Member Info for Inbrackets

Dust starts to settle and commentary begins. Thought this was quite an interesting article as it tries to look through the smoke and mirrors, the fact a fiction of the CRMA and the limitations.

https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/critical-raw-materials-act-can-europe-achieve-its-ambitious-goals/

Bearing in mind what the Gov has said publicly in the last administration and then the current, both to the general populace and the EC regards their support for the new industry throughout the chain and across the country, this safety valve strikes me as a plus. I would hope that the project would actually meet any requirements made of it, if at all possible with current technologies, as all parties know and understand what is needed be it OEMs, Governments, the EC, major investors etc etc and more importantly than anything that they need to be as good a guest to their host, the community that they will be part of.

Yes, there will be a range of views but ultimately should APA feel that the case has not been made, and would be uncomfortable in confirming the DIA, this ‘escape’ route would allow the Government to perhaps make a more holistic decision, taking into account broader considerations in the interest of the wider populace to reflect the impact that a refusal in one part of the country may have on the potential development elsewhere.

You asked and I am hoping that I shall be able to chop up my soapbox for kindlingat some stage in the near future.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_1661

All the bits about Lithium would seem to be quite blasé, looking heavily towards friendly country supplies as they recognise the demand cannot be supplied internally. Haven’t come across any specific projects even though they put a target figure so it looks like they will set this overall target and then leave it up to the member states, by classifying projects as a strategic resource.
Will that be the 10 day APA escape route?

That is unless I have missed the important bits, which is quite likely with a relatively cursory initial skim.

Tony, the process is in Portugal and I don’t suppose that they will be having a Bank Holiday for the Coronation, but they will have their own.

We should remember that if APA are minded to refuse the decision they need to refer it to higher authorities and give them 10 working days to make their decision. Therefore, if they are going to grant the DIA, that decision must be reached before day 40. If that’s the case, presumably confirmation would follow and be announced at that point. Hopefully as they should be well aware of what is in the submission, their review (bar consultations) will be quicker though in practice it will probably go to the end.

https://twitter.com/i/broadcasts/1eaJbrmwmZjJX?t=9m15s

UvdL sets the scene for tomorrow. Not much detail and sounded quite woolly with plenty of places for the devil to hide. Lots of talk of friendly countries and future recycling perhaps providing some padding for the can as it is tapped quietly down the road.

Saw a message earlier today to say that it had been pushed back to 16th.

Quite agree with comments. If the Reuters preview was the sum total of the CRMA there seemed to be as many questions to be answered as issues covered.

Anyone know what the problem is with ALL?

I am not deliberately dampening the positives that are swirling round the current position but we should also remember that when the Gov were identifying the original areas (before they whittled it down) SAV were specially excluded from the additional benefits to be provided under the terms of the auction. It caused consternation at the time and whilst words of comfort might have been made in explanation, there was no cast iron confirmation backed by anyone with sufficient authority to execute.

Whatever the rules are of the auctions are, it would be hard to see why they would be treated seriously when they are so delayed and without any recent approvals or visible confirmed activity. So, o the assumption that concerns are met, SAV needs to be given its permissions.

I am hoping that SAV picks up another one or even two further sites from the auctions and that would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons as far as the SP is concerned.

Yes but mostly we’re accidentally posted as they referred to ARCM rather than SAV. Nothing lost.

Another hat tip to Saloccin, in fact take off and bow.

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/annmettler_eu-clean-tech-draft-plan-sets-40-production-activity-7037829009518268416-GtuI

Apparently the proposals from the EU are beginning to seep out. If so, they may well start to enable much of what is needed.

“ - The problem with perennially slow #permitting is also tackled, with national governments allowed to fast-track industrial projects that have an 'adverse impact on the environment' if authorities consider 'the public interest served by the project should override those impacts.' While this may be controversial, we must remember that these are testing times: a) #ukrainewar b) compromised #energysecurity c) flagrant lack of #energyresilience (see above) and d) #deindustrialization in energy-intensive industries (see BASF job cuts of 2400 last week).

This is a make-or-break moment for Europe. Accelerating the #energytransition is the defining generational challenge of our times”

Not sure when this will all hit the fan. I had thought that it was March 8th, but I have seen March 14th. Either way, near or nearer future.

https://www.mining.com/web/monumental-shift-in-way-junior-mining-stocks-are-valued-is-coming/

Another good read, setting the scene.

All I want for Christmas is my DFS, my DFS, see my DFS.
Preferably well before Christmas.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_23_1328

Well only 3-4 working days to see whether they have or not, but speed and action oozed from this statement from Maros Sefcovic

Much will hang on the EU response to the IRA next week when the CRMA is laid out, and the subsequent reactions from the member states. Business cannot sit by indefinitely and will have planned using a variety of (dare I say it) assumptions and outcomes. Strikes me that they are making the point that they have/ will have their bases covered despite what has been the woeful lack of urgency in Europe.

You could easily accuse Aurora of a silence recently but write that down to the newCEO getting his feet under the desk properly. Looks like they will be leaving the mining bit open for cos with experience which may well fit the bill as we move beyond MdB and maybe take on additional areas with the auctions. Appreciate that this is making a base assumption but longer term options are based on various assumptions.

The timing of this article pre the EU CRMA next week, coupled with SAV s submission the following week and APAs decision shortly thereafter is immaculate.

Hat tip Saloccin for rooting out this truffle

Article from SPGlobal from Aurora CEO ending with this last para

‘We expect that significant mining works and a reasonable amount of feasibility assessments are undertaken by mining companies before entering into an off-take agreement for battery metals. Aurora will significantly value off-takes with mining companies with proven experience and developed assets, minimizing risks related to sourcing timelines and specifications. Aurora will in any case remain open for off-take opportunities with early-stage mining assets, if adequate, to secure long-term feedstock.’

Published at the right time

Wolster, if APA are minded to refuse, they have to pass it over to the Minister/ Portuguese Government 10 working days before any announcement is made, so that would mean 40 days to reach a decision effectively, and if it was to be positive why would they need the extra 10 days.. Can’t see a negative being trumpeted from the battlements should it happen as this would market sensitive but if it were to go much beyond 40 days, the nerves may jangle a bit and I may become uncomfortably numb.

I understand that th 10 days is part of the 50 days. May help explain the current consultations going on now rather than submitting early and starting the clock, effectively extending the 50 day period to provide this feedback for APA.

Goodwill? It’s a long term project and a week here or there if it helps a fuller understanding would not be noticed in the greater scheme of things.

I understand that th 10 days is part of the 50 days. May help explain the current consultations going on now rather than submitting early and starting the clock, effectively extending the 50 day period to provide this feedback for APA.

Goodwill? It’s a long term project and a week here or there if it helps a fuller understanding would not be noticed in the greater scheme of things.

Comfortably numb