TLG Ann: Vittangi Anode Project Permit Advances - 8th May 2023, 8:18am

[annb0t]

TLG Ann: Vittangi Anode Project Permit Advances
Price Sensitive: Y
Date: 8th May 2023, 8:18am

>>> Read announcement: Google: TLG Market Announcements

 

[teilenswert]

#howslowcanyougo

 

[beserk]

#howslowcanyougo

howlowcanyougo#

 

[BigDog]

Seems like things are lining up nicely yet again, albeit a couple months delayed…

14 June we get the Mining Permit and the appeals will be thrown out and exactly one week later on 21 June the Plant will be approved (with possibility of appeals and no doubt 1-2 further delay).

Great to have some certainty on dates!

 

[Vigdorian]

Fingers crossed we get a big fat positive for both sets of permits and we're pregnant with Vittangi ... but there are still several plausible scenarios.

Mining Permits
Worst case scenario - an appeal is granted (the verdict is overturned) ,
Best case scenario - the appeals gets thrown out and the restrictive wording that suggested that the Talga cannot mine until all appeal processes have been completed gets overturned particularly if the ruling is still relevant if there is a challenge at the supreme court.

Lulea refinery
Worst case - permit is not given which will then open up another battle front , this time Talga appeals? Talga appeals to the SC ? Talga relocates the refinery and requests a permit elsewhere and we do not host any more free breakfasts.
Best Case - Permit granted ,case closed. No council surprises or withholding plans.

Other question that still remain. What is the likelihood of a supreme court challenge ? how long does that process take ? Pending the Supreme Court's decision , will Talga be able to extract graphite in the interim or will they be subject to restrictive conditions?

 

[Semmel]

One has to thank Talga for keeping us up to date. So .. Thank you Talga!

 

[cosors]

So do I.

From the print media. The vector recognition of the words and correction was difficult and time-consuming. It is also possible that errors have crept in.

"Heavy metals in the bay could stop the Talga plan.

The water in Sörbrändöfjärden is of such poor quality that emissions from the planned Talga factory in Hertsöfältet are not allowed. That is the county council's assessment.

This week the County and Environment Court is holding the main hearing on Talga's new factory on the Hertsö field. Talga has applied for an environmental permit to produce up to 22,000 tonnes of battery anode material per year. The raw material is the graphite that Talga will mine at Vittangi.

The process water from the factory will be cleaned and discharged into the Sörbrändörjar River. There are certain environmental quality standards for water, for example for heavy metals, which must become requirements. The environmental quality standards are based on the Eli Water Directive.

The environmental quality standards in Brinte are deteriorating. There is unacceptable harmfulness of the water. Sörbrändöfjärden already has the worst classification for certain substances. It must not get any worse, and that is what we see the danger of. The company disagrees," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson, head of the district administration in Norbotten.
In Sörbrändöfjärden it is the mercury and zinc levels that are affected by the Talga factory's emissions, according to the district administration.

In this case it is zinc and mercury. The levels of these two substances are already too high. We don't think they should be polluted even more," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson.

What does unacceptable pollution of the water mean?
"From our point of view it is not possible to give a permit. But we are involved in the whole thing, and we think that the central authority, the Maritime and Water Authority, should take a position on this. They can interpret it." in different ways. The court decides.

The Swedish Maritime and Water Authority has not commented on Talga's application, despite requests from the district administration.
"We will continue to argue for a statement from the authority because we think it is appropriate. This is a very complex issue," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson.

Sörbrändöfjärden is already dominated by industry, and the plans for Svartön and Hertsöfältet envisage the establishment of more industries.

Production is to use very dangerous chemicals such as hydrofluoric acid and sulphuric acid. The company has used how these substances are transported and handled. The district administration assumes that the company takes these issues seriously, but has imposed conditions that the company must meet."

Noise?
That shouldn't be much of an issue. We don't quite agree on when the day starts, whether at six or seven in the morning," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson."

__________________________

"The Land and Environment Court will decide whether the Australian company Talga receives an environmental permit to build a factory on the Hertsö field in Luleå, which will make materials for batteries.​

TT
PUBLISHED 8 MAY 2023 AT 10.15

According to Norr Media, the emissions have come into focus during the main hearing, where the county administrative board and Talga disagree about the significance of the zinc and mercury that the factory releases into Sörbrändöfjärden.

- Sörbrandöfjörden already has the worst classification for certain substances today. It must not get worse, we see a risk that it will, says Anna-Carin Ohlsson, head of unit at the county administration in Norrbotten, to Norrbottens-Kuriren .

For its part, Talga believes that the mercury emissions are so low that they are barely detectable, while the 44 kilos of zinc that are estimated to be released are not much in the context, because the Luleälven annually releases 35,000 kilos, according to the company.

- It becomes clear that the zinc load from Talga's operations has no real biological impact, said Talga's representative Joel Mårtensson at the closing speech, according to NSD .

In April, the Land and Environmental Court granted permission for mining operations outside Vittangi in Kiruna Municipality to Talga. The graphite concentrate is supposed to be shipped to the Hertsö field to produce material used in lithium-ion batteries.
The court's decision will be announced on June 21."
https://www.nyteknik.se/industri/ut...laner-oense-om-betydelsen-av-den-zink/2053109

Goes now through all the regular newspapers.

 

[beserk]

Fingers crossed we get a big fat positive for both sets of permits and we're pregnant with Vittangi ... but there are still several plausible scenarios.

Mining Permits
Worst case scenario - an appeal is granted (the verdict is overturned) ,
Best case scenario - the appeals gets thrown out and the restrictive wording that suggested that the Talga cannot mine until all appeal processes have been completed gets overturned particularly if the ruling is still relevant if there is a challenge at the supreme court.

Lulea refinery
Worst case - permit is not given which will then open up another battle front , this time Talga appeals? Talga appeals to the SC ? Talga relocates the refinery and requests a permit elsewhere and we do not host any more free breakfasts.
Best Case - Permit granted ,case closed. No council surprises or withholding plans.

Other question that still remain. What is the likelihood of a supreme court challenge ? how long does that process take ? Pending the Supreme Court's decision , will Talga be able to extract graphite in the interim or will they be subject to restrictive conditions?

Re: vexed question with SC challenge of lower court go ahead. The past Chairman of TalmA, AA, wasn't backwards with coming forward that Talma is splash with cash and have the best beaks money can buy.

And the new Chairman, another of the same surname starting with A, apparently even the Chairmanship is owned and rotated within the Royal family of A, has reissued the threath to go to the SC where the Talma beaks have a 2 out of three strike rate. Not bad odds in bloodsport.

An astute observation Cosors that the murder of black crows is congregating around the free meal.

However the crows the NIMBYs can afford according to principle of no - cure, no-pay model aren' t the brightest on the block.

Talmas beaks are more formidable. And costa lotta which explains why Talma in paralell is suing for exclusive fishing and hunting rights. These rights can be monetised and any monies raised will no doubt go to lawyers fees.

Interesting to see how the fight between Talma v Talga beaks will play out. Hopefully we can afford the ones with the sharpest talons.

-beserk

 

[Vigdorian]

So do I.

From the print media. The vector recognition of the words and correction was difficult and time-consuming. It is also possible that errors have crept in.

I also note that the existing industry and melting of steel are probably responsible for the elevated heavy metal levels. The neighbour and fertiliser manufacturer should then also get some problems. Talga has shown how they treat the water. It seems to me that this is a tactic to buy time and push things between authorities or relevant agencies. Nevertheless, these things should be taken seriously again. I have been following the back and forth between the administration and Talga for a long time. Most recently, it was about the handling of hydrofluoric acid, which Talga was able to answer adequately.
In short, the district administration now thinks the water quality is too bad and is therefore against new industry. It refers to the Swedish Maritime and Water Authority. Let them give their opinion.

View attachment 35970

"Heavy metals in the bay could stop the Talga plan.

The water in Sörbrändöfjärden is of such poor quality that emissions from the planned Talga factory in Hertsöfältet are not allowed. That is the county council's assessment.

This week the County and Environment Court is holding the main hearing on Talga's new factory on the Hertsö field. Talga has applied for an environmental permit to produce up to 22,000 tonnes of battery anode material per year. The raw material is the graphite that Talga will mine at Vittangi.

The process water from the factory will be cleaned and discharged into the Sörbrändörjar River. There are certain environmental quality standards for water, for example for heavy metals, which must become requirements. The environmental quality standards are based on the Eli Water Directive.

The environmental quality standards in Brinte are deteriorating. There is unacceptable harmfulness of the water. Sörbrändöfjärden already has the worst classification for certain substances. It must not get any worse, and that is what we see the danger of. The company disagrees," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson, head of the district administration in Norbotten. And the newspaper don't let her have her say. I don't know about you, but I would be interested in the other opinion on how Talga ensures that they don't put any additional unacceptable pollution on the water. Take care of the dirty industry that is already there and impose new requirements on them I think. And yes, the newspaper could have let the other side have their say. The article was written in connection with an on-site inspection.
In Sörbrändöfjärden it is the mercury and zinc levels that are affected by the Talga factory's emissions, according to the district administration.

In this case it is zinc and mercury. The levels of these two substances are already too high. We don't think they should be polluted even more," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson.

What does unacceptable pollution of the water mean?
"From our point of view it is not possible to give a permit. But we are involved in the whole thing, and we think that the central authority, the Maritime and Water Authority, should take a position on this. They can interpret it." in different ways. The court decides.

The Swedish Maritime and Water Authority has not commented on Talga's application, despite requests from the district administration.
"We will continue to argue for a statement from the authority because we think it is appropriate. This is a very complex issue," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson.

Sörbrändöfjärden is already dominated by industry, and the plans for Svartön and Hertsöfältet envisage the establishment of more industries.

Production is to use very dangerous chemicals such as hydrofluoric acid and sulphuric acid. The company has used how these substances are transported and handled. The district administration assumes that the company takes these issues seriously, but has imposed conditions that the company must meet."

Noise?
That shouldn't be much of an issue. We don't quite agree on when the day starts, whether at six or seven in the morning," says Anna-Carin Ohlsson."

View attachment 35966
Do you see that!? The environment there is already highly polluted. No more industry should be located there, no matter how well they filtrate their water.

Comment for the bar, I'm just too lazy to go over there:
But I absolutely agree with Ohlsson that she should not decide how to solve the problem.
It's already boiling up again in me. That's the same logic as the antis here. The climate is in a bad way and it's the industry's fault, so we have to prevent additional new industry. That will solve the problem.


__________________________

"The Land and Environment Court will decide whether the Australian company Talga receives an environmental permit to build a factory on the Hertsö field in Luleå, which will make materials for batteries.​

TT
PUBLISHED 8 MAY 2023 AT 10.15

According to Norr Media, the emissions have come into focus during the main hearing, where the county administrative board and Talga disagree about the significance of the zinc and mercury that the factory releases into Sörbrändöfjärden.
- Sörbrandöfjörden already has the worst classification for certain substances today. It must not get worse, we see a risk that it will, says Anna-Carin Ohlsson, head of unit at the county administration in Norrbotten, to Norrbottens-Kuriren .
For its part, Talga believes that the mercury emissions are so low that they are barely detectable, while the 44 kilos of zinc that are estimated to be released are not much in the context, because the Luleälven annually releases 35,000 kilos, according to the company.
- It becomes clear that the zinc load from Talga's operations has no real biological impact, said Talga's representative Joel Mårtensson at the closing speech, according to NSD .
In April, the Land and Environmental Court granted permission for mining operations outside Vittangi in Kiruna Municipality to Talga. The graphite concentrate is supposed to be shipped to the Hertsö field to produce material used in lithium-ion batteries.
The court's decision will be announced on June 21."
https://www.nyteknik.se/industri/ut...laner-oense-om-betydelsen-av-den-zink/2053109

Goes through all the regular newspapers.

Do you think Talga has a contingency plan for lulea? It doesn’t sound like the ideal situation . Another thought , from a scalability point of view - hypothetically , do you think that 880kg of mercury will be viewed in the same manner as 44kg of mercury because in this instance unlike the argument for the mining permits where we applied for stage 1 production , you wouldn’t want to set your base where you might be constrained in the refinery in stage 2 or 3.

 

[cosors]

 

[Vigdorian]

Sorry my mood is bad. That has absolutely nothing to do with you. So please forgive me if my words don't read as friendly to you as they are meant by me.

I don't quite follow. I have no confirmation of mercury at all. Only this woman mentions the contamination of the water with it. The environmental engineer from Talga mentions zinc in the amount of 44Kg/a, which is so little that it can hardly be measured compared to the 35 tonnes (or 35 x 1000Kg) of zinc that are already emitted maybe from SSAB. I don't know how you come up with the 880. The other expansion stages do not play a role here. I also don't know if there is a technical solution to filter this small or tiny amount of zinc out of the water.
I cannot understand Ms Ohlsson's logic at all. It is about the ratio 35,000:44 or about 0.13% on top of the 100% if it is not filtered out. It is not a question of objectivity, but of the personal ambitions of this case worker. That's the explanation why we haven't had the permit in our pockets. I didn't take it seriously at the beginning because we can't be held responsible for the pollution that already exists I thought. Ms Ohlsson is now turning the logic around. Limit values do not matter if there is already too much of it. To clarify and polemicise - should be in the bar - there is too much CO² so any new human life is bad for this planet. Let her read it if she finds her way here.

I find it absolutely difficult to comprehend this factually. For me, these are private ambitions. If she refuses and says no for the district administration then she is doing it outside the legal framework that is given about limits to discharge. So she refers this case to the Swedish Maritime and Water Authority. She herself has expressed her opinion. 0.13% on top is too much for her. This does not violate the limit values, but her opinion that the water is already too polluted - whether it is the fault of Talga or not - is irrelevant to her.

So it is delayed until someone with expertise decides or someone gets the other companies to stop polluting the water so much.
What really bothers me is the permanently bad and one-sided press. Nobody but Talga itself dares to openly speak out in the press. All the other problems have been dealt with without the public noticing anything except you here. And now? The press is full because of nothing factual.

You absolutely meet the limits, but still no.

This is not objective and this is unfair and should not stand up in court, but! => successfully delayed.

Talga's limit values are permissible, but this responsible person still says no because the environment is already too polluted!?
I'd better retire for a few weeks and stop feeding us this insane madness. Does me no good.

And MT: Back from our anode refinery site, all cleared and services going in.
Even if he probably means the snow.
It's possible that everything is normal right on track and even the NV anode thing is perfectly normal and I'm just exaggerating. I don't know.

_______
By the way, this is zinc worth over $120,000 that the industry there is dumping into the water.

Feel free to vent - 90% of the time I agree with you , the other 10% I’d normally take it further.

Oops , Replace my 44kg/a of mercury with 44kg/a of zinc.
880kg/a was simply a hypothetical multiplier of x20 (if we were to expand the operation) and wondering if future court rulings would treat 880/35,880 the same as 44/35,044 , despite the body of water (don’t ask me to spell it) already been assigned the worst water rating.

 

[Vigdorian]

As a Side-note , I think a ticket costs $770 and Talga only has a 15min slot … and a booth. $770 for a meet and greet is hefty.

 

[cosors]

Today I deleted almost everything I had posted. To remain transparent with you I recommend reading this under Hertsönfältet in context to the ann today carefully and build your own opinion:
https://www.lansstyrelsen.se/norrbotten/om-oss/vart-uppdrag/aktuella-tillstandsprocesser.html

 

[Vigdorian]

Today I deleted almost everything I had posted. To remain transparent with you I recommend reading this under Hertsönfältet in context to the ann today carefully and build your own opinion:
https://www.lansstyrelsen.se/norrbotten/om-oss/vart-uppdrag/aktuella-tillstandsprocesser.html

What’s your opinion ?

Reading it doesn’t instill confidence in me but in the same token I'm not sure the county’s expectations are realistic… essentially they’re suggesting that lulea park is not fit for housing the new business district if the industries involved include discarding any materials in the waterways in varying degree , in our case relatively low zinc and mercury.

 

[beserk]

As a Side-note , I think a ticket costs $770 and Talga only has a 15min slot … and a booth. $770 for a meet and greet is hefty.
[/QUOTE

I listened in on the streamed content. Only had an hour to spend this morning so I had to leave the Zoom meeting prematurely after the MT presentation.

I let others start up the analysis....

No worries

-beserk
.

 

[cosors]

What’s your opinion ?

Reading it doesn’t instill confidence in me but in the same token I'm not sure the county’s expectations are realistic… essentially they’re suggesting that lulea park is not fit for housing the new business district if the industries involved include discarding any materials in the waterways in varying degree , in our case relatively low zinc and mercury.

This is not so easy for me to explain. But I am trying.

On the one hand I think the project is a thoroughly positive thing for all of us, including the antis. Nevertheless, Talga and we are used to obstacles being put in our way all the time. The road is like a boulder field.
Sweden is the land of the Green Transition and yet here the rubble is not removed, let alone a path paved. And the media portrayal is absolutely one-sided against it. What kind of image is a Swedish citizen supposed to get of the project? Most of them probably don't even know that it is very positive for them. And the voice of the antis is too loud or the only one perceptible in this chorus.

When it comes to an insane waste of energy and the baking of coke for graphite for anodes, people clap. And when it's about a really green thing only the negative things about it are highlighted. I think this is mendacious and it frustrates me sometimes even in my own country.

Like Talga I am used to solving problems with compromises. This is different and there is no compromise. It is a determination that this 44Kg/a is in conflict with EU law. But, they are not the ones who decide and therefore refer to the other office and ask their opinion. They have not yet had anything to say about it. And in the end the court decides and I think it is in the nature of a court to act within the framework of compromise. They take this finding as a boundary condition I think.

I don't know if and how this problem can be solved technically. I also don't know if Talga is already working on a solution as usual. I interpret the statement to mean that Talga has simply taken a different stance so far. But that won't get them anywhere with this office.

Theoretically, the matter could be solved easily and factually for the office. There are probably many possible solutions. One comes in my mind:
The court could grant a temporary special permit and at the same time oblige the existing industry to improve its water management by 0.13%. Then EU law would be respected and there would be room for Talga.
I think finding a new location is out of the question.
But maybe Talga already has a technical solution up its sleeve, who knows.

How absurd this problem is: pollution makes it necessary that companies like Talga exist with their projects. But here the pollution of the old or existing industry leads to a dead end and to this No. Perhaps I am most annoyed by this absurdity. They clearly don't have a grip on their existing industry in this case. And the bill has to be paid by Talga, who are fighting for the good cause. And nobody in Sweden cries out at this absurdity. The media paint a picture of nodding approval. The only ones jumping to Talga's side in the media are themselves.

I was surprised by this problem although I have known about the issue for a longer time. I assumed that it would be like countless times before and that compromises would be made and the plan refined. But now we know this factual no from this side. We will see how the court assesses this. And once everything is solved after an endless amount of hard work for this green cause there is a party in Kiruna that refuses to cooperate and play party-political power games. They don't care about the cause and the Green Deal.

And that leads me to a discrepancy: we know about this problem here which was not mentioned in the last update. I repeat myself, I don't know if Talga already has a solution. And I don't know if this problem is as big as it seems to me.

Presumably it will continue as before and a way will be painstakingly built. But I don't know who will propose or develop it.

Finally, there is the fight against time. And if Europe does not want to leave the field to the Chinese then all those involved must pave the way to make it possible instead of constantly throwing new obstacles in the way. At least here I see the EU as very constructive and Sweden as a brake in our case. And that's the thing I don't understand. It is in Sweden's interest to push this matter forward. It is only their support that I see as no more than just the struggle of individual interests. beserk has drawn a picture for all of us here of what it looks like behind some scenes.

I am curious to see how the matter will turn out. But I'll probably poke around less in the rubbish and then I'll find less to be angry about. As an investor in this great green project I have enough patience. And I hope I won't lose my confidence in the Green Deal.