Monkeymandan
Regular
My highlight
Talga Updates and Discussion thread
- Thread starter Semmel
- Start date
My highlight
Mine too Dan
I appreciate all your posts of late. Cheers to TLG who appear to be turning a corner...
Monkeymandan
Regular
Cheers Dah! Yes finally feels like we’ve turned the corner, and are perhaps on the precipice of something BIG.Mine too Dan
I appreciate all your posts of late. Cheers to TLG who appear to be turning a corner...
And in the meantime am enjoying following the trail of breadcrumbs after the pain of the last few years.
Monkeymandan
Regular
Coping @Gvan’s post from HC on Thursday for anyone who didn’t see it, as it’s a great summary of what could stem from the White House visit.
‘Before Mark’s visit to DC, I was mostly eyeing the DOE grant for “Strengthening Domestic Critical Materials Processing and Manufacturing to Enhance National Security”, which specifically lists anode production as one of the topic areas. $725m USD across 14 chosen projects.
I believe this is still the most likely outcome.
However, meeting directly with the Executive Office of the President, National Security Council and National Energy Dominance Council is about as high-level as you could get. The NSC in particular.
For those not familiar:
“The United States National Security Council (NSC) is the national security council used by the President of the United States for consideration of national security, military, and foreign policy matters. Based in the White House, it is part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, and composed of senior national security advisors and Cabinet officials.
Since its inception in 1947 by President Harry S. Truman, the function of the council has been to advise and assist the president on national security and foreign policies. It also serves as the president's principal arm for coordinating these policies among various government agencies. The council has subsequently played a key role in most major events in U.S. foreign policy, from the Korean War to the war on terror.”
What’s impressive about this is that Mark and UCC are engaging with the government at a federal policy level on critical minerals for defense, supply chain security, and the NATO-aligned resource strategy. This shows the US government has recognised Talga as a potential strategic asset, which could see discussions extend beyond just the DOE grant funding mentioned above.
For example, last month we saw the US government was offering to buy equity in Australian critical minerals companies as part of a funding package to expand its supply and cut reliance on China.
“U.S. government officials were "saying to companies, you come to us with a proposal and we'll assess it and try and make it work through those various funding channels and programs that we have available to us," Andrew Worland, CEO of International Graphite
The officials they met included former mining executive David Copley, who heads an office at the U.S. National Security Council focused on strengthening supply chains, and Joshua Kroon, a deputy assistant secretary for critical minerals and metals at the International Trade Administration, Worland said. Funding pathways could include traditional debt, debt and equity models, which would be debt financing with an "equity kicker," and also offtakes, where the U.S. could potentially prepay for supply to add to a defence stockpile, Worland said, adding the focus was on getting projects ready for 2027.”
Another possibility is DOD-backed funding under the Defense Production Act.
Funding under the DPA is what GraphiteONE received back in 2023 for their feasibility study.
Which actually brings me to my next point: In light of China's new export restrictions, a comparison between Talga and GraphiteOne highlights why Talga should be particularly attractive to the US Government. Talga is completely independent of China, owning all of its technology rather than licensing any from Chinese firms. By contrast, GraphiteOne isn’t fully ex-China, having entered into a licensing agreement with Hunan Chenyu Fuji New Energy Technology for its anode manufacturing process.
“Technology License Agreement: Chenyu grants an exclusive license to certain AAM technologies in return for the payment of royalties applied to net revenues received by G1 from the sale in each calendar quarter of AAM products manufactured using the technology.”
Keep in mind that IP/technology related to graphite anode production is part of the recent Chinese export controls. So, basically not secure or independent at all.
I’m not singling out GraphiteONE here. Most Western anode producers do not own their own proprietary, end-to-end anode manufacturing technology. Instead, they typically license, partner, or joint-venture with Chinese companies.
That’s why, in my view, the ball is very much in Talga’s court.’
‘Before Mark’s visit to DC, I was mostly eyeing the DOE grant for “Strengthening Domestic Critical Materials Processing and Manufacturing to Enhance National Security”, which specifically lists anode production as one of the topic areas. $725m USD across 14 chosen projects.
I believe this is still the most likely outcome.
However, meeting directly with the Executive Office of the President, National Security Council and National Energy Dominance Council is about as high-level as you could get. The NSC in particular.
For those not familiar:
“The United States National Security Council (NSC) is the national security council used by the President of the United States for consideration of national security, military, and foreign policy matters. Based in the White House, it is part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States, and composed of senior national security advisors and Cabinet officials.
Since its inception in 1947 by President Harry S. Truman, the function of the council has been to advise and assist the president on national security and foreign policies. It also serves as the president's principal arm for coordinating these policies among various government agencies. The council has subsequently played a key role in most major events in U.S. foreign policy, from the Korean War to the war on terror.”
What’s impressive about this is that Mark and UCC are engaging with the government at a federal policy level on critical minerals for defense, supply chain security, and the NATO-aligned resource strategy. This shows the US government has recognised Talga as a potential strategic asset, which could see discussions extend beyond just the DOE grant funding mentioned above.
For example, last month we saw the US government was offering to buy equity in Australian critical minerals companies as part of a funding package to expand its supply and cut reliance on China.
“U.S. government officials were "saying to companies, you come to us with a proposal and we'll assess it and try and make it work through those various funding channels and programs that we have available to us," Andrew Worland, CEO of International Graphite
The officials they met included former mining executive David Copley, who heads an office at the U.S. National Security Council focused on strengthening supply chains, and Joshua Kroon, a deputy assistant secretary for critical minerals and metals at the International Trade Administration, Worland said. Funding pathways could include traditional debt, debt and equity models, which would be debt financing with an "equity kicker," and also offtakes, where the U.S. could potentially prepay for supply to add to a defence stockpile, Worland said, adding the focus was on getting projects ready for 2027.”
Another possibility is DOD-backed funding under the Defense Production Act.
Funding under the DPA is what GraphiteONE received back in 2023 for their feasibility study.
Which actually brings me to my next point: In light of China's new export restrictions, a comparison between Talga and GraphiteOne highlights why Talga should be particularly attractive to the US Government. Talga is completely independent of China, owning all of its technology rather than licensing any from Chinese firms. By contrast, GraphiteOne isn’t fully ex-China, having entered into a licensing agreement with Hunan Chenyu Fuji New Energy Technology for its anode manufacturing process.
“Technology License Agreement: Chenyu grants an exclusive license to certain AAM technologies in return for the payment of royalties applied to net revenues received by G1 from the sale in each calendar quarter of AAM products manufactured using the technology.”
Keep in mind that IP/technology related to graphite anode production is part of the recent Chinese export controls. So, basically not secure or independent at all.
I’m not singling out GraphiteONE here. Most Western anode producers do not own their own proprietary, end-to-end anode manufacturing technology. Instead, they typically license, partner, or joint-venture with Chinese companies.
That’s why, in my view, the ball is very much in Talga’s court.’
If I remember my 1 times tables, ...
"Further significant scale grant applications are in process ..."
Similar threads
- Article
