PyroGenesis Inc T.PYR

More Rio Tinto Labrador Client info

[MidtownGuy]

I've pieced together some more info that Rio Tinto Labrador (the Iron Ore Company of Canada site) is a client. Starting to gel even better now.

With the below info it's likely they are client B, not client A.

PYR’s June 11 NR for the signing of a 2nd iron ore client for modelling had revealing info:

Source: https://www.pyrogenesis.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/2020-06-11-PyroGenesis-Signs-Second-Modelling-Contract-with-Another-Iron-Ore-Pelletization-Client.pdf

1/ A key mention of “AFFORDABLE HYDRO POWER”.

A sentence in the news release states PYR’s torches would provide: “...a cost advantage to those companies that have access to affordable hydro power as a replacement to expensive bunker fuel”.

Not a lot of places in the world have hydro-power; even fewer have hydro power close to mines. Labrador certainly does, with Churchill Falls (the second largest underground power station in the world) and the Muskrat Falls coming online now.

2/ A key mention of “BUNKER FUEL”.

Bunker fuel is the heaviest type of fuel oil, even heavier than diesel. Literally the bottom of the barrel residues of petroleum distillation. It’s mostly used in ships.

Many pellet plants use bunker fuel, but not all of them. The Labradro Iron Ore Company of Canada’s pellet plant specifically does, using a bunker fuel known as “Bunker C”. Here’s a Newfoundland ministry of the environment doc that says so:

“Iron Ore Company of Canada’s Carol Project, at Labrador City... Bunker C is used to fuel the boilers and indurating (pellet) machines."

Source here: https://www.gov.nl.ca/eccm/env-protection/ics/mining/

2/ A key mention of “REDUCING SULFUR DIOXIDE”.

Further down the same June 11 NR from PYR is this statement:

“In the case of Client B, the switch to plasma torches will also result in the additional benefit of significantly reducing the emission of another pollutant; sulphur dioxide (SO2).”

Now, almost any switch from fossil fuel burners to plasma would reduce emissions, including sulphur dioxide, so this struck me as a strange and very specific call out that PYR is making. Odd, until you know some background.

In 2017, the Government of Canada mandated a performance agreement for the iron ore pellet sector in Canada to reduce air pollutants, specially **sulphur dioxide**. The agreement has a deadline of 2026.

The signees of the agreement? There were two:

Iron Ore Company of Canada (Rio Tinto) at Carol Lake Project, Labrador City

ArcelorMittal Mining Canada G.P. at Port-Cartier Quebec.

From the agreement:

“The induration furnace is the primary source of emissions from this sector of sulfur dioxide (SO2)... the purpose of this Agreement is for each Company to achieve and maintain the BLIERs [Base-Level Industrial Emissions Requirements] for PM2.5, SO2, and NOx”

Source agreement: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-performance-agreements/iron-ore-pellet-sector-overview/agreement.html

And of course, using bunker fuel would have Tinto Labradro creating very high levels of SO2, comparatively. Plasma torches would go a long way to meeting those government SO2 reduction goals, hence perhaps why PYR called it out.

3/ Key mention of 100 Burners.

In describing the client in the June PYR news release, the first paragraph states: “Client B has over 100 burners in its existing facilities.”

The average induration furnace has 20 burners. (Note: I’ve also read some furnaces have up to 28 burners.)

Source: https://www.metal7.com/public_upload/files/Burner%20500L%20-%20Anglais.pdf

Of those two signees to the government agreement...

> ArcellorMittal Quebec has two production lines. That’s only 40 – 50 burners. [Note: though they do have other pellet plants around the world that would take them over 100.]

Source: https://www.transformerlavenir.com/en/facilities/amem-facilities/the-pellet-plant/

> The Iron Ore Company of Canada has six production lines, for around 120-130 burners.

Source: https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/labrador-iron-ore-royalty-corporation-results-for-the-third-quarter-ended-september-30-2020-839194488.html

Others, like VALE and LKAB, have many more plants and burners, far surpassing the "over 100" number cited in the NR.

SUMMARY

Just more evidence that Tinto is a client.

And given all of the above from the Client B news release, I’m inclined  to think Rio Tinto is Client B. Also, one of the mentions of Client A in a NR stated they had 10 pellet plants, which Rio does not have.

[ElanS2]

IOC does use Bunker C, One train load, how many tankers I do not know, per week. Arcelors Port Cartier plant is a grate kiln therefore fewer torches. Getting new Labrador power to it could be a problem due to the distance and Hydro Quebec would have to buy it from NALCO. After the Churchill Falls debacle in the 60s NALCO will not wish to do that. Politically speaking the Muskrat power will be to

[MakeItRain1]

Everything Midtownguy has presented is backed by facts with links. Everything you have presented has been hearsay. Please back it up it up with some kind of evidence. To be honest you show up every once in awhile with some kind of negative sentamint and always come off as a pretend know it all trying to get cheap shares.

[StairwayTo]

I was thinking B also. In one of your detailed study from last week, Rio Tinto said they are testing torches (plurial), client A only has one. So the quote given to B for 4 torches, could very well be for Rio and went straight to testing.

[ScienceFirst]

Midtownguy ... Outstanding research from your part!  Thanks for sharing it.