Member Info for 99icecream

Catbert - Over 4,00 km by truck !

Catbert - Simandou is in the Republic of Guinea, not Equatorial Guinea.

See blow my comments from 5th Feb on this. I would add the following.

As far as we know, OCP do not have their EIA and if so I assume that both Emmerson's and OCP's EIA will be awarded at the same time. Also, OCP have a greater proportion of Carnanallite and so would benefit from the Emmerson's KMP. The KMP require DAP (diammonium phosphate) which is produced by OCP. So there is the prospect of some sort of co-operation between Emmerson and OCP.

From my post Feb 5.

It seems a remarkable coincidence that OCP launches their Khemisset Potash mine (23 Jan) within 8 days of the EML RNS on 1st Feb. This comment in the article on the OCP launch was particularly interesting:

"This program intends to develop innovative processes for ore treatment, optimize water usage, and improve the use of liquid and solid waste products"

IMHO - This suggests to me that OCP are faced with the same issues regarding water use and have also been attempting to improve their processing methods.

https://en.hespress.com/78552-ocp-launches-potash-project-in-khemisset-in-bid-to-expand-food-security.html

You can search the French language newspapers where there is generally a very positive attitude to Fertilizers / OCP / Phosphates, little or no mention of Potash. You would really need to read the popular press (in Arabic) to know more.

In its latest research Liberum (4 March 2024) has a target price for Emmerson on 17.8p, so yes 10 bagging is a possibility.

Currently the KP2 prices are being dictated by price changes in Johannesburg.

Volumes for July 1 to July 10, are KP2.L = 6.9 million shares; KP2.AX = 6.6 million shares; KP2.JO 60.3million

JO volume approx 10 x other markets

Indeed - spot the difference:

KP2.AX Close 1.37 (equiv) Volume 76 Thousand

KP2.L Close 1.375 Volume 533 Thousand

KP2.JO Close Price 1.46 (equiv) Volume 11.792 Million

The idea isn't to choose Potash as an alternative to Golf, but just to get an idea of the volume of water needed by Kore c.f. some other use we can all understand.

Based on the 1 June 2020 Feasibility Study which assumed KCL production of an average of 101.8 Tonnes per hour and 810,000 Tonnes per annum. This implies production runs for 810,000 / 101.8 = 8,000 hrs per annum (91% of the available time).

This implies water use of 56 Tonnes per hour = 448,000 Tonnes per annum.

So equivalent to the water needs of 2.25 Spanish 18HGC's

Morocco has about 40 x 18HGC's aimed at tourism.

BTW another interesting statistic from Spain. 2/3 of crops in Spain use irrigation. Also, 80% of water use in Spain is irrigation.

https://www.agroberichtenbuitenland.nl/actueel/nieuws/2023/08/18/spain--we-spend-more-water-than-we-can-afford

So that means Kore needs about as much water as Spanish 18HGC ?

How, many hour a day do we assume Kore operates ?

Thanks AJ

The average Spanish 18HGC requires 162 Acre Feet of water per year (enough for a cube 162 foot x 1 acre).

Rather than the infamous water unit the OSP (Olympic Swimming Pool). I suggest the Spanish 18HGC (18 Hole Golf Course).

The average Spanish 18HGC requires 162 Acre Feet of water per year (enough for a cube 18 foot x 1 acre).

This translates to 200,000,000 litres or 200 tonnes per annum of water.

This about Nitrogen based fertilizers made from excess Russian natural gas (not Potash or Phosphates).

IMHO - You are correct Veteran10. My guess is that Mr. Knauth did not know / was not told that he should not talk to press / analysts in the 30 days (close period) prior to the annual results being announced. The share issue was being organised for the same day and hence the Non-Denial, Denial was necessary to keep the share price down.

With the Feasibility Study distributed to interested parties after the 30th April, a two month interval allows time for them to have their boffins read and interpret the material and come back with any technical questions.

Glencore are primarily commodity traders and are happy buying off-takes or even working mines. The are not usually keen on taking huge risk developing mine projects. Their recent bad experience with HZM will not have changed their attitude (IMHO).

Maybe they should have announced another funding agreement with Shard ! - That did the trick last time.

We know that a number of potential strategic partners (who have had the companies feasibility study since 30 April) are engaging with the Company to better understand the project !!

So, now the company must find out who are really wants to deal, and if the price works.

The RNS is (IMHO) what's known in political circles as a Non Denial Denial (see wikipedia).