Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Platinum Group Metals (PGMs) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Aurum who wrote (248)	2/5/2000 9:11:00 PM
From: Aurum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 529

Hi Ptask, An important, and I presume expanding, use for palladium is in multi-layer ceramic capacitors. Mobile phone apparently contain about 100 of these and I presume these MLCC are smaller and/or more efficient. Below is an extract from the source I quoted previously. _______________ (25) Autocatalysts based on platinum, palladium and/or rhodium have been developed to eliminate the three most dangerous gases emitted by motor vehicle exhausts, namely, carbon monoxide (CO), nitrous oxides (NOx) and unburnt hydrocarbons (HC). The function of autocatalysts is to convert these noxious gases to less harmful components (carbon dioxide, nitrogen and water). (26) Essentially two types of commercial autocatalysts are currently manufactured. The older system uses an oxidizing platinum/palladium catalyst that converts the CO and HC (thus named the 'two-way` system) to carbon dioxide and water. The newer system not only performs the task of the two-way system, but is also capable of dealing with the third pollutant, NOx. With the addition of rhodium to the platinum/palladium catalyst, the system then converts the CO, HC, and NOx to carbon dioxide, nitrogen and water. This catalyst is therefore called the 'three-way` system. The three-way catalysts currently use either platinum/rhodium or platinum/palladium/rhodium. 27) Platinum, palladium and rhodium are used in varying ratios depending on specific requirements, such as the engine size, fuel used (petrol or diesel), efficiency levels sought, vehicle mass and the manufacturers' design and technology. Platinum has an advantage over the other PGMs, in that it can absorb a wider spectrum of gases. It is the most active of the three metals in CO and HC conversion, it is the least affected by lead and sulphur in the fuel and works well at low temperatures. However, it does not reduce NOx efficiently (a task that rhodium performs well). Palladium has some ability to convert CO and HC, and to reduce NOx, but is easily contaminated and is slow to become operational. Therefore, platinum, palladium and rhodium perform differently in the catalytic conversion required by autocatalysts to remove the noxious constituents. 28) Moreover, design changes in automotive components typically require lead times of several years. Such changes are costly, requiring substantial R& D and testing to ascertain whether the new model would meet ever-tightening environmental regulations. Automobile manufacturers have indicated that it would not be economically feasible to consider undertaking the R& D required for re-designing, unless there were to be an appreciable and irreversible change in PGM prices or liberalization of environmental protection laws. Clearly, the switching costs for automobile manufacturers go well beyond the costs of the various PGMs nvolved. Thus, there is rather limited substitutability among the PGMs in autocatalytic applications. Rather than substitution, the complementarity of PGMs is well demonstrated in the field of catalytic converters for cars. Furthermore, diesel engines use only platinum and not palladium converters. The substitution possibilities between palladium and platinum therefore appear limited for these purposes. (29) The parties have submitted that there is a much more significant scope for the substitution of palladium for platinum in autocatalysts than suggested by the Commission. In this respect Ford, Nissan and Engelhard are stated as being at the forefront of the development of this technology which it is said will be of greater relevance in Europe because of smaller car engine sizes. 30) During its investigation the Commission has had contact with two of these companies: one has stated that it has always used platinum and rhodium in the production of autocatalysts and any change would require costly design changes. The other company has confirmed that it does manufacture palladium-only autocatalysts. 31) The Commission recognizes that palladium has substituted for platinum in certain types of autocatalysts in recent years. As stated by the parties this trend is likely to continue to a certain extent. However, the Commission considers that there is a rather limited possibility for any significant substitution of palladium for platinum in autocatalysts because of the cost of design changes and the specific properties of each metal to react with specific pollutants. As mentioned above these properties include the fact that lead and sulphur render palladium inactive and that diesel engines and large gasoline engines require platinum catalysts. According to Johnson Matthey, in evidence of this fact 'many European vehicles are fitted with two-brick catalyst systems, and it is now common to use a palladium/rhodium catalyst in conjunction with another containing platinum. This enables auto makers to take advantage of palladium's efficiency in converting HC emissions, while retaining platinum for its CO activity, and rhodium for its ability to deal with NOx.` The parties agree that palladium cannot be totally substituted for platinum (see parties' reply of 19 March 1996 to the questions following the hearing). (32) Although the use of palladium has increased in proportion to platinum, the market demand for platinum will continue as it will remain an essential element for use in autocatalysts.

To: Aurum who wrote (248)	2/5/2000 9:25:00 PM
From: Aurum	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 529

Hi Ptask, here is some interesting material (April 1996; so its a bit dated) concerning production of PGMs from Russia. ___________ Russia (122) Russia accounted for 23 % of global platinum supplies in 1995. However, in 1995 Johnson Matthey indicates that only about 13 of the 23 percentage points were supplied from production, whereas about 10 percentage points or about 500 000 ounces were supplied from stocks. The Russian Government controls Russian exports of precious metals through its Committee for Precious Metals and Stones and its sales agency, Almaz. (123) According to Johnson Matthey in Platinum 1995 Russian production of platinum peaked in the late 1980s. In addition they report that the political changes in Russia have led to falling output for, among other reasons, a lack of essential investments and because PGM grades have fallen as the ore rich in sulphide has increasingly been mined out. Therefore the Russian mines cannot provide competition through expansion in the foreseeable future. (124) In principle it would be possible for Western companies to invest in Russian PGM production. However, as explained below, this is unlikely (see Section VII B.3). It would therefore appear that the Russian ability to compete in the platinum market will decline in the coming years. (125) The parties have submitted that the Russian mine at Noril'sk will increase annual production to 1 million ounces within the next five years: this is a level of production never before achieved according to The platinum group metals - a global perspective by C. F. Vermaak. According to the parties, in order to achieve this production substantial investment of US $ 1 to US õ 2 billion is necessary which may be forthcoming in the next four to five years. The parties further claim that commitments to attract these funds (within the next two years) have been made by Uneximbank and EBRD. However, contrary to what has been indicated, the EBRD is not offering finance. Given the length of the investment horizon and the likelihood of raising these monies it is highly unlikely that the Russians will be able to reach past production levels (or surpass those levels, as suggested by the parties), for the next five years.