Sunday 13 July was a busy day for posters

No such message found

Emerging Graphene Technology Company

Hydrothermal Graphite Deposit Ammenable for Commercial Graphene Applications

Reply New Message

Prev Message Back To Forum Threaded View Next Message

goldhunter11

Rank: President [?]

Points: 11806 [?]

Votes: 128 Score: 3.7 [?]

Your Vote:

Please Log In to Vote

Did you know? You can earn activity points by filling your profile with information about yourself (what city you live in, your favorite team, blogs etc.)

Sunday 13 July was a busy day for posters

posted on Jul 14, 2014 11:34AM

I was following what have been said by various posters including some key actors in this theatre this morning, and that left my head spinning. I will give it a rest for a little while and let the saga unfold itself. Currently, it's as clear as mud.

One item that caught my eyes was a discussion on the process to purify/upgrade graphite by BG and TaKeNoTes on the other side, particularly the assertion that it would take some $8000 worth of NaOH to upgrade 1 ton of graphite (need 20 tons of NaOH for 1 ton of graphite).

Before commenting on this assertion I would introduce, as references, some good starting points that can be found in 2 interviews, which you should read yourselves for forming your own opinions, rather than believing the second-hand info from a poster.

1. Investor Intel Interview with Oliver Peters (OP)

http://investorintel.com/graphite-graphene-intel/what-every-investor-needs-to-know-about-investing-in-graphite/

2. Graphite Investing Interview (GIN) with Aubrey Aveleigh (AE). Posted by Glorieux on 25 June 2013.

http://agoracom.com/ir/Zenyatta/forums/discussion/topics/577500-investing-news-network-interview/messages/1812212#message

- In the first one, OP discussed the general aspects for getting highly purified graphite from the ore. Very comprehensive discussion from a renowed expert who has been working as consultant for various companies including SGS. He mentioned near the end that he was the lead person in the development of the process flowsheet for various companies including ZEN at SGS. As a professional who understands the importance of confidentiality he did not go into any details related to any of the company he was involved with. But, this is just common sense. Hence, it is unlikely that he would give out any details of a company flowsheet to any information seeker outside the circle of confidentiality.

- In GIN interview, AE said and I quote:

In our case, we’re using sodium hydroxide. It’s safer. It’s a base, not an acid. We use 25 percent by weight, and we can recycle the material. It’s much cheaper and obviously we’ve got extremely high grades from it, and with good recoveries.

GIN: Are you able to compare it? Like you say, it’s cheaper, but how much cheaper? Can you give us an indication?

AE: I can’t throw numbers because we haven’t done a prefeasibility or an economic assessment yet. As you know, the Ontario Securities Commission does not allow us to talk about economics and numbers without going through that process.

All this seems quite reasonable, noting the 25% (i.e. 1/4) by weight. In other words, 1/4 ton of NaOH would be required for 1 ton of graphite (and usually, the company would start with the run of mill concentrates (which in some cases contain a high level of purification, e.g. ~90%). The further purification process using caustic soda is to upgrade the purity to a higher level, e.g. >99.%).

If the starting level (the feed) were at a higher level than ~90% then the NaOH requirement would be lower to achieve the same purity level at the end of the soda bake process, e.g. instead of 25% NaOH it could be 10%. Another fact to keep in mind is that larger flakes are easier (requires less NaOH) to upgrade compared to smaller flakes due to its graphitic C contents.

In the absence of the PEA, as AE has said in the interview, (see above) nobody, including himself is not allowed by the OSC to talk about economics and specific numbers for a deposit. But it would be fine to state a general number such as 25% without going too deep in the details which are different for different feeds.

Keeping all that in mind, it would be resonable to expect that the amount of NaOH required to purify/upgrade the concentrates, to >99.% C for ZEN graphite would be in the range of 25% by wt, as AE said.

At US$400/t NaOH 25% by wt = > $US 100/ton, which would be much much lower than 20t x $400/t = $8000/ton (a factor of 80, i.e. nearly 100). This is the cost of NaOH alone, ignoring the operational costs, and other costs...So, the end product must fetch at least $US 8000/t just to get back to cost of NaOH. In my opinion, the 20x ($8000/t of NaOH) requirement should be ignored (simply out of this world), since there is no technical/scientific evidence to support it.

On the other hand, there is some scientific evidence, published scientific paper, link below

http://www.scribd.com/doc/125590545/Preparation-of-High-Purity-Graphite-From-Alkali-Roasting

which provides general support the value in the range of 25% indicated by AE, and indication for the reduction of NaOH requirement to 10% if a feed of 95.9% is used instead of 87-88%.

This is my own opinion, based on the scientific information available, along with statements made by highly qualified professional people, such as AE and OP. Feel free to weigh in.