Member Info for SmartPunter

Rainbow Rare Earths has achieved a significant advancement in its Phalaborwa project test work by successfully incorporating a cerium (Ce) depletion step. This step reduces the Ce content in the mixed rare earth product (MREP) by approximately 65%, enhancing the quality of the high-grade MREP, which previously averaged over 55% total rare earths oxide (TREO) and a TREO purity of over 93%. The Ce depletion also reduces the volumetric flow to the separation circuit to about 2% of the original 340 m3/h pregnant leach solution, decreasing the metal needing processing by roughly 27%. The company anticipates finalizing the separation component in Q4 2025.

https://www.investegate.co.uk/announcement/rns/rainbow-rare-earths-limited-npv--rbw/further-major-advancement-in-phalaborwa-test-work/9121559

>>floors were being put in place globally over rare earth pricing more inline with the studies done by the company in 2022

The 2022 PEA had a basket price of $132/kg

Gives EBITDA of 190M

>>

Although, that level of dy/tb is going to get a buyer, even from China.

ANSTO helped produce the RBW process, they know their stuff. I suspect you are right about the water table, I'm negating it as an issue and assuming ISR is viable.

The down stream processing is actually key, because there is no market for MREC and the solvent extraction process is problematic. Using Ionic extraction is appealing in many ways.

>>Now you're more positive than me on the project suddenly

I'm extremely negative on REE miners. So.much BS.

Serra Verde have polluted the water supply and the locals are complaining.

If ISR works fine, the Dy/Tb ratio is what is appears here.

The only other RE project Im in is RBW, which is like Ionic Clay but phosphogypsum. They have figured how to use CIX/CIC on MREC to go downstream Nd/Pr/Dy/Tb. The keys make this possible are: High TREO (55% v 62%) and reduced *problematic* impurities. Exactly what these are in a specific MREC is unsure, but nobody has managed to use CIX/ CIC economically on hard rock REE deposits.

If this technology can be used on COBR, not only is CAPEX 10% of solvent separation, OPEX will be world beating for 100% payability. And governments will love the Dy/Tb. Also environmentally much cleaner.

I've had a change of heart and invested.

Why?

1. Dy/Tb is a critical military REE. It is required for high temp magnets.

2. ISR may be viable, but digging up and processing in a heap for the additional Dy/Tb would be viable too.

ShipwreckSheep

I concede, you are right, 70% payability is standard and the high Dy/Tb is a big input.

There is still the issue of ISR pollution (solveable) and the lack of separation outside of China and China's ban of MREC import from non Chinese companies.

The West has a dire shortage of separation plants.

>>track a very generic mix of MREC,

Its not generic, its standard. China has very specific lists of rare earth industrial standards that allows its industry to operate.

There maybe options to negotiate around this but don't kid yourself that you can charge 4 times the market rate because of its Dy/Tb content. Its a 200 stage extraction process to recover those two.

Look at lynas snd MP Materials accounts to see the actual income levels from mrec.

>>And have a look at the rest also maybe. And at the profit margins in all-in cost vs value at spot prices indicated on slides 18 and 19 here that refer directly to produced MREC

Thats the core of the problem. MREC has specification and a price. It sells for $5.5k not $10k or $18k and its determined by the customer with the $1bn separation plant and patented IP.

The difficultly with REE is the separation not digging out of the ground.

Here the market prices.

https://www.metal.com/Concentrate/201102250378

Doesn't mention that China has mostly banned ISR and Sierre Verde has encountered problems. The other ionic clay miners are not using ISR for a very good reason.

And the recovered product is MREC. It is NOT separated into individual REE. A miner will not gain any financial income from Dy/Tb because neither they or virtually any western company has the separation plant to extract it.

MREC sells for $5.5k per ton. COBR are claim 10k per ton opex?

Even Pensana are claiming $6k per ton for hard rock (highly unlikely)

The Ionic clay project in Africa PFS figure was $80k per ton

Another ISR project in Canada

>>only non-China deposit that is suited for ISR,

Wrong there are a half dozen other ISR projects in various advanced stages in Australia, a project in Africa. Then there is Sierra Verde in Brazil where the issue that got ISR BANNED in China has cropped up severe environmental damage. Ionic rare earths are not automatically cheap to recover and certainly not guaranteed to be economically viable - it depends on chemistry.

Also ionic RE depends on weatheringhows that figure for deposits at depth?

You know these drilling results are dire, dont you?

Low TREO, poor (18%) ndpr ratio, thin intercept, not on surface. Its a dud.

I think its going to be really funny.

Implications:

1. RBW are extremely close to a result. The key decision is whether to stop at SEG + for 70 % payability of Dy/Tb/S/E/G or go for 100%

2. Other MREC producers probably cannot use CIC/CIX unless they build/modify the MREC plant to purify, customised to the specific or body.

3. Tunisia and other low REE content phosphogypsum stacks could become viable. Reducing the flow rate (ftom 3m tpa to 60k tpa) by removing problematic impurities, may enable it.

Question to Gemini AI research:

Summarise all these replies and give the questions and parameters of the research. The question to answer is:

Does the reported purification of MREC to 55%, the new high flow rate and higher purity of 93% support the conclusion that 99.5% ndpr and tb Dy can be produced. Use scientific sources only

Based on the research conducted, here is a summary of the key findings from our conversations, followed by a direct answer to your question.

Summary of Research and Parameters

Our research has focused on understanding the technical and economic claims of a new rare earth element (REE) processing project. The key questions and parameters of this research were:

* Recovery Rates: We established that the end-to-end recovery rate for converting monazite to mixed rare earth carbonate (MREC) typically falls between 75% and 95%. The recovery rate from MREC to final separated rare earth metal oxides is generally very high, ranging from 90% to over 99%.

* Feedstock Purity: We clarified the distinction between two key metrics. The first is the Total Rare Earth Oxide (TREO) concentration of the MREC, which for the project is >55%, significantly exceeding the industry standard of >42%. The second is the TREO purity of the feedstock sent to the final separation circuit, which for the project is >93%, compared to an industry benchmark of >90%.

* Process Optimization: We identified a critical process improvement: the drastic reduction of the pregnant leach solution (PLS) flow rate from 340 m³/hr to a much lower 7-10 m³/hr. This is a crucial step that makes the downstream separation process smaller, cheaper, and more efficient.

* Separation Stages: We analyzed the role of the Continuous Ion Exchange (CIX) and Continuous Ion Chromatography (CIC) processes. CIX is used for initial concentration and impurity removal, while CIC performs the final, precise separation. We also evaluated the cost implications of adding a third separation stage to the planned two-product flowsheet, concluding that it would be a manageable, non-linear increase in capital cost.

* Heavy Rare Earths (HREEs): We examined the economic potential of the heavy rare earth stream (SEG+), confirming that a payability of 70-85% is typical for unseparated concentrates, while full separation can achieve 100% payability. We also noted the high complexity and cost of separating elements like dysprosium (Dy) and terbium (Tb), which can require a large number of separation stages.

The Conclusion: A Scientifically Grounded Assessment

Yes, the reported purification of the MREC to a >55% TREO concentration and, more importantly, a >93% TREO purity for the final feedstock, combined with the low flow rate, strongly supports the conclusion that 99.5% purity for NdPr and Dy/Tb can be produced. This conclusion is based on well-established scientific principles of rare earth separation.

Here is a breakdown of the evidence from scientific sources:

* Purity is a Proven Capability of the Technology: Scientific literature confirms that ion exchange and ion chromatography are established technologies capable of achieving ultra-high purities. Academic and technical papers state that these methods can produce purities exceeding 99.9% [1] and even up to 99.99999% or higher.[2] This demonstrates that the

Pt 2

Here is a breakdown of the evidence from scientific sources:

​Purity is a Proven Capability of the Technology: Scientific literature confirms that ion exchange and ion chromatography are established technologies capable of achieving ultra-high purities. Academic and technical papers state that these methods can produce purities exceeding 99.9% [1] and even up to 99.99999% or higher.[2] This demonstrates that the technology itself is well-suited for achieving the 99.5% purity target for individual elements.[1]

​High-Purity Feedstock is the Critical Enabler: The success of any separation process is fundamentally dependent on the quality of its feed. Research indicates that a feedstock with high purity and a low volume of impurities is "key to reaching separated rare earth oxides of the desired purity level".[3, 4, 5] By removing a high percentage of non-rare earth impurities and concentrating the rare earths upstream, the downstream CIX/CIC process can operate with greater selectivity and efficiency, focusing on the difficult task of separating the rare earths from each other rather than dealing with problematic waste materials like iron, aluminum, thorium, and uranium.[6, 7] The project’s ability to reduce the volumetric flow rate of the pregnant leach solution by over 97%—from 340 m³/hr to 7-10 m³/hr—is a direct result of this upstream purification and is the primary driver for a simplified, low-cost downstream circuit.[3, 4, 5]

​Multi-Stage Separation is the Standard: The separation of chemically similar elements like neodymium and praseodymium, or dysprosium and terbium, requires a multi-stage process to achieve high purity. For example, pilot work has shown that a first pass of ion chromatography can achieve a moderate purity (e.g., 68% for Nd/Pr) which is then refined in a second pass to over 96% purity.[8] This progressive enhancement of purity through successive stages is a core principle of ion exchange and confirms that the project's plan to achieve 99.5% purity is a result of a well-defined, multi-stage process, not a single-step jump.[8, 9] The company's decision to produce a high-purity NdPr oxide and a separate SEG+ stream is a rational strategy that leverages the strengths of the technology to achieve a simplified and cost-effective overall flowsheet.