Member Info for Inbrackets

The attached article would seem a pretty good outline of positive developments that they need to take, though as usual it will depend on timely implementation. The goalposts are on wheels and for once the EU cannot afford to follow reluctantly rather than live in the delusion that they are in control of where they are placed.

https://www.politico.eu/article/vestager-eu-subsidies-could-match-us-green-push/

Some plotting is going on in response, as suspected.

CM, rightly or wrongly, I took it that the work on the redesign etc has now all but been completed and that they are now writing it up “ Work is now largely focused on the revisions of the EIA documents and Savannah remains on track to make its resubmission during Q1 2023, ahead of the 17 March deadline”. How long before it is submitted who knows but “ahead “ would imply that they will be looking to go before March 17th.

Whenever it does drop, the main thing is that a reply, one way or another, is time limited and certain.

Do they have an office? Do they need an office? They did have briefly pre COVID and they may have again but with 17 employees, 10 based in Portugal and senior management spread around the globe/UK, there is hardly a need for a centralised coffee room or photocopier.

Weren’t they looking to juxtapose the world of fossil fuels and global warming forest fires against the new world facilitated with lithium, locally, nationally and pan European? At the same time looking at the ‘issue of the day’ being water and how they are dealing with that and community benefit.

Would be interested to see the engagement numbers in say three months time as I doubt it will be widely viewed or shake things very much, lost in the Christmas fog. We seem to have had a flurry of RNS as it is always good to have a reminder that folk are still alive, but we know what is wanted and that remains under wraps.

Thoughts?
The IRA has certainly ruffled some feathers in the EU. The strong smell of coffee doesn’t necessarily mean that there will be a mass awakening however some sort of response may well come in the CRMAct due early next month. No doubt it will be couched in suitable ESG terms with new acronyms but some of the future ambitions were hinted at recently by UvdL eg reducing permitting period, so we shall soon see.

I don’t see a wholesale reversal of ESG as the EU will use this as a barrier, but they will surely look to facilitate and counter the pull effects of the IRA. I don’t think they are ready to accentuate any trade wars.

Timely
Further confirmation of Savannah’s intentions and acceptance as part of the wider mining community. Still needs to move from the ‘ghost’ into reality over the coming months.

With no existing offtakes, we have no formal ties and an open market when the EIA drops, but any future partner be it someone like Galp, Northvolt or all the other potential suitors will need to see and rely on SAVs ESG credentials as they themselves need to be able to be credible to their own investors. Fortunately I believe that SAV have focussed quite heavily on this area from outset and will be able to demonstrate this to the wider potential partners.

It was the underlying thread that many of the E and the G intertwine with the Social and require local acceptance. As I have droned on before, I think that both Portuguese Gov and EU will need to help satisfy the local municipality that they will benefit fairly from having the mining in their community.

And if EU bureaucracy wasn’t enough, ESG considerations are increasingly becoming a key item, not just for SAV but effectively for all the companies that might either trade with or team up with.

https://investingnews.com/battery-metals-sustainability/

Have been banging on about the need for a local deal for a wee while now as being perhaps more important than any offtake agreement.

No wonder this multi-faceted game of 3/4/5D chess takes time.

What value an offtake agreement? Just imagine getting a call from your solicitor to say your vendor is looking to delay completion for a year, maybe more but will let you know.

I see that Vulcan have confirmed that due ‘supply difficulties’ they have kicked their trial plant a year+ into the future. This is the trial plant, so would still need proving up and fine tuning quite aside from the permitting.

Does this make SAV’s plain vanilla potential and relatively short term potential all the more important for EU support to kickstart meaningful European lithium production.

I think that the local and County Council both gave the new mine the go ahead but it was then pulled by the Government and kicked into an enquiry to help massage COP26 90 miles north in Glasgow. There will be 3/400 families very happy to be solvent again on the West Coast of Cumbria. As it is for coming coal for steel, the logic for mining our own rather than importing the self same from abroad leads to a clear cut decision, at least to my mind, on all manner of fronts. The right decision

Would I be guilty of being too naïve in thinking that the requirements and responsibilities of modern day mining companies such as SAV or major energy companies such as Galp or Northvolt, coupled with due diligence of the EU etc, should qualify them with some moral high ground?

If your view is accurate Denzal, and it would be easy to imagine a whiff n the air, then if local politicians are being obstructive, would it not be for the Portuguese Gov and EU to publicise all the support they are to provide for the local community to ensure that a national and European asset (that by geographic chance is where it is) can be developed as needed. If it were just SAV, then the No-sayers would no doubt continue to whisper, however misplaced.

An open statement from on high, would be a direct connection with the local electorate. To be fair, the local mayor has said that he had nothing fundamental against mining as long as the local community was also to benefit. Aside from the APA decision, it is this local agreement that needs to be reached, and maybe the Gov and EU need to be more vocal in their righteousness.

Historical mistrust might well have been justified and maybe a difficult exorcism.

Last mining project given permits was about 30 years ago and so much has changed which one might hope would help allay fears. Quite aside from Portugal’s own governance, along with European input, there are investors diligence on Governance and anti bribery legislation with the threat of retribution against misbehaving directors. Couple this with powers of enquiry, whatever the level of historic mistrust, one might hope that the backdrop of multiple companies providing best practice advice within a suitable regulatory framework would help confirm the openness and sincerity of a project as much as the lack of any dodgy deal done in a bodega (I know, Spain not Portugal).

Thanks CM. Appreciated.
Interesting article. Portugal is so well positioned from so many angles but would seem to need to jettison some old hang ups and take delight in what they have.

Searched the Portugal Resident site, couldn’t find it for some season. Could you cut and paste the link? Thanks

As you say CM, as you say.
Funny old world.
Few years back the conversations were all about producing in Portugal with no ready market due lack of refiners and no battery makers.
Still depends on successful permitting but the past three years of faffing about has transformed the outlook and inverted the position. Serendipitous.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uil3N7Pkh6A

The full 20 odd mins are quite interesting but he concentrates on Europe’s outlook from about 17mins in. Read into this what you will.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/SPEECH_22_7276

EU recognises the threats to its industrial presence and that it actually needs to act rather than soap box sermonise and kick cans down the road. CRM Act to be presented Q12023 will be a stark backdrop to APAs 50 working day consideration period following resubmission.

Thanks for that. Have read through a few of the responses and trawled through all 300+ entries.

I noted with interest a number of common themes. Many were identical, starting off with ‘Firstly, the CRMA needs to not just focus on …’. Amazingly from different people who had all arrived at the exact same form of words to express themselves. Even more amazingly this also crossed borders and languages as aside from the phenomena in Portugal, I noted that a contributor from Belgium also managed to arrive at the same thoughts.

I see that Vulcan were minded to contribute and note that SAV would seem to have decided not to.

CM, good on you for reading it properly.
Overseas supply is an inevitability (sustainable ESG compliant sources) . They have delayed / deferred any deals so far and suspect they will see what the position is when any licences are issued. The NV comments pretty much confirm the generally difficult local supply position - grades/impurities etc so if we are ok on that front, local and licensed, the pencils are likely to be sharpest post rather than pre APA. It’s not that far off.

https://twitter.com/activematerial/status/1597186428500586498?s=61&t=iFUS9GwmbwJwNm5w3VhYbQ

‘Europe’s known high quality resource are inadequate’ doesn’t mean there aren’t any, in fact implies there are some. Checking out the published grades of other European hopefuls, does it help explain why NV have landed on Portugal.

https://twitter.com/activematerial/status/1597186428500586498