for low production costs in our picks.
When things are bad, CLQ and Ivanhoe Mines will be affected less than others, many of whom will stop or reduce production, or go out of business altogether.
The companies with the lowest costs survive when things are bad and make the most money when things are good.
One aside on costs and commodity price forecasts as they affect my thinking.
There are tones and tons of variables to worry about and analyze when picking stocks and sectors. What I try to do in commodity stocks is target the commodity first.
1. FUTURE COMMODITY PRICES Uncertainty about the future price of that commodity has already been considered, before I looked at individual companies.
I may be wrong in my assessment, but I am not going to worry about that when looking at the companies within the sector. I already worried about that before I chose the sector.
2. LOW COSTS…likewise I try to select companies that have low production costs. If things go wrong in the commodity or the stock market, I know that the company I have selected will be among the last ones standing, and they will make the most if things are good. Thus even if I am wrong about the commodity, the company has a better chance of weathering adversity than a similar company with higher costs.
3. DIVERSIFICATION My overall portfolio is not diversified. It is strongly concentrated in precious metals and battery materials.
However I do look at the diversification of the target, and consider it to be a plus as long as the other areas besides the target are of high interest.
So I like gold and copper, or cobalt and nickel,
or scandium cobalt and nickel.
Other times, if I am looking for a one-commodity bet,
the diversification is a negative.
4. TECHNOLOGY obviously I have become very interested in companies that have an edge in technology, CLQ being the poster child for that aspect.
Not saying I am right or that my picks are better than
anyone else’s. Just sharing my thinking.
$FYI – Pharmaceutical material shows promise for better grid-scale batteries
https://www.pnnl.gov/news/release.aspx?id=4509
Having read the article I’m not sured if this is going to replace Vanadium or an additive to the VRB electrolyte. There is still a lot to be done/know with phenazine use in VRB electrolyte.
I was searching for HNs’ Vanadium post and found this instead to post this news from PNNL.
Griffin VRB: It does indeed say ‘alternative’. However its very much in the experimental phase and theres many a slip twix’d cup and lip. I really dont think this should worry us. The need for mass storage is NOW. If we worried too much about whats being developed we’d never safely invest in anything…….science is eternally moving the boundaries and 99% fail to produce anything more than ‘interesting’.
Any estimate of how much of each and the value (based on today’s spot) commodity goes into each battery?
No…but remember that the grid storage volume is exploding, it is a major user of Li-NCM and is also a large number that defies easy calculation.
The EV thing is more understandable to the public, but grid storage is exploding in front of us but is less visible.
Anecdotal: cell phones have less than car batteries. But it took me 8 weeks to get a new LI-NCM battery for my I phone, and the local guy has hundreds of people waiting.
And Exploding is the reason for NOT using Lithium in grid storage, thus changing to Vanadium or zinc batteries.
Ha.
I think that’s because the mfrs want to cut corners on the cobalt. The stuff is just so expensive !
But Li NCM is still the boss. The guys have to buy what is known right now.
I agree that zinc-air and VRB are going to grow fast.
$CLQ $CTEQF…Money where mouth is
With the expectations I have of the June BFS, it would be inconsistent of me not to max out my position to my comfort level.
I have already broken most rules on diversification. But I would kick myself for not loading up before the BFS, and I did so today. The prices were in the high 80s.
At least if I am disappointed, I will find out about it is a short time.
Stanley Drunkenmiller said, “The mistake I’d say 98% of money managers and individuals make is they feel like they got to be playing in a bunch of stuff. And if you really see it, put all your eggs in one basket and then watch the basket very carefully.”
Just call me HendrixDruckenmillerNuzzles.
When I was working, I managed my 401K using that principle, even had it all in 1 stock for short periods of time. You can bet your bippy I watched the heck out of that egg!
“Bet your Bippy”…..HAAAaaaa….. been a long time since I heard that!
Absolutely my approach, I’m usually super-mega-heavyweight with my #1, and right now I hold 4 stocks. CLQ dominates my portfolio right now.
Eggs and baskets…..the odds of dropping a basket must be far higher if youre carrying 20.
$QUIK long 🙂 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/quicklogic-corporation-announces-pricing-of-155-million-public-offering-of-common-stock-and-warrants-2018-05-24 #Best2YOU! 🙂
Lookin’ good Sarah 🙂 hehe
https://twitter.com/sarahrhfit/status/999718460534992896 $Long $CLQ and $CTEQF 🙂
Everybody’s gonna pay extra attention to Sarah now !
XX Ben 🙂
In a round about way, the many great people here and in the gumshoe community help carry the load.
I’ve seen these FS’ can be catalysts in either direction, so I’m both excited and a bit leery. Its not like the market doesn’t already know what to expect, we’ve already announced 7 cobalt and 25 nickel production, so its really only surprises that would move the stock price. Costs could be a negative surprise, though the company has already prepped us for that, but how high will they be?. Anything over 1.5B could give us an Ardea effect. If anything, I think the completion of the financing package will be a bigger catalyst on the stock price than the DFS, as long as dilution doesn’t exceed acceptability.
I agree… in general just a BFS can be a dud as far as the stock price is concerned. And I agree on the finance package.
But my assessment is that the BFS will be a blockbuster profit-wise, and that a number of other announcements will occur concurrently or nearly so with the BFS; in particular, favorable financing and possibly a JV on the cathode plant.
The financing especially is of interest. They have had major banks lined up since November, and RF has been working with all manner of EPC and finance-heavy entities. They said in one release that they intended to have term sheets done in advance of the BFS, so the BFS may have a lot of information on the finance package.
While I think the BFS will have a heavy capex, say 1.5 billion, I believe the sunk equity and Friedland’s advance prep will be sufficient to clear the hurdles the high capex may present.
If I am wrong, then my brokerage account will have red in it for a while.
$CLQ $CTEQF…Friendly reminder. June 1 is a week from Friday.
Bullet headlines from the last material announcement from them:
*****
Clean TeQ Sunrise Project Update May 3, 2018
• Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) for Clean TeQ Sunrise Project remains
on track for delivery in June 2018
• Targeting substantially increased metal production over the first 10
years (compared to 2016 Pre-Feasibility Study and NI 43-101 Technical
Report1)
• Nameplate refinery capacity increased substantially to 7ktpa cobalt and
25ktpa nickel to maximise production optionality
• Higher revenue from increased metal production and stronger price
outlook is expected to offset any larger investment in capacity
• Early works program underway preparing for the installation of water
pipeline, power infrastructure and construction camp
• Strong ongoing engagement with government and community
stakeholders
Cobalt demand, not just EVs > https://www.reuters.com/article/us-metal-cobalt-aerospace/jet-engines-help-power-cobalt-to-10-year-highs-idUSKCN1IP1S4 #Best2All 🙂
Very interesting. I am surprised that with a backlog of ~12K airplanes (between Airbus and Boeing), we are not hearing/reading about a company (esp a Chinese one) stepping up to fill some of the shortfall.
The pie charts on aviation market share show Airbus (Europe) and Boeing (American) at 40% plus each, with a bunch of also-rans.
What is striking is the absence of Chinese, Japanese, Korean, and Russians.
I think the Chinese will “leapfrog” existing technology and barge in big-time with the scan-alu
alloys, sort of like they are “leapfrogging” gas engine vehicles to go after electric.
Also. The military and aerospace useage of scandium will be enormous. The figures are a little more difficult to understand and decipher. But you got Lockeheed and Northrup and General Dynamics and all the rest.
And by the way, Airbus started as an aviation defense company.
No one is going to convince me that commercial aviation will be ahead of the military in aviation technology. We just don’t hear about it. They are going to want scan-alu alloys.
Hn: Does anyone know the ratio of scandium to aluminum needed to weld? If we did, we could work out the supply and demand.
As I understand it, the aviation weight reduction (thereby fuel saving) is not from the scandium/ally mix per se….its that the ally can be welded which saves the weight of the riveting.
http://www.globalminingobserver.com/cleanteq-inside-friedlands-green-miracle-company-192
“Around 10 per cent of the weight of an airplane is accounted for by the rivets used to maintain its structure. An Airbus A380 reportedly has an empty weight of 610,000 pounds. It is believed that using Al-Sc alloy in airplanes can reduce the overall aircraft weight by 10 to 15%, so the weight reduction is substantial and would more than pay for the cost of scandium over the life of the aircraft in higher operating efficiency.”
http://www.discoveryinvesting.com/blog/2015/2/5/the-chicken-and-egg-problem-with-energy-metals-scandium-as-a-case-study
Yes there is savings from rivets; there is also increased strength-to-weight depending on the amount of scandium.
Most of the alloys I have read about have very small percentages of scandium, less than 1%.
So the trade-off on weight will be decided on an application-to-application basis.
Also there is a lot of early application to scan-alu alloys in complex engine and interior parts, where the advantage is in the 3d printing capabilities of scandium, which simplify and speed up the manufacturing process.
I believe the 3d part printing (and casting) will be first. In fact I think it is alrweady in process. The big tonnage in fuselage and skin will come later.
Take a close look at the announcement that just referred everybody to a third-party research paper on the evolution of the cobalt supply chain. Look at the picture. What you will see is the Lightrider motorcycle. This picture has been used by Clean Teq for over a year;
and by other scandium sources also.
The motorcycle frame was developed by AP Works, a research division of Airbus, and it was 3d printed with scan-alu alloys.
What was different this time is that the photo had copy on it that acknowledged AIRBUS.
Vanadiumcorp…question…
In my peripatetic search for vanadium sources, I have been attracted to Vanadiumcorp; but I have a problem:
I don’t understand WTF their business is. There are a lot of juicy looking components, they have a lot of bases covered, lots of vanadium-related stuff.
But I can’t figure out what the thrust of their income will be.
Can anybody give me an idea of how they could make a lot of money on vanadium ?
I looked at vanadium stocks late last year Vanadium Corp was one of them. Nice glitzy web site, but little real information. They want to do VRBF electrolyte with a new mfg process ‘Direct'(?).
I have a small position in Stina Resources/CellCube (thank you Cowboy 🙂 $STNUF. I was thinking of adding but decided to hold. Stina, American Vanadium $AVCVF CellCube(now Monitor Ventures), Glidemiester/CellCube, Prophecy Development Gibellini Project $PRPCF are inter related via CellCube and Gibellini and by default (common denominator) Monitor Ventures CEO Bill Radvak. Stinas’ part of Gibellini has higher grade but can they do better with CellCube. What is Stina really focused on Vanadium or CellCube.
I ended up taking a ‘flyer’ on Vanadium One $VDMRF they are an explorer. The have three projects, Vanadium known, Manganese known, Gold geology. They started drilling on the vanadium project last December(?). The drill assayes shoulbe due soon(?). The best investment I’ve seen in vanadium batteries is actually a mfg of inverters SolarEdge Technologies $SEDG but it is too pricey for me.
http://investors.solaredge.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=253935&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=2348253
$VDMRF swing trade high risk
PS buy low!
The Vanadiumcorp website has lots of great-looking stuff but as I say it is unclear to me how they are going to make money. I do not understand what their core proposition is.
I totally agree with you, but a while ago I purchased some and I can’t remember why, but now I have been thinking about selling my position and adding to STNUF.
Glitz, but “Where’s the Beef?” Right Clara?
$VRB:CA
They plan on being a vertical integration company from mine to product.
The skinny is there is no mine yet,years away. They DO have partners that make and sell VRFB’s. Here is their May corporate presentation:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5tyqnfxf4izmg5c/2018%20-%2005%20Corporate%20Presentation.pdf?dl=0
The CEO said that a PEA would be forthcoming shortly.
Personally, I am very big on MGXMF. They are actually doing things now.
Personally, I am very big on AES. They ans Siemens have their own private company Fluence, but AES handles the information on the company:
http://blog.fluenceenergy.com/energy-storage-for-transmission-and-distribution-planning?utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=63239803&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8LXW04NdOS9EYq_Ziwcwt-THBrAqV-Pu-2Q3iFaj2P_Qguk1TyYvZ4bRBuRwVZROOwcaKvE-fLdyo9IBA_LYbkcjcKRg&_hsmi=63239803
Personally, I am very big on STNUF. Cowboy introduced it to us a while back and I like their strategy for vertical integration of product (batteries).
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/STNUF?p=STNUF
“”Can anyone tell me how to make a lot of money on Vanadiuim?””
Most likely will never come close to your CLQ 😉
Thanks edski. Also long MGX, AES sure worth having also IMO.
On the vanadium juniors I don’t want to wait years for construction, too long a horizon; also IMO. Things could change but with CLQ and Largo we will be early if and when something happens.
I think CLQ even with no announced intention will get it done before most juniors who are already declared in the metal.
Cobalt Miners News For The Month Of May 2018 by Matt Bohlsen
May 25, 2018 3:09 PM ET | Includes: AEOMF, AMSLF, ARRRF, ARTTF, AZRMF, BHP, BKTPF, BRCSF, BRVVF, BXTMD, CBLLF, CMCLF, CSSQF, CTEQF, ECSIF, FCX, FQVLF, FTMDF, FTSSF, GBLEF, GMRSF, HLPCF, HNLMF, IIDDY, KATFF, KBGCF, MCRZF, MLXEF, NDENF, NILSY, NZRIF, OZMLF, PANRF, PLM, PTNUF, RGARF, RNKLF, SHERF, SMMYY, SNNAF, TAKRF, USCFF, WCTXF https://seekingalpha.com/article/4177366-cobalt-miners-news-month-may-2018? #Best2YOU! 🙂
One Problem I Have with Vanadium Resources
As I have stated, my vanadium positions are CLQ, which has not even declared a mining deal on vanadium, and Sparton Resources, a highly speculative TSX stock that has an 18% interest in Pu Neng.
So I am not exactly solidly positioned in vanadium, even though I believe Pu Neng will be tremendous and a leader in the VRB space.
I believe they will do a deal in China to source vanadium; hopefully with either CLQ or Sparton, but possibly excluding them both.
In any case, one way or another I think Pu Neng will be vertical and inside China from start to finish.
Here is my problem. Who else besides Pu Neng is going to use vanadium for VRBs ? In other words, if I take a shot on a vanadium miner, who are they going to sell to, with Pu Neng
locked up with their own sources ? And when will the prospect get its vanadium to market ?
I am not in a big hurry, as the VRB market is just starting.
But without other developed makers of VRB batteries, who will these mining prospects sell to ?
Will they just sell to the steelmakers while Pu Neng gobbles up the vanadium battery business ?
Would the number of pounds of Vanadium in VRB electrolyte for one megawatt help. That should be available at Pacfic Northwestern National Labs. They developed an improved vanadium electrolyte with government funding of course should free.
Griffin, IMO this is a good question but it is sort of like Sarah’s rivet question.
We can get a number, but the main variables are unknowable and very large. In this case, even if we find how much vanadium is needed for a megawatt of electrolyte, the next question would be:
How many megawatts or gigawatts of VRB installations can we expect to be built in the next X period of time ?
I have no idea how we would arrive at a number on that.
Heck on most announcements for solar, you cannot even tell what chemistry is being used for the batteries.
A lot of these storage companies are private and won’t tell us. Like I say it is a good question…just not one
I am going to attempt to answer, though someone else may.
A lot of silver, collectively, is being put in solar panels that will not be recycled for many a year – if ever.
Like I said earlier on the thread, my Vanadium play is Largo Resources Ltd, now increasing output to 1000 MT per month from its Maracas mine in Bahia state Brazil. It claims to be the only pure V2O5 mine in the free world. TSX:LGO. I hold
I agree with you Shavian. Looks good! No money available on this end….
Question for you. Where is all of that Vanadium going up the conveyor belt going?
http://www.largoresources.com/home/default.aspx
You hardly see anything falling off the other end…
Good point Ed. The big VRB manufacturers are going to be Chinese , and I don’t have a handle on those yet. One small U.K. firm now starting to make progress is RedT (AIM:RED). Run by Aussie Monash grad Scott MacGregor, they have now sold a couple of dozen VRB units ( which come in various sizes) in U.K. and Africa and now have an Asian distributor. It has been a long struggle for them but they are getting there now, and I think their stock is cheap at about GBP 0.07. I hold a few and may add on further progress.
Sarah et al: thoughts on scandium uptake
Keep in mind that the world production of scandium is tiny, maybe less than 20 tons per year.
The world’s largest user is Bloom Energy, a private company that makes solid state scandium batteries (which is another story) and uses maybe 5 tons a year, maybe a little more.
There are so many areas of potential savings in scan-alu applications for aerospace and aviation, and so many upside demand factors, that I do not think it is a critical exercise to try and figure the weight savings in aircraft rivets, even though they are substantial. (But don’t let me stop you, if you want to do it.)
The metallurgists and engineers have known about scandium for years. The problem has been supply.
The use and application of scandium-aluminum alloys can be phased in depending on the amount available and the cost/benefit of the application.
First, you got the complicated engine and interior parts, which can be 3D printed.
Then you got heavier structural interior applications and engines.
Then you got plate and fuselage skins. Really big volume here.
Gonna put the hurt on the steel guys.
And these are commercial aviation, which I believe is just the tip of the iceberg.
What about the military ? What about Lockheed, and Northrop, and the others, and the European and Chinese militaries? What about drones and rockets and satellites ?
I do not believe Boeing and Airbus are going to be the only ones wanting the scandium, when Lockheed and Northrop need it for their new fighters and the missile engineers need ligher rocket weights to launch satellites.
Here is something else: The percentage of scandium needed in the alloys is so minor, that there is very large upside price elasticity.
**
Okay, so we got years of upside in aviation and aerospace and the military. An ideal situation. Tiny supply and big demand.
Wonderful.
But there is more:
What about cars ? What about trucks ? And trains, busses, automobiles, motorbikes ?
With the electric vehicle movement, range is critical and weight is directly related to weight. Aluminum reduces weight. Ford is already using structural aluminum in its most profitable item, the F150 truck, to save weight.
Summing up, I believe that the only practical limit for the foreseeable future in scandium demand is the supply of it.
And there’s going to be precious little of it, until Sunrise goes into production in 18 or 24 months.
But once it gets rolling, there will be a long, multi-year bull market in it. Just my opinion, of course.
***
Ironically I first became interested in Clean Teq on account of scandium. In late 2016, the scandium angle was de-emphasized, but the nickel-cobalt story and the water potential were good enough to maintain and command my interest.
Two years later, I am getting the feeling that RF also had his eye on scandium all along. He just saw no reason to tell anyone. The cobalt and nickel sell better right now, and nobody is willing to give any cap value to scandium.
Not yet, anyway.
Great stuff on aerospace HM. While agreeing entirely on Scandium alloys for light-weighting, please take note of the other horse coming up on the rails – graphene. The addition of 1% of Graphene Nano Particles (GNP] to various polymers and carbon fibre has been shown to add up to 30% to tensile strength and therefore to potential weight reduction. It’s a long road from the lab to the production line in aero structures like wing components because of the need for rigourous safety testing, but graphene-enhanced plastics will appear much sooner than we think in aircraft seats, interior trim and aisle trolleys, all saving significant amounts of weight before we get into the actual wings and fuselages themselves. There is a huge amount of BS being spouted by graphene wannabes such as Aussie based Talga Resources , which has produced some graphene oxide in quantity (50-300 layers of carbon atoms) which is useful in strengthening concrete etc, but is worse than useless for aerospace -quality plastics. I won’t bore you with the dynamics of GNP, but for success in this field you need few-layer graphene – typically 3-10 layers of carbon atoms , and with the platelets of a given size. This is proving very difficult to achieve in any quantity, as most techniques just smash up the platelets rendering them useless . The only company I am aware of which has truly hacked this problem is a small U.K. engineering group Versarien plc (AIM:VRS), relatively unknown but which has already signed collaborations and received small orders from at least 6 global companies,. Israel Aerospace Industries is the only name revealed, but the others are understood to include GE, Unilever, Continental Tyres and Nike, because applications for this stuff and the associated graphene inks for 3D printing seem virtually limitless. VRS owns subsidiaries which are spinoffs from the Univesities of Cambridge (inks) and Manchester (GNPs). Manchester of course where where graphene was first isolated in 2004.
An agreement to build a production factory in Shandong province China seems close to signing as soon as IP protection is assured, and a senior official from the U.K. Govt has just been seconded to the company – the first time this has ever happened with an AIM-listed company. Take a good look and DYOR. I hold VRS and CLQ
Thanks Shavian.
Versarien and Largo look like a good pair though pretty different in development, obviously…an odd couple.
I am loaded right now on CLQ in anticipation of June events, but they are both my radar now.
I see graphene as a tech play and graphite as a commodity. Versarien might fit the bill for graphene though as mentioned I have a big bet on Ionic Industries. In graphite I have LNZCF Sama Resources, thus also in SRG.
Thanks again for the ideas.
graphene to b used in new mgx minerals batterries in near future, see website.
HN: As an aside; it seems you are now the the new ‘gummy bounce’ meister 🙂 . All this recent chatter about Sparton suddenly bounces it 27% yesterday. Ease up guys, it’ll be cheaper next week.
Scandium: Thanks to Rubberworm for reprinting the scan/ally/rivets info. I accept that the market for sc is presently tiny, but that’s because few people can (presently) find a use for it. Wh’os gonna go looking for or digging up stuff you cant (presently) find buyers for?….Hmm, the crystal ball gazing RF ! But from whats been said about making an ally alloy, that may change quickly….fortunately CLQ is ahead of the game and PGM is ripe for real estate expansion.
Ally stuff can already be molded from sheets of course, but I can easily see how adding just 1% of sc to enable 3d printing, will change that whole game. Speed is the holy grail of manufacturing. Weight saving on rivets and components, plus increased strength/corrosion resistance is another BIG potential market. China apparently already consumes 1m tonnes of ally pa . If you believe this report the future for ally is rosy….and where ally goes, I suspect sc wont be far behind: ”Today, aluminium ranks number two in the consumption volumes among all the metals, surpassed only by steel. In the coming decades the demand for aluminium will continue increasing at unstoppable rates. Recent developments in the motor industry, the rapid growth of cities, new potential uses of aluminium as a substitute to copper in the power industry – these and many other trends mean that the winged metal is well placed to strengthen its dominant position as a key structural material of the 21st century. ”. If sc is is ally’s magic dust, even if only 10% of the future ally used has it added, thats one HUGE demand. And even if dozens of miners suddenly go digging, CLQ is so far ahead of the game I cannot see how my long term money is at much risk. Plus of course, sc is just one string to CLQ’s bow.
Very very long CLQ and sleeping well.
Relatively new readers may have missed this January announcement on CLQ and aluminum:
http://www.miningweekly.com/article/clean-teq-teams-up-with-chinalco-chinese-varsity-on-scandium-alloy-development-2018-01-31
Chinalco is the Chinese state in alu-drag.
“Wh’os gonna go looking for or digging up stuff you cant (presently) find buyers for?”…that is the point.
NOBODY. Even CLQ is excluding scandium from their reports and financials, because nobody will give cap credit for a metal with 50 tons annual world-wide consumption.
Clean Teq has the connections to research the applications, create the market, get the off-takes,
and produce the goods. And the mine is under construction, for all practical intents and purposes; and will have C1 costs that are going to give other miners heart attacks.
Professor Wiki sez world production of scandium is 10 tons.
Not very much. There are trucks and tractors that weigh more.
True. But elsewhere we learn that ‘it is the 31st most abundant element on Earth’. So the 10 tonnes pa reflects the present demand rather than the rarity. When and if it gets adopted as an ally alloy, oodles could suddenly be refined….so long as you have an autoclave handy. That’s RF’s whip hand….a two year head start and production costs so low that any other miner/refiner will need to think twice before investing a dime.
Abundant but badly dispersed and uneconomical to extract….so far. Right on about speed to production.
You came late but seem to be learning fast.
Vanadium problems
I’ve been thinking about it. I am less inclined to chase after
non-Friedland vanadium, unless I can see the take-off end game clearly, and I can see a vanadium redox supplier landscape being created.
Now my position in Sparton is speculative, but it is not solely based on vanadium mining…it is predicated on the 18% interest in Pu Neng. So it is not a geology discovery play, it is a tech play in Pu Neng.
Sparton could bring a mining deal to Pu Neng, but I do not need them to do this to have comfort in the stock…they got 18% of Pu Neng, even if they do not find a vanadium deposit.
What about CLQ ? CLQ has not even declared that vanadium is a target. How can I consider it a vanadium play ? Pu Neng could make a deal in China, Friedland could cut out CLQ and make a new JV or partner with another vanadium source that has nothing to do with CLQ, and be a pig and keep everything in Pu Neng.
This is all true. Pu Neng could go it alone, or get a vanadium source that has nothing to do with Sparton and also leaves CLQ out in the cold.
But on reflection, I am now feeling more confident that CLQ will be involved with the vanadium in China.
First there are the previously noted corporate interlocks of Eric Finlayson. Finlayson is CEO of HPX, he is on the Board of CLQ, he was temporary CEO of Pu Neng, he is a geologist, he is working on finding vanadium sources for Pu Neng.
Then there is the CLQ technology…though there are, apparently, several competing vanadium extraction technologies.
But the additional thought that gives weight to the speculation that CLQ will be involved, is that Friedland would be doing dirty to his partners at Pengxin if he cut CLQ out
of the deal.
How would you feel if you were Jiang Zhao Bai of Pengxin, you just bought into a big equity slice of CLQ, you are working your ass off with your Chinese contacts for CLQ, and Friedland turns around and cuts you out of vanadium mining in China ?
Folks, RF might cut you out you, he might cut me out, he might cut Lee Barker out.
But there is no friggin’ way he will cut Pengxin out of the deal.
So I say, CLQ will be involved in vanadium mining in China.
Real soon. Not a sure thing. But I think so.
****
If this doesn’t work out, I am not going to force it.
Scandium has better supply/demand characteristics than vanadium.
You may want to consider another alternative to Pu Nang and Friedman, just BECAUSE it is an alternative source, if nothing else. I know you don’t like to think about that, but it is the first lesson of investing.
There are many companies making VRFB’s now. Some see the future of many micro grid applications all over the world, (think Africa) Monies saved by not having to run cables pays for their use.
I think that Vanadium and Zinc flow batteries will be the way to go right now.
I’m talking grid type storage and not automobile.
For sure. Looking for alternatives. Just not going to stretch too hard.
Vanadium and scandium…a lot of great give-and-take recently. Especially for two metals that are not very common on world markets and do not have a lot of miners digging them.
There was a lot of benefit for me writing the essay on scandium uptake.
I believe both metals have a great future.
But the consideration on scandium applications tends to persuade me that as a retail investor, scandium is a preferable target compared to vanadium.
It is just a relative relationship, the same way that one might prefer copper or nickel targets over zinc.
The main reasons that emerged are as follows:
1. There is a very robust and international user base for scan-alu alloys. The technology on the manufacturing side is heavily populated.
2. The various transport sectors give some confidence that scan-alu alloys have many years of development before achieving stasis.
3. There is government support and backing for many of the end users of scandium…I am referring to aircraft, aerospace, and military.
4. The competitive landscape for a competing commodities and technologies in the final applications is more favorable with scandium than for vanadium.
5. While there are very few primary producers of vanadium, like Largo, there are none at all in scandium.
6. The speed of uptake on scandium appears to have greater and virtually unlimited upside. Vanadium will have demand from steelmaking and whoever is making VRBs; but compared to the potential users and applications in scandium, vanadium has a narrow user base.
WHAT I AM GOING TO DO ABOUT IT: Obviously my position in CLQ is going to remain important and gives comfort on both metals.
But my thinking on finding additional targets for the two metals has shifted strongly towards scandium.
For my own outlook and assets, I think one or two additional good vanadium plays will fill the bill; for scandium, I would consider a few more. It is a matter of personal preference.
Scandium should get more money in the current situation.
I asked Stockdale if CLQ has made any comments about Vanadium…his reply was
“We have not made any statements about Vanadium but it is an element that we have done quite a lot of work in recovering/separating with our ion exchange process.”
What a surprise. “They have done “quite a lot of work” on a metal that is vital to a company in which RF has invested $100 million. Shocking.
It is going to be kept mum, they will not say much of anything.
It just helps the competition and damages their own negotiating position with potential counterparties.
Thanks, rubberworm !
More thoughts on scandium and vanadium investment strategy
ATTENTION: All opinions subject to change. I could be wrong about anything.
**
I am very comfortable having Clean Teq (and associated companies of RF) as my primary investments in scandium and vanadium. But because of CLQ’s diversity, I am open to more target-specific investments and speculations in both scandium and vanadium.
My opinion is that scandium is a better short-to-medium term target than vanadium. Given my outlook, resources, and objectives. scandium targets will will merit more capital and positions than vanadium.
Having said that, I offer my stream-of-consciouness ditherings about the subject.
**
VANADIUM…I am strongly inclined to take a position in Largo Resources, and then
not give a lot more thought to vanadium for a while. Largo has the advantage of being an established producer in a good jurisdiction. They already have a significant share of world vanadium production, and as an existing producer they will benefit immediately from price increases. So we may have to wait a long time for vanadium prices to go up, but we will not have to wait another five years after that for a mine to be built.
The disadvantage is that they have a lot of overhead since they are an operating mine, and they do not make a lot of money. And we are late, the stock has been in an uptrend since last summer. Oh well. ..if I had had the opinion a year ago, I would have bought it a year ago.
As we all know, MINERS SUCK unless we are in a bull market. But I think it is worth having a company that we know will be first in line to capitalize when vanadium heads north. And I already have enough speculative uncertainty about exploration, development, and construction in my other picks.
Largo Resources…favorably inclined.
**
SCANDIUM…this is a little more interesting. There are several good targets that are a subset of the nickel-cobalt competition with Clean Teq. A lot of Clean Teq’s competitors are falling off the race to nickel-cobalt, but they have big scandium potential. PGM has even dropped nickel-cobalt from its agenda to declare itself a scandium project.
I think of the recent poster who has taken a beating on PGM. Our attitudes change a lot depending on our entry prices and objectives. I have gone back-and-forth on PGM myself. At current prices, PGM is a good scandium speculation. At former prices, it is a disaster as a nickel-cobalt speculation.
PGM and a few others are inferior to Clean Teq as a nickel-cobalt plays, but still have inherent and largely unrecognized value as scandium speculations. Their projects are being moved forward on account of nickel and cobalt. So we do not need to wait for a scandium boom, and the investments are likely to appreciate on account of nickel and cobalt before there is front-of-mind investor awareness on scandium.
And for some reason, the prices are really low. The charts are horrible.
I have to re-check these for their scandium geology, but the companies are already fairly well known to us. Off the top of my head, I know that PGM and AUZ (both Flemington and Sconi) have scandium. The So does the Ningyan (sp?) deposit, I think that is Cobalt 27. Not sure about COB at Thackaringa.
Another Aussie worth looking at is SCY/SCYYF Scandium International. This is a favorite of a well-known analyst; head-to-head, it is inferior to CLQ in my opinion, but as a second place scandium-focussed target, it may be worth considering.
Opinions and feedback are welcome.
#FYI – Vanadium Miners News For The Month Of April 2018
by Matt Bohlsen @sa
Includes: APAFF, ATVVF, AUEEF, BSHVF, CCCCF, LGORF, NSRCF
Summary
Vanadium spot prices were slightly lower in April.
Vanadium market news – Mining legend Robert Friedland states: “We think there’s a revolution coming in vanadium redox flow batteries.”
Vanadium company news – “Neometals vanadium resource a ‘massive’ 4x larger.”
https://seekingalpha.com/article/4167859-vanadium-miners-news-month-april-2018?uprof=46&isDirectRoadblock=true
I’m watching ASX:TMT & AVL because they are both in the Gabanintha vanadium project (don’t ask why) their sp seems to be in step. I thought I had posted in electrical storage.
Griffin…good tickers, thanks
Thanks it’s so little compared to what you have done for us.
I did a search for vanadium demand and got a page of pricey reports like $2500-5000. There was one that was free but it didn’t have info to think about posting. The info is out there I’ll have to try and back door it through mining.com or some other group catering to miners. I think the above link to Bohlsen is the first issue on vanadium, I’m thinking it may improve with the next issue.
Agree 100%, many thanks hn SS.
The main things that I have seen on vanadium are pretty sketchy, but give a good feel for the situation:
–Most sources in western-unfriendly jurisdictions
–World useage maybe 200 tons
–Main current use in steel alloys, China increasing regulations that will increase vanadium demand
–VRB useage very small but poised to explode; will still remain a secondary chemistry in storage but should get significant share over time
–no dedicated Western mines, other than Largo
Against this sketch we have RF strolling around coal-rich Hubei and Shanxi provinces, with a $100 million invested in a VRB company and his right-hand executive stating that he is looking for vanadium in China.
These are not dots to connect. They are thick, bold, black dashes with little spaces in between.