Member Info for jimb2

Https://mexicobusiness.news/mining/news/mining-companies-have-filed-500-amparos-against-mining-law

The Mining Law reform, which came into effect on May 9, 2023, has stirred uncertainty within the mining sector. A notable point of contention raised by companies is the reduction of concessions. Industry insiders and opposition leaders alike have deemed the reform unconstitutional, prompting the initiation of legal challenges against it.

In response to what the sector and opposition leaders consider an unconstitutional reform of the Mining Law, opposition deputies have filed a legal challenge against the reform before the Supreme Court (SCJN). On the private sector front, both national and foreign companies have submitted over 500 amparos.

And Vulcan:

https://bnn.network/finance-nav/if-vulcan-materials-does-not-sell-land-i-will-issue-a-decree-to-expropriate-amlo/

I think his last few months are going to be very stressful, I wouldn't put it past China to restrict battery materials going to Mexico?

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-require-export-permits-some-graphite-products-dec-1-2023-10-20/

I had a tip for BEM at 18p from another poster, at these prices and the current outlook for European supplies of graphite being restricted by China, it looks to be good punt.

https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-require-export-permits-some-graphite-products-dec-1-2023-10-20/

Https://www.investors.com/news/lithium-stocks-alb-sqm-downgraded-on-oversupply-as-ev-race-slows/

Lithium Americas cut at Deutsche Bank as richly valued after spinoff

Wednesday's trading as Deutsche Bank downgraded the stock to Hold from Buy with a $7 price target, slashed from $25, citing a rich valuation following the recent spinoff of Lithium Argentina

Chile Copper Company: to buy Australian assets in Chile:

https://www.spglobal.com/commodityinsights/en/market-insights/latest-news/metals/101823-codelco-to-acquire-australian-junior-as-chile-rolls-out-lithium-plan#:~:text=In%20a%20statement%20late%20Oct,country's%20second%2Dlargest%20lithium%20resource.

In a statement late Oct. 17, Codelco said it would acquire all of LPI's shares at A$0.57 per share, valuing at the company at around $244 million.

Mexico lithium industry news:

Seems the time of reckoning is upon us @EV_Bull and those with there resources are starting to call the shots:

Nigeria to require mining firms to invest in domestic processing - minister

https://www.reuters.com/article/nigeria-mining-idAFL8N3BN44J

Good job for EMH being located in the heart of European manufacturing as well as for EG1 with no such restrictions on exporting Spodumene -

Https://cnevpost.com/2023/10/17/byd-expects-q3-net-profit-to-rise-69-from-q2/?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Lithium mines and battery tech two essential ingredients!

FYI,

I'm a KDNC holder and stumbled upon this that you might find interesting,

Https://www.dossierpolitico.com/vernoticias.php?artid=288589&relacion=&tipo=Principal&categoria=12

Ganfeng Lithium has the possibility of resorting to an existing reciprocal investment protection agreement between Mexico and China regarding the cancellation of its concessions for the exploitation of lithium in Sonora by the government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO).

This agreement, signed in 2008, allows a Chinese investor to initiate an international procedure, explained Carlos Ramos, partner at the Hogan Lovells law firm.

I believe this is the agreement in question:

AGREEMENT BETWEENTHE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED MEXICAN STATES AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE´S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON THE PROMOTION AND RECIPROCAL PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS

https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/treaty-files/759/download

I would welcome a legal eye looks over, but article 7 looks very interesting:

ARTICLE 7

Expropriation and Compensation

Neither Contracting Party may expropriate or nationalize an investment either directly or indirectly through measures tantamount to expropriation or nationalization (“expropriation”), except:

(a) for a public purpose;

(b) on a non-discriminatory basis;

(c) in accordance with due process of law; and

(d) on payment of compensation in accordance with paragraph 2 below.

2. Compensation shall:

(a) be equivalent to the fair market value of the expropriated investment immediately before the expropriation occurred. The fair market value shall not reflect any change in value because the intended expropriation had become publicly known earlier;

it's a lengthy document so take a look, it appears Ganfeng have filed the first stage that give four months:

Annex to Article 13 paragraph 5

An investor shall go through the domestic **administrative review procedures as specified by the laws and regulations of the disputing Contracting Party before the submission to international arbitration in accordance with Chapter III, Section One. If the domestic administrative review procedures are not complete within four (4) months after the date an application for the review is first filed, it shall be considered that the procedures are complete and the investor may proceed to an international arbitration** The investor may file an application for the review during the six (6) months consultation or negotiation period as provided in Article 12.

GL

i feel far more confident with the outcome favouring ganfeng if it does get to icsid arbitration now i’ve seen the 2008 investment protection agreement and the fact that ganfeng have started the process. of course, it might not reach that stage.

from my post 15th october 17:52 on the ganfeng concessions:

carlos ramos, partner at the hogan lovells law firm

“throughout this administration, the government's strategy has been to start with a procedure of this type, regardless of strict legality, and subsequently seek to reach an agreement,” said the lawyer.

and with that in mind i’ll be following what happens with vulcan materials that seems to be following the a_l.o strategy.

https://www.mineria-pa.com/noticias/mexico-amlo-exhorta-a-vulcan-materials-a-llegar-a-un-acuerdo/

the president of mexico, andrés manuel lópez obrador (amlo), urged the subsidiary of vulcan materials, calica, to accept his government's offer of usd 440 million for the 2,000 hectares it has concessions in the southeast of the state of *****ana roo.

but lópez obrador warned that he will not leave the matter hanging and will end it before the end of his six-year term in 2024

the mexican government shut down vulcan materials' operations last year , citing concerns about the impact of the company's underwater limestone extraction on the local ecosystem and water table.

vulcan , which has a concession until 2037, has stated that it has the necessary permits to operate and that it intends to vigorously pursue all available legal avenues to protect its rights and resume normal operations.

amlo pointed out that, despite his government's offer, the company refuses to sell and demands **** compensation of usd 1.5 billion for the closure of its operation, ordered in may 2022****

and who wants to inherit this?

sheinbaum asks vulcan materials to accept the purchase offer for the materials bank in playa del carmen

https://icsid.worldbank.org/cases/case-database/case-detail?caseno=arb/19/1

legacy vulcan, llc (u.s.)

date registered:

january 3, 2019

date of constitution of tribunal:

september 20, 2019

status of proceeding:

pending

latest development:

september 20, 2023 - each party files a post-site visit brief.

@tomcat-14, yes ironic $600bn at circa $80/t lce

compensation shall:

(a) be equivalent to the fair market value of the expropriated investment immediately before the expropriation occurred. the fair market value shall not reflect any change in value because the intended expropriation had become publicly known earlier;

(b) be paid without delay;

(c) include interest at a commercially reasonable rate, from the date of expropriation until the date of actual payment; and

(d) be fully realizable and freely transferable.

that agreement is something i didn't know existed and with no related trade agreement between mexico and china gave me some cause for concern – not now!

@EV_Bull,

that agreement covers the arbitration in plenty of detail and we know that Ganfeng have filed an *** administrative review ***so the first stage of the arbitration process and that leaves only four months for the administrative review to be completed otherwise submission to international arbitration is possible.

https://bnn.network/world/mexico/mexicos-lithium-concession-cancellation-legal-implications-and-future-prospects/

Controversy Over Investment Obligations

The Mexican authorities had put Ganfeng’s concessions under review, demanding evidence that Ganfeng’s local subsidiaries had fulfilled their investment obligations from 2017 to 2021. Despite Ganfeng’s submission of the required evidence in May, the authorities proceeded with the cancellation. Ganfeng maintains its position that the cancellation resolutions violate both Mexican and international law, claiming them to be arbitrary and unsubstantiated in fact and law. ***The company has filed administrative review recourses against the resolutions***

Annex to Article 13 paragraph 5

An investor shall go through the domestic **administrative review procedures as specified by the laws and regulations of the disputing Contracting Party before the submission to international arbitration in accordance with Chapter III, Section One. If the domestic administrative review procedures are not complete within four (4) months after the date an application for the review is first filed, it shall be considered that the procedures are complete and the investor may proceed to an international arbitration** The investor may file an application for the review during the six (6) months consultation or negotiation period as provided in Article 12.

Notice of Intent and Consultation

1. The disputing parties should first attempt to settle a claim through consultation or negotiation.

2. With a view to settling the claim amicably, the disputing investor shall deliver to the disputing Contracting Party written notice of its intention to submit a claim to arbitration at least six months before the claim is submitted.2 Such notice shall specify:

(a) the name and domicile of the disputing investor and, where a claim is made by an investor for loss or damage to an enterprise, the name and domicile of the enterprise;

I would hope this is resolved within the four months administrative review period.

Well, is no one curious?

Ganfeng Lithium has the possibility of resorting to an existing reciprocal investment protection agreement between Mexico and China regarding the cancellation of its concessions for the exploitation of lithium in Sonora by the government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO).

I believe this is the agreement in question:

AGREEMENT BETWEENTHE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED MEXICAN STATES AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE´S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON THE PROMOTION AND RECIPROCAL PROTECTION OF INVESTMENTS

https://investmentpolicy.unctad.org/international-investment-agreements/treaty-files/759/download

I would welcome a legal eye looks over, but article 7 looks very interesting:

ARTICLE 7

Expropriation and Compensation

Neither Contracting Party may expropriate or nationalize an investment either directly or indirectly through measures tantamount to expropriation or nationalization (“expropriation”), except:

(a) for a public purpose;

(b) on a non-discriminatory basis;

(c) in accordance with due process of law; and

(d) on payment of compensation in accordance with paragraph 2 below.

2. Compensation shall:

(a) be equivalent to the fair market value of the expropriated investment immediately before the expropriation occurred. The fair market value shall not reflect any change in value because the intended expropriation had become publicly known earlier;

####

Public purpose seems to point to something such as claiming land to build a school or hospital – with my limited search:

What standard should apply when determining what constitutes a public purpose? To qualify as serving a public purpose, a project must serve a benefit to the public, rather than aiding the interests of an individual or specific group

Https://www.dossierpolitico.com/vernoticias.php?artid=288589&relacion=&tipo=Principal&categoria=12

Ganfeng Lithium has the possibility of resorting to an existing reciprocal investment protection agreement between Mexico and China regarding the cancellation of its concessions for the exploitation of lithium in Sonora by the government of Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO).

This agreement, signed in 2008, allows a Chinese investor to initiate an international procedure, explained Carlos Ramos, partner at the Hogan Lovells law firm.

However, to take this step “I would have to renounce any defense procedure that was being processed before the Mexican authorities,” he explained in an interview.

####

Meanwhile, the possibility that the government and Ganfeng Lithium reach an agreement also remains open, something that Carlos Romero does not rule out as the intention behind the decision made by the Mexican authorities.

“Throughout this administration, the government's strategy has been to start with a procedure of this type, regardless of strict legality, and subsequently seek to reach an agreement,” said the lawyer.

Yes, indeed the National Grid and all this talk of enough electricity to power the EV revolution, keeping me awake at night - perhaps it's just a phase I'm going through - time to go off grid.

Make that Myth 1 bullet 2,

@Ericthered,

National Grid:

Myth 2

https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/electric-vehicles-myths-misconceptions#:~:text=Myth%207%3A%20Electric%20cars%20break,longer%20due%20to%20regenerative%20braking.

Not there yet @MB, on the move in the next eighteen months at the outside so I won't see the benefit, the new location will face in the right direction - I was contemplating ground solar but didn't have the agreement from the decision maker, that would have needed more area than roof solar due to shadows/trees blocking etc.

And of course the next nugget of doubt:

Do the electricity grid's wires have enough capacity for charging EVs?

The simple answer is yes. The highest peak electricity demand in the UK in recent years was 62GW in 2002. Since then, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16% due to improvements in energy efficiency.

Even if we all switched to EVs overnight, we estimate demand would only increase by around 10%. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002, and this is well within the range the grid can capably handle.

Well, there's no end of conflicting reporting on that subject,

I do find getting solar panels fitted is far easier than drilling for oil and refining at home ;-)

Are you sure @MB or perhaps confusing Hybrid with battery only BEV's?

Indeed, one day soon the probability of a car fire being an EV will be much more likely, ICE has 110 year head start and hopefully by then a lot more people living to see the news once the air pollution killing thousands of people yearly in the UK alone diminishes.

Easy to forget if it's not affecting you personally!

but is it?

3:48PM

Fire service confirm initial vehicle in Luton Airport fire was diesel car

In an update posted at 3.30pm, Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service said:

Yes but diesel does ignite under pressure or immense heat - it becomes more like an explosive gas, I think the blast area of a tank of diesel or petrol exploding under immense heat or pressure would be significantly wider than an EV battery, that would explain why the fire service couldn't contain the fire even though they were there within ten minutes, petrol and diesel tanks EXPLODING --

EV's don't do this:

https://youtu.be/RSZUBvdo1bw?si=Q5X5mi8b-UofYLAS

EV - caused by a manufacturing issue (two fires)

Urgent recall for hundreds of popular electric cars because the battery could explode into flames More than 230 Porsche Taycan electric vehicles recalled The recall comes after two battery fires occured in Australia

'Due to a manufacturing issue, there is a possibility of insufficient sealing between the high-voltage battery casing and battery cover,' the recall said.

ICE

Porsche is recalling 24,467 Panameras from the 2017-2022 model years due to a defective cooling pump that could lead to a fire. In Canada, 1,638 vehicles are affected.

In documents it submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the equivalent of Transport Canada, Porsche says the problem occurs when moisture enters the external coolant pump of the climate control system.

I think I'll be buying a BYD EV