Register
Login:
Share:
Email Facebook Twitter

Member Info for Coldfeet


Member Since: Thu, 13th Nov 2008

Number of Share Chat Posts (all time): 1,545
Number of Share Chat Posts (last 30 days): 0

Last Posted: 6 Mar '14



6 Mar '14


Evening trouble1,

Same here.

Petmin like to think the NAIC JV they have with GRI will have the lowest pig iron opex, by some margin, and they are aiming for less than $280/t, presume that is after credits.

Makes BAO's projections almost unbelievable but the DFS should clear that up.

ATB
1 Jan '14


Evening sharesgonesouth,

Ben did suggest that BAO had looked at this licence to the south-east of Massamba Group but decided not to pursue an interest. The fact that a small coal producer like BHR have decided to invest in exploring a pig iron project themselves can only be based on the economic findings released by BAO so far.

Re. your second paragraph, any potential JV partner would certainly wait for the BFS before negotiating any involvement, the capex numbers are that big. I suspect that BAO already have a JV partner in mind, they just want to see the bankable figures before agreeing their next move.

As do the IFC.

And whoever are behind the AMED increasing stake.

ATB
4 Dec '13


Evening Cylindrix,

If you think BHR will be producing pig iron before BAO then you need to re-read the RNS, and do some research on BAO.

The question that needs answering is why would a small coal producer, currently with opex issues due to logistics, be interested in commiting a lot of funds completing a feasibility study on a pig iron project in tete where there is, currently, no substantial evidence of interest from financiers or steel majors?

Or do they know more than we do?

ATB
27 Nov '13


Morning Jonnyshots,

Take a look at Sippdeal, very low costs and admin charges.

ATB
31 Oct '13


Morning Steeltrader77,

I'm not a metallurgist, far from it, but the bench-scale data looked good to me as a first pass.

Your post contains spot-on questions very relevant to where BAO are currently.

The presentation contains the analysis reported in the pyro-metallurgical RNS dated 4th March which confirmed that the reduction and smelting testwork was un-fluxed. It would be great if the pilot-scale testwork currently in process would report a commercial grade product but I would be surprised. Until the boffins work out the best way to smelt the components, including the type and volume of fluxes required, it may take a few more tests before BAO can announce such an important event.

I've copied parts of the RNS that are relevant.

"The test was un-fluxed and therefore contains some Sulphur and Phosphorus that would be otherwise expected to be removed with the **** and with secondary metallurgical treatment in the ladle after tapping. Similarly much of the Vanadium would be removed from the hot metal and recovered as a Vanadium-rich **** prior to final pig iron production. The low Carbon content of the pig iron is not representative of the Submerged Arc Furnace product which is expected to be in the order of 3.5%.

The chemical analysis of the iron disc in the table confirms that the pig iron after full treatment is likely to meet a typical pig iron specification (EN 10 001:1990; GOST 805-95) for Electric Arc Furnace (EAF) steelmaking. Of particular importance is the very low level of Titanium (Ti), demonstrating that the process is able to remove critical deleterious components from the original resource material."

ATB


Sign up for Live Prices
Top Recommended
Hot Chat Topics
Top recommended posters in the last 30 days
Share Price SpacerQPP1000873 
Share Price Spaceronceatrader525 
Share Price Spacermatlot495 
Share Price SpacerBrotherhumble461 
Share Price Spacersortapundit422 
Share Price Spacerakcsl414 
Share Price Spacercautioussid393 
Share Price SpacerSammyC390 




Member Login

Forgotten your password?
Email:

Password:


Don't have an account? Click here to Register Free!


Home  |  Contact Us  |  About Us  |  Careers  |  Advertise with Us  |  Sitemap  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Cookies  |  Privacy


Datafeed and UK data supplied by NBTrader and Digital Look. While London South East do their best to maintain the high quality of the information displayed on this site,
we cannot be held responsible for any loss due to incorrect information found here. All information is provided free of charge, 'as-is', and you use it at your own risk.
The contents of all 'Chat' messages should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Limited, or its affiliates.
London South East does not authorise or approve this content, and reserves the right to remove items at its discretion.