RE: On Track24 Aug 2023 13:03
The FEED was done in two phases. The first phase formulated the components and work plans, but a second phase went into much higher detail last autumn regarding the mine. However ,the original FEED and detailed FEED had to be modified again to scale down the project and readapt to a modulated phase development route. The original FEED and detailed was not all wasted. The sulphate production step for the ore has been omitted and the original MRES pilot work on the carbonate reintroduced.
This change has arisen as to raise $120-140M from the banks with around $80M put in by the largest shareholder. The experts in prefabrication and delivering the modulated construction do not have a blank sheet of paper. They can readapt all the FEED work and rework only those parts that are relevant in the new construction pathway on a far quicker timescale.
Overall nobody was willing to take a $500M market risk on both projects. It was seen as being so big that it could fail. The company is now trying the PEAK approach of one step at a time. PEAK have decided that any refinery in Teeside was not going to happen. they plan to use profits to build a refinery later in Tanzania. It may end up Angola goes the same way if the UK is not prepared to take more upfront risk.
Everybody is quick to say the current route was the only possible way it could all be done. The higher interest rates, Covid-19 aftermath, Ukraine war, higher inflation and general ineptitude to progress climate protection technologies have all been apart in forcing these changes on the company. The problem with the slow sequential path to development is that China can still mess things up in the market place and of course the world may face more climatic changes and be far more dependent on oil and fossil fuels for far longer. The sequential route is also more costly and it has different disadvantages when compared to what was proposed at Saltend. Incidentally this issue was debated at length back in November 2020 and many investors at that time supported the risk Pensana management chose to do.