Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Tornadotony
It would seem odd to me for the EA to decide that no permit was needed considering the work done to permit the very similar Peak plant at Teesside :
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ts6-8jh-peak-technology-metals-limited-environmental-permit-issued
"All workstreams supporting the Saltend operations environmental approval are completed......
Both projects are fully permitted, operationally robust with fit-for-purpose technical solutions for both Angola and the UK."
I haven't seen the consultation on the environmental permit for Saltend on the Environment Agency website yet.
Anyone know if it has been granted ?
But would the other miners be able to guarantee that the feedstock going to Saltend is "radionuclide free" as Pensana guaranteed for their planning application ? If not, does it have to pass through the secret process in Angola first ?
I continue to be amazed at the contrast between Peak's detailed and considered application for the Teeside processing plant and the flimsy ("back of a fag packet" ?) stuff submitted to East Riding. I'd support taking over the Peak permissions.
I was interested to stumble upon the recently closed consultation for an Environment Agency permit for LCM
"The intended activity is a pilot project that forms part of a €17m European funded project entitled
Secure European Critical Rare Earth Elements (SecREEts). This is aimed at securing a viable and
integrated European supply chain for rare earth permanent magnets that is competitive with
established Chinese supply, but which meets higher European environmental standards. The rare
earth metal fluorides produced in this process will feed into the existing electrolysis process on site 4
which manufactures Neodymium metal. This latter activity is an activity prescribed under Section
2.2 Part A(1)(a) within the scope of LCM’s current environmental permit.
Process Description:
A fluidised bed reactor converts rare earth oxides (principally Neodymium oxide, Nd2O3, and
Neodymium praseodymium oxide, ((NdPr)2O3) into rare earth fluorides (principally Neodymium
fluoride, NdF3, and Neodymium praseodymium fluoride, NdPrF3) in a batch process using a fluidising
medium composed of anhydrous hydrogen fluoride gas (HF) and Argon (Ar). ....... "
https://consult.environment-agency.gov.uk/psc/ch65-1bl-less-common-metals-limited/supporting_documents/Application%20Variation%20%20Supporting%20Information.pdf
I was surprised by the costs for the Longonjo Concentrator / Longonjo MRES Separation facility in the RNS.
Had they been known about before ?
The stuff about getting involved in the Angolan coffee business was also new to me.
I'm puzzled by the FEED delay. When I skimmed through the rules for the "competition" for funds, I got the impression that if you had already done the bulk of the FEED work, you were ineligible to apply - and on the basis that the FEED for VLS was about to be published, I reckoned that the competition was not material.
Now the RNS says they are in the game for it, one wonders how much of the FEED has been done. Do they have to hide what has been done to date so that they can claim the cash for the prize and delay release for another 6 months ?
I wonder whether Velocys can meet the 70% life-cycle GHG reduction without sorting the incoming waste stream to exclude non-bio materials.
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Alternative-aviation-fuel-sustainability-mar2021.pdf
Debates to be had on the methods for life-cycle analysis ?
I wonder whether Velocys can meet the 70% life-cycle GHG reduction without sorting the incoming waste stream to exclude non-bio materials.
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Alternative-aviation-fuel-sustainability-mar2021.pdf
Debates to be had on the methods for life-cycle analysis ?
Interesting paper - "Fueling flight: Assessing the sustainability implications of alternative aviation fuels"
https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/publications/Alternative-aviation-fuel-sustainability-mar2021.pdf
talks about life cycle analysis for various alternative aviation fuels. They argue that Fischer-Tropsch synthesis fuels from municipal solid waste can have dramatically different impacts depending on the biogenic content of the waste.
"Plastic in MSW effectively sequesters carbon over a long time period if it remains in a landfill, whereas this is less likely for biogenic material, much of whose carbon content would be released as methane or oxidized if left in a landfill, or combusted into biogenic CO2. MSW with higher plastic content thus has a higher GHG intensity ."
There can be indirect benefits from using the biogenic material for fuel " MSW-derived may have high indirect emissions savings due to avoided methane emissions at landfills."
It could get complicated for policymakers to incentivise fuel from the paper and food components of refuse but discriminate against burning plastics !
All I can find on the website is 500,000 tonnes of refuse gives 60 million litres of jet and road fuel. Using the density of kerosene as 0.82, I make that 49,000 tonnes of fuel leaving 451,000 tonnes to go up the chimney.
Sense,
Do you have a rough mass balance for the plant ?
I have only seen the figures that Solena had for their gasification/Velocys plant which quoted an input of 575,000 metric tonnes/yr of refuse getting converted into 39,500 tonnes of jet fuel and 39,300 tonnes of diesel ( and 49 MW of electricity of which 3MW was exported and the rest used in the plant). This still leaves nigh on 500,000 tonnes to go up the chimney as CO2 and water. It strikes me that there is an awful lot of incineration going on in those figures.
Intriguing tweet
"Three little words in the the EU/UK Trade Agreement (2c below: "...other than fuel...") open the way to taxation of aviation fuel for each other's airlines [and hence to future fuel-tax-based policy measures in favour of sustainable fuels] "
https://twitter.com/PEdmondAero/status/1342807034505424897