London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

I think the graphite price you may be looking at that is seemingly connected to the oil price may be the price for synthetic graphite as this is fuel derived product/more expensive fuel may result in higher open costs which producers may pass on to graphite consumers.

Sorry for the very long attempt to answer your questions, I tried to be as concise as I could. The company does have an email address which I’d recommend trying - they have been quite accommodating to many answering questions in the past: admin@tirupatigraphite.co.uk

Hope the above is somewhere helpful!
PS I forgot to add to the HF acid-free tech question that TGR actually did some testing with a German partner which supported the TSG tech's capability and applicablitiy - RNS 22nd Feb 2021

https://www.lse.co.uk/rns/TGR/battery-grade-spherical-graphite-trials-successful-7ajme7kkxdtzbfb.html

And my reply;

That's great, thank you so much for taking the time and for the detailed reply.

Will be really interested to hear back about improving Madagascan grades and any trial results for the Mozambique plants.

I was basing my question 6 on the info in the article below about oil prices affecting synthetic prices, which would then lead producers to change to natural graphite and bring the price up.

I also saw a rough corolation between flake graphite price and the oil price on the charts.

https://investorintel.com/critical-minerals-rare-earths/why-graphite-could-be-the-next-critical-mineral-to-rise-steeply-in-price/?print=pdf

5. That’s a very good question and one I’m sure TGR will address in its revised plans - however TGR does not only rely on forecasts but figures being achieved in actual sales globally which is a good competitive AND realistic edge it has over those yet to develop any projects themselves who are of course very keen to shout about forecast prices being as high as possible. Indeed though, price growth will only benefit current producers like TGR and those bringing capacity online asap. Again, would expect the figures to be based on what the company sees itself as being able to achieve in terms of giving itself a competitive edge over other higher cost/lower margin producers and would-be producers such as from what it is achieving now and what it is winning new customers with in price negotiations etc. Unlike Syrah’s position back in 2017, the graphite market is quickly growing now with the onset of mass EV adoption and the Mozambique assets have a stronger basket mix of cheaper finer flake graphite and more expensive co****/larger flake graphite compared to Syrah’s which is heavily dominated by cheaper fine flake material. I would expect the price rises in forecasts achieved for ex-China graphite material to be reflected in TGR’s revised projections/plans in a strong and pragmatic manner. Elsewhere I’ve seen DFS releases such as BKT, EV1, TON etc suggesting prices have risen anywhere between 10-30% for some grades and flake sizes since 2018 and suggesting price ranges could be achieved between $700-$1700/t depending on product - exactly what that turns out to be for TGR will again have to be judged by the company and the market updated for its first stage expected product basket mix out of Montepuez.

6. Unsure exactly because the graphite market is opaque, especially within China, and we do not have a breakdown of TGR’s exact sales by flake size/grade to measure vs current market intelligence/forecasts - however important to bear in mind it’s an average basket price and TGR produce a basket of flake sizes currently out of Madagascar that have reached between a 94-96% tgc level of purity - hence now the 97% figure is being achieved and growing the company expects the basket price to increase - I would expect such a trend of higher prices to continue as TGR increases sales of the higher purity and larger flake graphite to new customers as is mentioned in the latest RNS it is intending to do with qualification work and marketing ongoing, and will result in the average price therefore moving up as a greater proportion of production is this higher grade material than it has been in the recent past - furthermore there is nothing to suggest TGR won’t attempt to produce material at an even higher grade out of Madagascar toward 98-99% (I.e. before the extreme high purity levels of 99.95%+ requiring downstream plants) which again would of course probably result in achieving higher average prices in future.

3. TGR has been quite confident in voicing that it will review BAT’s figures and revise them to suit TGR’s capabilities and the long-years of experience of management in dealing with Hard rock Graphite resources. They’ve said the work done to date at Montepuez on the ground (groundwork, basecamp, crusher, drainage, tailings-dam work etc) has already saved about £10m going forward. Hard to know exactly until TGR publishes its figures but so far in Madagascar its proven itself to be an industry low-capex:production capacity producer - spending only c.£11m in Madagascar on actual Capex to bring 30,000tpa of production online (attached pic from TGR presentation as well). The first stage at Monetpuez is proposed at 50,000tpa and is construction started so am v looking forward to what the company can come up with in its revised plans, albeit much will depend on if TGR goes for the full 50,000tpa to start or another first stage target for example. Opex-wise achieving higher grades with lean processing circuits is TGR’s bread and butter as is becoming more apparent in Madagascar despite the saprolitic clay material there.
Mozambique is hard-rock and similar to previous projects in India operated by management I believe, and with innovations in processing units demonstrated so far in Madagascar I would hope we can expect reduced opex figures for Mozambique in the revised plans too.

4. I am unsure quite at what scale TSG’s tech is ready for application - however it had been hoped according to the IPO prospectus and the April 2021 fundraising before the adverse weather at the beginning of 2022 and the current TSG impasse was reached that, among the large-scale integrated downstream unit that was initially planned for expansion in India, a 3,000tpa unit was going to be targeted for HF acid-free spherical graphite - considering Syrah’s initial plant in the US is targeting c.11,000tpa and using HF acid, that is ambitious and contributes to why investors were/are very keen to see progress on the downstream front. Again though, until we hear more about the TSG/downstream situation from TGR it’s just speculation what ultimately may occur, however the company has made noises in interviews about targeting the UK and elsewhere for downstream capacities. There are certainly growing incentives to build capacities in various locations globally. I believe initially though these plants would not be located in Madagascar/Mozambique owing to the additional technology and infrastructure requirements, hence the more developed economies with established infrastructure, tech and labour etc are probably preferences.

Thank you T.B on telegram for the comprehensive reply to all questions. Here is the reply in full:

Hi Andy,

Here’s my go at answering your q’s:
1. BAT did a LOT of drilling on these deposits, increasing confidence in the resource bases to provide for long life of mine for the respective stages. At Montepuez there are two deposits, Elephant and Buffalo that form part of a mining plan originally developed by BAT for the 100,000tpa capacity, already permitted with granted licenses etc, so there’s not much needed in terms of upgrading the resource for quite a while imo given the size and with grades of up to c.23% tgc. I would expect as they mine the resource and funds are flowing that exploration and drilling will continue around the deposits and within the license/tenement areas to either increase the mine life by expanding and upgrading the resource over an even larger area, or to further up confidence across the latter stages of the mine life. Bear in mind that stage 1 of Montepuez has a 50 year mine life (see pics of BAT BFS for Montepuez stage 1 below). I guess any plans to drill more will be published as the company sees fit once it has revised BAT’s plans, but I reckon it’s not an immediate concern given the substantial drill out to date.

2. All the resources contained in the deposits as far as I’m aware belong to and are owned by TGR now. BAT published a maiden Vanadium resource in 2019 and only did preliminary work on that front before their focus shifted to gold+copper exploration in Australia. A great thing about this deal is that it includes all the IP related to the projects I believe so I’m sure TGR is of course aware of the contained Vanadium resource and perhaps this will be touched upon again when TGR update the market with their revisions. I noted from BAT’s announcement of the Vanadium resource that they detailed a preliminary plan involving how the Vanadium could be exploited and conducted test work that demonstrated that V2O5 can be extracted as a by-product of the graphite processing at the Project, involving a secondary process circuit to put the Graphite tailings through to produce the V205. This would reduce waste and boost the project’s Sustainability credentials on top of massively benefitting the long term economics and value of the project as you suggest, so am sure TGR would like to raise awareness of these factors. As BAT’s work suggests they can exploit the Graphite tailings produced via Flake Graphite concentrate production and TGR currently being a Graphite focused producer I reckon TGR will first focus on bringing these assets into production first effectively, before then expanding their focus toward an additional revenue stream of V205 production which again as you allude to could be substantial! (Again I will attach pictures of the Vanadium reserve/resource as announced by BAT below)

Good evening all.

Tirupati Graphite has recently come to my attention. I have had a look at some of the numbers for the recently acquired Mozambique projects.
https://tirupatigraphite.co.uk/images/Corporate%20Presentations/Q4-2022-CORP%20Presentation%20Final.pdf

Could anyone more knowledgeable than myself please have a go at answering some of the following questions please?

1) From page 11 above, the 2012 JORC estimates the total mineral resource at 13Mt. Is this likely to rise significantly in the future? How much of the license areas are unexplored? Is there a resource upgrade planned?
2) I see from the battery minerals website, at Montepuez there is 86Kt of contained Vanadium Pentoxide (V2O5) which is currently selling for $36,000/t. Does this belong to Tirupati now? Is it part of the JORC resource/reserve? I’m surprised it hasn’t been mentioned as the metal content could potentially be worth about 25% of the total current resource value of all Tirupati projects combined.
3) Tirupati have a lean processing technology. Does this mean that figures used in the 2018 Mozambique feasibility study require significant revision? By how much does capex and opex come down using Tirupati technology?
4) I am interested to know more about the TSG India acid free technology to purify the graphite to 99.95%. Is this ready to go beyond pilot scale? Will it be installed on location at the projects or is it carried out in India?
5) How does todays basket price for the Mozambique 96% TGC product compare with the figures used in the 2018 feasibility study? The prices were based on 2022 estimated prices of USD$1,064/t @ Montepuez and USD$1,106/t @ Balama

6) For the Madagascar project(s), "Targeting c.10% uplift in basket price realisation from Madagascan production to between US$910 - US$935 per metric tonne in the fiscal year to March 2024"
Is this value lower/higher or about right for non China graphite market prices? Could this price increase once buyer(s) test and once consistent volume is established or is this the maximum price we could expect going forward?

I noticed that average graphite prices tend to follow the oil price and it looks like the oil price is on the rise right now so I'm wondering if there is any short term upside to the basket price as I haven't read anywhere that a fixed price offtake agreement exists.

https://www.batteryminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Increase-in-Montepuez-Graphite-Reserve-1.pdf

https://www.batteryminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Substantial-Maiden-Vanadium-Resource-at-Montepuez.pdf

https://www.batteryminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/2018-12-12-Battery-Minerals-Balama-Central-Feas-Study-FINAL-FINAL.pdf

I was beginning to get tired of my own posts to be fair but as its the weekend, c'est la vie.
I'm sure visitinghost will be back again soon with a new line of enquiry.

Cash end december 2021
€6,446,217
Loan drawdown €5m
Revenue earned 1h 2022 €2.98 m

Cash end of june 2022
€2,221,662

Money out 1h 22 = €12m

Cash start of 2h 22 €2.2m
Capital raise €3.75m
Altair loan €2.4m
Revenue €2-4m
Money available = €10.15m to €12.15m

Minus €5m loan repayment = €5.15 to €7.15m

2023 - March, capital raise - £2m for R&D, a further £1.7m Altair interest only loan, and I am hoping they have just taken out the remaining of the Altair loan. The first repayment is due end of june (3 month payment holiday, just like the original loan), and is smaller repayments and now due to be repaid by the end of 2024.

Have a look at previous RNS's, Italy MDC reached financial close just under one month after the 2021 placing.
Italy MDC has likely netted Eqtec around €2.5m of revenue. France MDC is 6,5x the size of Italy MDC. Revenues from france maybe €10-15m?

What about the €4m University of Loraine funding grant? The €1m feasibility payment from the French government? Croatia MDC revenue due next after Italy is online? Next 1MW project in Greece we were told was already 80% funded last year? 3MW BMEC project in USA due to reach financial close this Quarter? Outstanding money due from Northfork? Development fees due for Deeside? Money due for Southport SPV? Refinancing Italy MDC due Q2?

Loads of news due and we have access to those loans. I really hope they just drew down the second instalment of the Riverfort march 2023. If not then its a worry.

D.P said this in the video:

"We still believe that the situation in the near term will continue to deteriorate, so we wanted to reprofile the debt and defer [inaudible] the payment plan originally committed, eh, with the lenders.

The debt reprofile requires an equity element to it to be able to implement, so the timing of the equity raise was in part dictated by this. Meanwhile, we also, eh, need the capital to continue, as we mentioned, progress on the MDCs this year. "

So either the loan is already withdrawn and needed reprofiling, or because the share price was so low, the existing loan terms were not attractive enough to Riverfort so they agreed a longer repayment schedule in return for warrants.

"The Lenders will also receive warrants over 965,909,091 Ordinary Shares as part of the debt reprofile, exercisable for a period of two years from the date of grant at a 100 percent premium over the Placing Price ("Lender Warrants"). However, the Lender Warrants will be exercisable only once the mid-market closing price of the Ordinary Shares is equal to or exceeds 0.55 pence at the time of exercise."

Production process of thermoelectric plants based on the gasification of waste

EBIOSS is an engineering company specialized in the design and construction of “turnkey” hand” of thermoelectric plants of between 500 KW and 10 MW based on gasification of waste.
By integrating the waste gasification method EQTEC Gasifier Technology clean energy is produced from heterogeneous waste.
waste gasification technology
There are various technologies from which electricity is obtained from waste such as direct combustion, pyrolysis, gasification and anaerobic digestion.
Anaerobic digestion is applicable to wet waste such as animal manure, organic waste and green energy crops (lawn, for example).
The other three processes are applicable to solid waste: In the direct combustion process, solid waste is burned directly
in boilers, producing steam that is used to generate electricity. In the pyrolysis process, the waste is broken down into pyrolysis oil that is It is used as fuel and its combustion generates energy.
The waste gasification process is a thermochemical treatment of the waste by which combustible gas is produced, called synthesis gas.
The advantage of gasification is that the use of syngas is much more efficient than direct combustion of the original fuel.
Thermal gasification is a highly efficient process compared to other technologies for the production of energy from waste, since with the same amount of waste generates more energy.
The waste gasification process is implemented using as raw material solid waste that is transformed into gas. This gas has a calorific value (heating value) determined to be used as a fuel for internal combustion engines, that drive alternators and as a result produce power.
EBIOSS waste gasification technology can use different types ofwaste as fuel, such as:
fruit tree residues
Almond shells and other nuts
coconut shells
Olive pits and pulp
grape pomace
forest residues
straw
sugarcane bagasse
Waste from the furniture industry etc.
Currently, the EBIOSS waste processing and transformation department is developing different technologies for different product mixes, such as organic fraction of Urban Solid Waste (MSW), chicken manure, sewage sludge, plastics, tires, animal meal, fuel derived from waste, etc.

Waste quality requirements
The factors that influence the efficiency of waste gasification are: humidity, ash content and the correspondence between the type of waste and the equipment for their gasification.
The composition of ground wood must also perfectly meet the requirements of gasification equipment. The variation in the size of the waste particles in comparison with what was planned will reduce effectiveness.

https://translate.google.com/?hl=en&sl=es&tl=en&op=docs

https://cecam.es/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Documento-de-conclusiones-Oportunidades-y-beneficios-de-la-economia-circular.pdf

"Management and recovery of by-products
? Grape pomace: main grape by-product (8-12%). The process begins with washing the pomace with hot water through bands to extract all the sugar and alcohol it contains. The water from the washings is called pickaxe and after having carried out the fermentation of the sugars, it goes to the distillation columns to obtain alcohol.
Next, the washed pomace is dried and the grape pomace (which is sold for oil extraction) and the dried pomace that is used as biomass in the facilities to generate electrical and thermal energy are separated.
? Wine lees: main by-product of musts and wines (4-8%). It is distilled to obtain brandy, producing a liquid discharge called value-free vinasse. But MOVIALSA has a plant for the extraction of tartaric materials in which stillage is treated, obtaining calcium tartrate for commercial use. In turn, the defatted stillage is produced, which is treated in a mineral liquid fertilizer concentrator, in which organic fertilizer and liquid mineral organic fertilizer of plant origin are manufactured, a product registered with the Ministry of Agriculture according to current legislation, which is commercialized under the brand VIDORGAN. This concentrator is fed by thermal energy from the steam network and hot water from the integrated cogenerations.
The by-product treatment cycle is closed by returning this fertilizer to the vineyards.
? Alperujo: main by-product of the mills that is removed during the olive milling campaign and that is processed in the reprocessing plant that MOVIALSA has in Campo de Criptana. Crude olive pomace oil is obtained that is sold to refining industries for its preparation and mixing, olive stone and olive pomace that are used as biomass in the facilities to generate electricity."

-----------------------------
**In turn, the defatted stillage is produced, which is treated in a mineral liquid fertilizer concentrator, in which organic fertilizer and liquid mineral organic fertilizer of plant origin are manufactured, a product registered with the Ministry of Agriculture according to current legislation, which is commercialized under the brand VIDORGAN.**

Again, i'm no chemical engineer or biologist, but it sounds to me like they have a pretty good handle on their operation.

Anaerobic digestion and gasification in the wine industry described here.
https://www-interempresas-net.translate.goog/Vitivinicola/Articulos/220216-Integracion-de-las-energias-renovables-en-la-industria-del-vino.html?_x_tr_sl=es&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en&_x_tr_pto=sc&_x_tr_hist=true

Hi visiting host,

I'm not a chemical engineer so can't answer that question specifically, but here is a few of the disadvantages of anaerobic digestion I found online

Disadvantages of Anaerobic Digestion

When carried out at a commercial scale on farms and at wastewater treatment works (WwTWs) it requires a high level of investment in large tanks and other process vessels.

If run inefficiently AD can cause an odour nuisance.

Does not convert as large a proportion of the carbon in the biomass to biogas as can be achieved using gasification.

It takes longer to start up the process due to the slow growth rate of the methane-producing organisms as compared to aerobic systems.

In some applications has higher buffer chemical dosing requirements for pH control to keep the pH for AD within the range of 6.5–8.

Nutrients removal is not as efficient as in aerobic treatment if is used as a water treatment process. Invariably a post-treatment process will be necessary before any discharge to a watercourse. For such discharges, a secondary process stage will be needed such as membrane filtration, or even further aerobic treatment, in order to meet the river, ditch, or stream discharge consent requirements and protect the aqueous environment.

The digestate output contains ammonia which when it is spread on land needs the care to prevent ammonia gas from causing air pollution.

I think that the PH of the olive waste plus the higher water requirement along with the lower carbon conversion could be the deciding factors here? Anaerobic digestion is widely available across Europe so surely this niche olive waste industry would know about them.

Or it could be that anaerobic digestion doesn't have the same global energy efficiency as CHP gasification. Global eficiency quoted as 45% to 52% in this paper
https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1607315

https://eqtec.com/the-first-olive-pomace-waste-to-energy-plant-in-the-world-using-advanced-gasification/

Movialsa total efficiency 64%
https://eqtec.com/wp-content/uploads/EQTEC-Movialsa-case-study-Aug-2022.pdf

Maybe they needed a combined heat and power plant building, and adding the gasification plant was economically feasible to do at the same time.

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/generating-energy-from-waste-including-anaerobic-digestion
"Advanced conversion technologies
A number of innovative advanced, high temperature processes are beginning to emerge. These have the potential to be more efficient than conventional processes and can offer a range of different types of energy from bio-based wastes, including wood waste and municipal wastes.

Here is an interview with the old CEO about Movialsa
https://*************.net/ceo-qa-with-ian-price-at-eqtec-plc-loneqt-2

Oh and to say that Eqtec have fallen since IPO is misleading as Eqtec PLC has only existed since 2017/18. The IPO was of React energy Ireland which were a biomass real estate business and had no affiliation with e

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for Andii

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for Andii

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)

Please enter at least 2 characters

No results found

Search results

Recently viewed

Trending