Gregory Wischer’s Post

In Defense One, Morgan Bazilian and I argue that the West’s efforts to build new mines and refineries for critical minerals will be challenging given the geological constraints with mining and the technological obstacles with refining. https://lnkd.in/e8bdGn_m To build more mines, companies need profitable deposits, which depend greatly on scale and grade. In the West, most large-scale, high-grade deposits have been discovered or are being mined. The Voisey's Bay discovery in 1993 was arguably the last major nickel sulphide discovery in the West. To build more refineries, companies in the West need the requisite technology. Yet, they often lack the appropriate technology as they ceded the processing in their mineral supply chains to China. With high-pressure acid leaching, for example, Western-run plants often bust budgets, fail to commission on time, and miss production targets. However, Western companies are making advances in mineral extraction and processing—often with government support, such as grants for exploration, loans for processing, and research funding for novel extraction and refining methods. The US Department of Defense, especially Manufacturing Capability Expansion & Investment Prioritization (MCEIP), has been the most active government department. While Western countries currently lack sufficient reserves to satisfy their total mineral demand, they could aim to increase mineral extraction and processing capacity to volumes that meet a good portion of their defense industries’ mineral demand given the national security implications.

The West needs to produce more critical minerals. Here’s how the Pentagon should help

The West needs to produce more critical minerals. Here’s how the Pentagon should help

defenseone.com

Jim MacLean

Mineral Land Management Consultant | Optimizing Commercial Outcomes & Enhancing Functional Expertise

3mo

The other major challenge that Western companies face is access to capital on reasonable terms. That is particularly the case for juniors. Generalist investors tend to avoid junior mining stocks. If they enter, it tends to be "fast money". They have one eye on the door to take quick profits or to exit quickly for the next new shiny thing if the project doesn't move as fast as expected or results are nuanced, and they exit particularly quickly on negative initial results. Investors in the sector who participate in private placements also often exit shortly after the hold period to clip the warrants. The net effect is that it's difficult to build momentum in the absence of obvious positive assay results. Fast money also gets bored at the study stage, which creates another problem for a project that is advancing. A company with a successful project moving to a mine then has the challenge of obtaining project financing in circumstances in which financiers try to cut the pie in their favour to mitigate downside risk. Overall, a very tough path to travel.

Like
Reply

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore topics