The next focusIR Investor Webinar takes places on 14th May with guest speakers from Blue Whale Growth Fund, Taseko Mines, Kavango Resources and CQS Natural Resources fund. Please register here.
Green machine, what Rodney suggests re. processing non-eu material is pretty much what the EBA's strategy is. They want to build out conversion capacity and gigas before looking at extracting EU resources.
Get the ball rolling with lower ESG non-eu product then slap regulation all over it and force the industry to shift to local resource and investment.
"1. Secure access to raw materials from resource-rich countries outside the EU.
2. Facilitate the expansion/creation of European sources of raw materials.
3. Secure access to secondary raw materials through recycling in a circular economy of batteries."
https://www.eba250.com/actions-projects/priority-actions/
LLInv, the EIA for Cinovec has yet to be submitted and put forward for public consultation or transboundary assessment so we have all of that to come. You can follow it here;
https://portal.cenia.cz/eiasea/detail/EIA_MZP506?lang=cs
I hold both SAV and EMH and for me, whilst the delays on both sides are extremely frustrating, SAV seem to be ahead on the agenda. Look at VW commitment to Valencia as the 3rd giga factory and proposed build out of refineries in Portugal, 3 proposed to date inc, Galp/Northvolt, Neometals/Bondalti and Lusorecursos.
"1 — [...].
2 — In view of the CA's opinion, the EIA authority must consider, in conjunction with the tenderer, the possible need for design modification to avoid or reduce significant effects on the environment, as well as the need to provide for additional measures to minimizetion or environmental compensation.
3 — In cases where the provisions of paragraph previous number, the procedure is interrupted for a period not exceeding six months for the tenderer to be able to present the reformulated elements of the project.
4 — [...].
5 — [...].
6 — The DIA is issued by the AIA authority in the period of 50 days from the date on which the period ends established pursuant to paragraph 3, or from the date on which the tenderer submits the reformulated elements of the project, if it occurs earlier.
7 — [Revoked].
8 — [Revoked]."
As above 16.6 SAV control the timeline for submission so could achieve resubmission at any time within 6 months. Broadly aligns to recent RNSs expecting further test work and decarbonisation plans by end of this year.
NV have raised a further $1.1 billion;
https://europe.autonews.com/suppliers/northvolt-raises-11b-roll-out-factories-europe
VW event this Thursday;
- We CELLebrate 3 world premieres on 1 day!
- Start of construction of #VWGroups FIRST own battery-factory! There will be 5 more to come.
- FIRST presentation of the #UnifiedCell, which will become the most powerful and sustainable market standard.
- Starting signal for our newly formed battery company as an upcoming global player in the battery business
https://www.linkedin.com/events/we-vegotthepower-mission-salzgi6949751743811346433/about/
Will be interesting to see if there's any discussion on raw materials sourcing.
Ape32, rather than a PFS SAV opted to focus on the EIA which includes mine plans, options etc, the only catch is it's all in Portuguese.
On this link use Google translate, the 2 main docs are EIA synthesis report Volume 1 and Volume 2. Volume 1 is 561 pages and Volume 2 is 882 pages. The overall EIA is something like 6000 pages.
https://siaia.apambiente.pt/AIA.aspx?ID=3353
Once approved the project will go directly to DFS. See more recent RNSs re flowsheet, test work and decarbonisation which will feed into the DFS too.
It's Finnish Minerals Group, a Finnish State-owned holding
and development company which manages the State’s mining industry shareholdings.
Assume you were thinking Fortescue Metals Group? Would have been interesting if it was.
Keliber environmental approval is important for the European political landscape as it proves that new projects can be approved. One of the criteria for RRP funding for example is 'do no harm' which is a minefield to assess, once more projects get approved the grey areas become a little clearer.
The Sibanye move to aquire a greater stake of Keliber post approval supports a common view that investment decisions are waiting for environmental approval.
It would be a reasonable assumption that SAVs potential partners/buyers/offtakers will come clean post EIA approval.
24 hours after EIA approval "Sibanye-Stillwater moves for control of Finland’s €446m Keliber lithium project"
https://www.miningmx.com/top-story/49969-sibanye-stillwater-to-lift-keliber-lithium-share-to-80-in-e250m-total-investment/
Also a timely reminder that the Portuguese state currently own circa 8% of GALP.
https://eco.sapo.pt/2022/06/28/estado-ganha-169-milhoes-com-dividendos-da-galp/
"If the shares were sold today , taking into account the unit price of yesterday's session (11.46 euros per share), the State would raise 711 million euros."
The addition of Aurora (GALP/NV JV) to LiRef is a curious one given LiRef has been running for a number of years and Aurora only formed officially last year.
Regardless, it gives the Portuguese state further interest in the success of GALP and Aurora and by extension the success of local miners, SAV, Luso, Infinity etc.
Firstember of LiRef has achieved approval;
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/keliber-oy_environmental-permit-granted-for-keliber-activity-6947472140308774915-hU5Z?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=android_app
"Savannah is a project member of the EIT Rawmaterials’ LiRef project. The project is validating two conversion processes with the target to develop one robust and flexible process transforming spodumene concentrate into battery grade lithium chemical. It aims to foster the development of a sustainable European value chain. The partners include three future lithium production companies (Savannah Resources, Keliber and European Lithium) as well as Aurora Lithium AB, Outotec, FLSmidth, GTK and Luleå University of Technology."
Any ADVFN posters feel free to share ;)
You're welcome IB, I haven't had much time for research or posting here in a while but do keep tabs on the conversation.
I did spot this curios translation from the GALP consortia application though "With the implementation of the value chain of batteries, Portugal will provide a fifth world lithium and first country producer in Europe to operate a mineral processing refinery, providing for the production and export of low-cost, low-carbon batteries."
1. Fifth world lithium. Perhaps lost in translation this could mean Portugal will be the 5th largest lithium producer in the world (up from 7th, see link) not, Portugal will provide a fifth (20%) of the worlds lithium (Although that would be excellent news!)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/268789/countries-with-the-largest-production-output-of-lithium/
2. First country producer in Europe. I think they're all saying this and NV Skellefteå have already produced a cell so missed the boat.
3. Export of low cost low carbon batteries. That stood out to me as we don't have a giga factory in Portugal as yet to produce cells. We have the VW facility in Spain but who could be eyeing up Giga Portugal? I dare not speculate as I've been accused of ramping.
goodday to you all.
CM/IB is this the one you're after?
https://bit.ly/39uLhuY
Confirms the GALP/SAV consortia has made the cut. Eco.pt article also confirms and they're usually very accurate.
https://eco.sapo.pt/2022/06/19/galp-prio-efacec-e-mais-48-consorcios-veja-as-empresas-escolhidas-nas-agendas-mobilizadoras/
Archer is on the panel with Galp and Aurora next week. Portuguese Minister of the Environment and Climate Action , Duarte Cordeiro, and Secretary of State for the Environment and Energy, João Galamba, are speaking before SAV. AGM will also be held in the morning so fingers crossed either SAV, GALP, Aurora or the Portuguese government will be making an announcement next week.
15:55
DEBATE: THE VALUE CHAIN ??OF LITHIUM BATTERIES
Enrique Abad Perez , Head of New Business, Galp
Sofia Simões , Researcher at the Resources Unit of the LNEG (National Laboratory of Energy and Geology)
David Archer , CEO of Savannah Industries
Cristobal Moreno , Vice -President of Engineering & Development at Aurora
Moderator: André Macedo
https://electricsummit.negocios.pt/seminars/portugal-energy-conference/
Maros was with SAV CEO talking about this a couple of weeks ago. Wonder if KC has had a call too?
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/david-archer-6a73697_savannahresources-eu-portugal-activity-6930543713026748417-DpJ8?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=android_app
To answer the question, 'Can the EU kick the UNECE into some kind of urgency'. No, the United Nations is a global organisation so preferential treatment can't be offered to what is effectively an NGO claim against a state authority (Montescola vs APA). Also given the issue at hand is related to compliance it would be an even bigger issue for UNECE themselves to fault on their own procedures. That said I'm sure the likes of Maros have contacts who can give an indication of the likely outcome and he in turn may have given a nod to Archer.
My view on this is,
The original response from UNECE was, "While the Committee at this stage finds it premature to comment on the actual substance of the communication, it does relate to the procedures and obligations regulated by the provisions of the Aarhus Convention, and therefore the content of the communication could not be considered to be irrelevant.... Accordingly, the preliminary determination of the Committee, subject to review following any comments received from the Party concerned, is that the communication is admissible."
Effectively the claim is only admissible because it relates to a convention which Portugal entered into back in 2003, not the content of the claim itself which is to be reviewed. I've read the correspondence and barring a technical hiccup which prevented a few annexes of the EIA being available for download it does seem a tenuous claim. In a nutshell, Montescola wanted the EIA information before APA declared it compliant and initiated the public consultation. APA didn't provide the EIA information because if they had done so before it was deemed compliant then incorrect information would have been made public. To counteract the technical error APA then extended the public consultation from 30 to 60 days but Montescola said that's not enough. I can sympathise with that as SAV had multiple consultants to produce the EIA but this is where there's a fundamental issue within the EIA process, who employs consultants for a technical review of the application? This is where APA have fallen short in the review as they simply don't have the staff.
Anyway, there's been some back and forth over the past year with UNECE eventually asking for further and final information by 05/04/22. APA responded on time however Montescola didn't, they waited for APA's response to be available online then commented further a week later. UNECE won't look favorably on that and I wouldn't be surprised to see it noted in their response statement. A rather foolish move imo!
Below link shows all of the cases reviewed since 2004. If you look at the latest ones from 2021 3/6 have been deemed 'Not admissible'. Our best case scenario is a response at the upcoming meeting which will conclude the same.
https://unece.org/env/pp/cc/communications-from-the-public
As always DYOR, don't want to be crucified if this drags on but I'm quite content and confident personally that we're heading to a close.
Fingers, re EU Commission holding projects up see the below from today.
"This initiative will aim to strengthen the European value chain through the identification of mineral resources and of critical raw materials projects in the European strategic interest, while ensuring a high level of environmental protection, including projects that promote a circular economy and resource efficiency" Brussels, 18.5.2022 COM(2022) 230 final
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_3131
Slow as you say, and reactive to current political pressures rather than strategically planned, but I know Portuguese Gov have already started to publicly back this and others will eventually follow.
"Savannah is proud to showcase the Barroso Lithium Project which is aligned with Europe’s Green Deal and RePowerEU initiatives while helping to strengthen Europe’s strategic autonomy. We met with European Commission Vice-President Maroš Šefcovic today in Brussels to discuss key developments for locally sourced lithium." 12/05/22 David Archer - Linkedin
"This initiative will aim to strengthen the European value chain through the identification of mineral resources and of
critical raw materials projects in the European strategic interest, while ensuring a high level of environmental protection, including projects that promote a circular economy and resource efficiency" Brussels, 18.5.2022 COM(2022) 230 final
I think the fact Archer was in Brussels discussing RePowerEU with Maros the week ahead of the formal announcement suggests there is relevance to SAV.
Looking at the available documents I would speculate that SAV are an eligible 'Project of Common Interest' given they are pivotal to the build out of the Iberian Battery Value Chain. Such projects will have access to an additional €800 million funding pot.
I totally agree with that Iplitigator, I'd also add that EIA is critical to the EU funding and will likely be a pre-requisite requirement. I'd imagine that's why they're proposing EIA 2023 and funding 2024.