A Visit To The Lynas Advanced Materials Plant

by Jack Lifton on March 7, 2013 · 52 comments

in Rare Earths, Site Visits

Bookmark and Share Print

A milestone was reached by Lynas Corporation last Wednesday, February 27, 2013, at the company's Lynas Advanced Materials' Plant, known as the LAMP, when the plant's solvent-extraction (SX) system produced the first results of its initial run, 200 kg of SEG (samarium-europium-gadolinium) carbonate. The next day La-Ce (lanthanum-cerium) mixed carbonates were delivered by the system. Finally the system will deliver - and may have already delivered - mixed neodymium-praseodymium carbonate, also known as didymium in the rare-earth trade. The system is designed to produce 30 tonnes a day of products when operating at full capacity. It was announced that the system will be capable of running at full capacity by June 30, 2013; it was also announced that Phase II of the system, an additional 11,000 metric tons per year of capacity, will be in operation by Sep 30, 2013.

The campaign (the length of time from loading the plant with a mixed concentrate to the delivery of the designed product(s)) was 90 days, I was told. The sequence in which the product(s) come out is due to a process-flow design that maximizes the separation and minimizes the time required to carry it out. LAMP takes mechanically beneficiated ore concentrates from Australia, roasts them and then extracts the rare-earth elements (REEs). It then converts them to a chemical salts solution, which is then fed into the solvent-extraction (SX) system to separate the individual rare earths into chosen combinations or individual elements according to customer specifications.

jack-lamp

I hope that it is obvious that although an SX system operates in a linear fashion, it separates the REEs from each other in an order, which is not necessarily linear, i.e. it doesn't do so by delivering its output in the order in which the REEs appear in the periodic table of the chemical elements. The process chemistry at LAMP is in fact designed to meet customer specifications for mixtures of La and Ce for the fluid cracking catalyst (FCC) manufacturers for the oil industry, cerium oxide for glass polishing, and didymium for the REE permanent magnet industry. The mid-range REEs, the SEG fraction, and the heavy REEs, the HRE fraction, are from LAMP produced as (mixed) concentrates to be processed separately and at the present time elsewhere.

LAMP is now in the ramp-up phase to prove that it can operate at full capacity in Phase I. This is the process that all such chemical engineering plants must go through, and it is NORMAL and looks, to me, as an outsider, as if it is going very well.

The open issue now is not chemical engineering, but marketing. The plant became operational behind schedule not because of technical issues but rather due to political ones. An environment activist group claimed first that the LAMP would release too much radioactivity, and would not be able to manage this waste. This argument has been overcome by multiple expert panels and site surveys and finally by the Malaysian courts and government, so the anti-Lynas group has now switched to the cry that the plant will emit toxic chemical wastes (as well as radioactive ones).

This argument falls flat with regulators who have noted that the industrial park in which the LAMP is located, also has large operations of BASF, W.R. Grace, and Tennessee Eastman, all three of which process immense volumes of oil and organic chemicals to make plastics, organic intermediates, and pharmaceutical intermediates. A spill from anyone of those plants would be far more toxic than ANYTHING that could be leaked from the LAMP! Further the LAMP has triple-redundant spill control systems that are among the most impressive I have ever seen. I wonder if the LAMP's Global 1000 neighbors are held to the same standards?

A national election will be held next month, and the anti-Lynas environmental faction is campaigning only for candidates who are willing to openly state their opposition the the LAMP. The "anti-" group recently commissioned a study by a well-known German industrial advisory group that without visiting the site condemned it as unsafe. This argument did not fly with the Malaysian Supreme Court which refused further injunctive relief to the "anti" group. The leader of that group threatened two weeks ago to "burn down the plant" if his group doesn't get their way. The tragedy is that if this very deluded man, who is apparently a doctor of medicine, were to do any such thing the danger would be not from LAMP but from its surrounding Global 1000 chemical processing plants. Many thoughtful people in Malaysia who were supporting the "anti" group have now drifted away due to the irrational actions of the group's founder.

The management and the on-site chemical engineering R&D group answered all of my questions this time as they did last time I visited in May 2012. They wouldn't disclose the proprietary extractants they use or the process parameters, but I did not expect them to.

I was extremely impressed by the professionalism of the management and of the technical support staff. Of the 400 staff currently at the plant I would say that 99% were Malay nationals along with, as far as I could see, one Australian (Lynas VP - Technology) and one Chinese national who has applied for Malay citizenship (she formerly worked in Baotou and is the Chief Research Engineer). The managing director is Malay who is an impressive individual in his demonstrated ability to manage both the plant and the company's relationships with the local people (among whom he now resides) and the political opponents and the local and national politicians.

The LAMP plant had process design assistance from Rhodia China but it was built and is operated by Malaysian contractors and employees.

Lynas has just announced that it will sell up to a certain portion of the LAMP's output preferentially to Malaysian companies that want to further process the rare earths and use the downstream products to make end-user products. I think we are seeing the seeding, thereby, of a Malaysian total rare earth supply chain.

Lynas told me that the LAMP will be profitable even if the prices of the rare earths decline beyond current levels, because it was designed to be profitable in the 2009 price period. I believe that, and I wish them good luck in their Malaysian operations.

I note that on June 30 if LAMP reaches its goal of full capacity, then it will be the largest capacity REE separation plant on earth, and if it further reaches the Phase II capacity of an additional 11,000 metric tons per annum then it will be not only the largest RE separation plant in the world but the largest one ever built anywhere. Until and if Molycorp's Project Phoenix is in the same stage as the LAMP, then the LAMP will be at least one-half of the non-Chinese world's capacity to separate/refine light rare earths. Thus, at that time, Malaysia will be second only to China in RE separation capacity.

Disclosure: at the time of writing, Jack Lifton holds no shares or stock options in Lynas Corporation (Lynas), nor is he doing paid consulting for Lynas. Mr. Lifton's visits to the Lynas facility have been as a guest of the Malaysian Academy of Sciences, which paid his travel expenses for those trips. Bookmark and Share Print

1 Steve Mackowski March 7, 2013 at 9:20 pm

May the LAMP light a path forward.
Great news for the ROW REO potential producers. This technology can be developed / constructed and operated outside of China.
On behalf the other ROW REO potential producers - well done Lynas!

2 Tim Ainsworth March 7, 2013 at 10:20 pm

Well said Steve.

Great report Jack, fingers crossed the marketing proceeds as smoothly as the commissioning appears to be going.

3 Veritas Bob March 7, 2013 at 10:26 pm

"The plant became operational behind schedule not because of technical issues but rather due to political ones."

Wasn't the plant well behind schedule quite apart from additional delays due to operating approval drama?

4 Jean-Claude Bunzli March 7, 2013 at 10:29 pm

Dear Jack,
Thank you for the detailed report and good luck to Lynas which deserves congratulations for having succeeded in hopping over the anti-group hurdles. It is re-assuring to see a diversification in RE supplies.
Now I have two questions. Was the campaign so long (3 months) because adjustments had to be made to the equipment for this first batch or will it be always that long? The second question is more touchy: any information about the wastes (I mean the Th ones)?
With best personal regards
Jean-Claude

5 Gennady March 7, 2013 at 11:58 pm

Dear Jack,
I agree with Jean-Caide;.
With regards
Gen & Kap (Gennady)

6 Walter Jensen March 8, 2013 at 12:08 am

Dear Jack: Your report on the Lyas plant is objective and thorough. I thank you for that. You have been a lucid and insightful writer regarding the ree space. We owe you a debt of gratitude! With kindest regards, Walter Jensen, M.D.

7 Jack March 8, 2013 at 3:14 am

I share your happiness but who can tell me what kind of RE will they produce?What purity will be achieved? Does anyone knows? I am trying get this info from Lynas however I met only wall of silence. Is it Top Secret?

8 OzzieGeorge March 8, 2013 at 3:46 am

We here in Oz, just below effing immoral Asian states, know that nothing but nothing, no deals, are done without money under the table by corrupt Asian politicians. Nothing. My hat off to Lynas management to have got their endeavour this far -- probably at the expense of having to buy politicians off and not because Lynas' plants were dangerous in the first place. I expected to pay for Lynas' expertise in this way, through LYC's share price.

9 rina yong March 8, 2013 at 5:49 am

Malaysians will like to see this Lynas biggest toxic plant to be uprooted as it is proven now by white house energy adviser that it is a western powered design to dump radioactive wastes into 3rd world countries using Malaysia 1st policy ..So far LAMP never review its radioactive waste disposal plan to the Kuantan residents publicly .

From Yew Eng Seong's photo https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-snc6/c58.0.403.403/p403x403/734858_10151752219873502_2035538117_n.jpg
Mr President Obama ,,your energy adviser is doing you an injustice behind your back ..Do you know that ?
,, Lynas issue of Kuantan picked up by HK news media have shown the whitish slag and yellowish discharges , the by-product of the LAMP processing of rare earth ore, floating on the Balok river .
The cockles and other shell fish too smell of chemicals when cracked open ..Locals fisherman dare not eat the sea harvest but to sell them to the nearby seafood restaurant and hotel .
What a disgrace blind supporter of Lynas !! You are as greedy and stupid .
White House Energy Adviser , Lynas boss , Nick , Nick Tsurikov , AELB chief you are not staying at Balok ..are you ?
?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Lynas???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
https://www.facebook.com/barackobama?fref=ts
Lynas Plant one of the safest in the world, says white house energy adviser, is it ? Kuantan residents doubt about this Jack Lifton credential as Mr President Obama's White House Energy Adviser press released
Is this white house energy adviser a chemist, physicist or economist to say it is safe ? If he is not a Chemist , how much does know about the chemical reactions in the plant ? Did Lynas give a schematic diagram on how the plant chemical reactions are working ?
Just one day visit to LAMP , he become a local newspaper TV3/4 HERO ? hahaha
?????? | Lynas plant one of the safest in the world, says ...
KUANTAN: The Lynas Advanced Materials Plant in Gebeng has one of the safest facilities compared to
similar plants around the world, said White House energy adviser ...
http://www.kwongwah.com.my/news/2013/03/01/101.html

HE IS SUCH A DISGRACE TO US CITIZENS TOO

10 rina yong March 8, 2013 at 7:26 am

Today March the 8th , in Kuantan,, found mutated jambu air in the market . Jambu air is called wax apple, love apple, java apple, Chomphu (In Thai)
Fruits get mutated like those fruits found after TEPCO nuclear power plant melt down .
Local fruits now get mutated . What about the local child's life ?
Don't eat odd looking fruits , you will appear odd and act odd soon!
Vote for a greener Malaysia
and remove the Lynas radioactive wastes producing plant once and for all
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/164423_347796911998216_649538429_n.jpg
What is jambu air called in english? - Yahoo! Answers
Best Answer: i was wondering the same thing! ---- i searched through wikipedia....and its called wax apple, love apple, java apple, Chomphu(In Thai .

11 Kurt March 8, 2013 at 7:55 am

Thanks Jack for a very interesting report. - I read also the "anti-comments". - My comment to these "antis" for further considearations is that the main obstacle with establishing a new processing plant is many times how to treat the waste waters and the waste materials, so that harmful components do not enter into the environment. Usually this often happens during the start-up of the newly constructed plant, due to the (N.B.!) incomplete analysis of the plant raw material. If such happens - as in this case with radioactive material, the said material can be recovered by using e.g. SX for additional economical use, in this case at nuclear power plants, and thus giving additional income to the processing plant covering the additional operational costs or most of them. These actions together more exact waste disposal control will then radically decrease the load to the environment.

12 Jean-Claude Bunzli March 8, 2013 at 8:37 am

Well well
As a scientist (chemist) I am stunned by the partisan (did I say erratic?) attitude of some people against LAMP. What relevance has the mention of TEPCO here? The LAMP plants is an extraction plant, using well known chemicals that Malaysian chemists/engineers know how to handle. I must say that living presently in South Korea I would feel safer near the LAMP plant than in Gumi (an industrial new city where chemicals are not handled properly...see the latest news). When it comes to thorium, the problematic is known and so are the ways to handle it. This includes using it as a nuclear fuel by the way, but this is probably a bit premature...
To conclude, it is true that past industrial procedures have produced unwanted wastes and problems, and tis everywhere on earth. But we are in the 21th century, industry is aware of its responsibility, and, more importantly, technology knows how to deal with these problems and regulations are growingly harsher. The LAMP plant follows very strict regulations and its opponents should better have a look into the operations of potentially less clean neighbors…

13 Jack Lifton March 8, 2013 at 9:15 am

I was told that the LAMP will produce three commercial products:
1. A lanthanum cerium carbonate mixture, which I presume is for the manufacturing of fluid cracking catalyst for the oil refining industry,
2. Cerium carbonate for glass polishing, and
3. A neodymium-praseodymium carbonate mixture for the rare earth permanent magnet manufacturing industry

I do not know what purity these products will have, but I think you must realize that such products are not commodities; they are made to end-use, or next in the supply chain, specifications. Lynas would be in violation of its non disclosure agreements with the customer(s) by revealing the "purity" or exact chemistry (in this case elemental ratios) of the products.

14 Jack Lifton March 8, 2013 at 9:29 am

Jean-Claude,

I'm sure that the 90 days was, as you say, because the plant was being calibrated. I believe that the normal cycle time is 6 weeks. Of course once the plant is ready for full capacity operation, as Lynas says that Phase I will be on June 30, then it will be possible, after full loading, and the passage of the first six weeks, to produce 30 tons a day, every day, of product. Due to the particular processes chosen the plant delivers, first of all, an SEG (Samarium, Europium, Gadolinium) carbonate mixture, the it next produces a Lanthanum-Cerium carbonate mixture, which Lynas calls LC. I do not know the rest of the production sequence, because I left Malaysia after the LC came out, and, quite frankly I didn't ask which products were still to come out in what order.

As to the Thorium disposal the Malaysian nuclear regulatory authorities have made the LAMP conform to VERY STRICT STANDARDS, which the Malaysian government has developed through extensive experience with actually treating the residues from rare earth processing. The opposition has an almost religious fervor so that numbers and science will never convince the opposition that there fears are overblown. All the logical fallacies in the world endlessly repeated do not change the facts.

Thanks for your comments,

Jack

15 Tim Starns March 8, 2013 at 10:15 am

"The mid-range REEs, the SEG fraction, and the heavy REEs, the HRE fraction, are from LAMP produced as (mixed) concentrates to be processed separately and at the present time elsewhere."

Are these concentrates marketable as source feedstock to China, NEO, or other places with existing processing capabilities?

16 Jack Lifton March 8, 2013 at 12:47 pm

Tim,

The SEG and HREEs concentrates are marketable to those who have separation capabilities for them. The open question for Lynas is whether it is best to sell them to a refiner, have them tolled at a refiner, or build it's own refining capacity for these concentrates. The answer to this question is, of course, which course of action is of most financial benefit to Lynas. And the answer to that question is another question: How cheaply can a separation plant for SEG and HREE be built and operated?

The non-Chinese world has very little separation capability and capacity for SEG and HREE concentrates. The Toronto crowd at PDAC I believe has finally noticed this after some of us have been discussing it publicly and openly since 2007. It is too late for most of the REE juniors to do anything about this deficiency. More than an other factor the lack of non-Chinese separation capacity will put paid to the majority of current REE juniors. This is entirely their fault.

17 rina yong March 9, 2013 at 12:30 am

Am anti cancer , uranium waste as byproduct from rare earth mining.
The main product of Lynas at Mt Weld is rare earth ore concentrates and the by product of Lynas is carcinogenic radioactive tailings and rare earth wastes of uranium, thorium and radium .

Can anyone tell me here or have you any friend who have cancer from
"depleted uranium" water source ?
1 Is drinking Uranium rich water a source of cancer ?
2 What type of cancer is most likely to cause ?
When you were growing up, how many people did you know who had cancer?
How many do you know today?
Filmmakers Liz Rogers and Kevin Flint go to South Dakota following a story about Uranium contamination only to discover that the problem flows much farther, and runs deeper than they could have imagined.
Three years and thousands of miles later, “Hot Water” tells of those impacted by Uranium mining, atomic testing, nuclear energy and the contamination that runs through our air, soil and even more dramatically...
Always remember we have our water from Balok river for marine creatures which we harvest them as Kuantan sea-food ..
Always remember we have drinking water where the source is from Uranium mining area ..
Is cancer from water source, inhalation of mining dust , ingestion of rare earth tainted heavy metallic enriched fruits,veg, milk, eggs or poultry in your area ? I am interested if these cancer victims like greedy $$$ (are god sent or not !!!

http://youtu.be/mlqhjSMw2nA

18 rina yong March 9, 2013 at 1:00 am

JUST KEEP SPEAKING OUT .It is the Kuantan and Kemaman residents' choice to reject Lynas LAMP. My aunt lives in Kuantan I was always worried when we went to visit her. Not because she was one of those old aunts grumble and asks embarrassing questions, but because she lived near a soon-to- be ready Rare earth processing plant called Lynas LAMP at Gebeng. I knew about Lynas LAMP not only because my aunt lived in the vicinity called Balok, but also because my relative is an avid protestor when the Lynas building the plant since in 2008, and she educated me about it. Every time I read Malaysian news about protests in Kuantan, KL or Australia about Lynas project and I saw the plant in the distance my mind would run rampant with the idea that at any moment something bad could happen and it would all blow up (I was an over-thinker even when I was little). I would hypothesize places where I would be if such a thing happened and which distances would be far away enough to save me. I asked myself if I would be safe visiting her.I like to listen what my aunt told me. She told me yes u can come before Lynas LAMP operating that I would only have minor radiation (according to what Lynas say) . After hearing so many locals protesting , I’m not so sure if I can believe myself going over to Kuantan anymore. Just hear from my aunt, she will be getting out of Kuantan soon , too bad .. sad news .. I never ask why ! What do you think if you are in my shoes ?
AS A MEDICAL STAFF , I AM ANTI CANCER ..
OUR CHOICE TOO REJECT , WE WILL REJECT LYNAS LAMP.
WE ARE NOT TURNING BACK ..PEOPLE' S HEALTH VS LYNAS LAMP'S PROFIT .
WE CHOOSE ONLY PEOPLE'S HEALTH . PLEASE GET OUT LYNAS ..

19 bz1516 March 9, 2013 at 1:49 pm

Very disappointing to see what LYC now has to rely on for sales. As a long since departed shareholder I have no dog in this fight.

Your description is suggestive of a company that has been forced to sell intermediate products at a discount to bring in it what it can. The only end product they appear to be selling is Ce oxide and that has shown itself to be price elastic.

It is not clear to me there is much of a market outside China for these intermediates raising even more issues of price, but I stand to be corrected.

20 Jack Lifton March 9, 2013 at 2:04 pm

BZ1516,

I do not understand your point, and I think you did not read my report carefully. Lynas told me last May that they had long term off-takes for the three customer specified products, which I described in the report. No one starts a large SX plant at full production. They are clearly breaking the plant in to bring it up to speed. I think that once that has been achieved they will commence a delivery schedule. You should ask them. As for the first products being "intermediates" why would anyone bite off more than they can chew? The LAMP's products are a very good start, and I was told at the site that since the plant was designed originally in late 2009 the then prices were used in the business model. Note also that at 22,000 tons per year production of the three designed products the production of SEG and HREE concentrates will be 940 tons per year of valuable "intermediates" that can toll processed or sold outright.

Jack

21 rina yong March 10, 2013 at 1:37 am

Wrong Leaders breed wrong decisions . Wrong decisions breed wrong outcome ..Wrong investment breed new suckers
Breaking News
See the candle stick 30DAYS chart of Lynas price movement Before and After the split of the right issue of 60 cents per shares

Red candles more than green candles ..showing the down trend behavior of this share ..of 6 cents each steps from 72 cents to 66 and back to 60 ..The down trend in term of % losses will be higher and higher as the price become lower and lower ..
As Analyst , I am predicting those right issue allotted investors will cut lost at 58 cents after attempting to sell all before falling below 60cents .
This chart shows the stale bull trap of this counter ..before turning to a bear market ..
Happy short selling above 60 cents if you are not holding this shares.
UNLESS YOU ARE A SHORTIES , RED candles cannot light up your life , can they ?
GREEN candles is hard to come by for a non dividend , high gearing
The relative strength index chart at 7daYs interval moving from 80 (strong buying) to 30 (dull/weak buying)

Its negative earning per share , negative P/E and socially/economically/politically motivated rare earth industry is showing its lack of any potential in THE LIGHT HREE , rare earth market ..
This counter is as good as dormant based on fundamental and not on Australian GE or Malaysia GE13 ..
Do not be a SUCKER of LYNAS COMMON LIGHT RARE EARTH MARKET [LREE] SUPPLIER OF La and Ce , MANY WILL AGREE WITH ME THE GLOBAL DEMAND IS ON THE PRECIOUS HARD RARE EARTH .[HREE] . LIGHT RARE EARTH MARKET [LREE] IS SATURATED AND HIGHLY COMPETITIVE . TO FIND HEAVY RARE EARTH [HREE] ..ARE at the present time elsewhere THAT IS NOT IN LAMP.
Deutsche Bank issue a SELL ADVICE ON 09/11/2012 . After a drastic drop of 0.805 to0.65 a loss of -0.155 (19.25%)
SELL ALL THE WAY . Cash is king, buy other mining(gold) shares .
Gold ores are rare never "rust" .. Rare earth ores are not rare , will rust and get recycled.
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=LYC.AX+Interactive#symbol=lyc.ax;range=20130104,20130204;compare=;indicator=split+sma(7)+volume+rsi(7);charttype=candlestick;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;
Do not keep this stock as your "DARLING STOCK" and throw away your hard earned CASH .THIS [LREE] SHARE WILL MAKE YOUR PURSE DRY. THE CHOICE IS YOURS . YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO REJECT MY VIEW ..;))
http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=LYC.AX+Interactive#symbol=lyc.ax;range=20130104,20130204;compare=;indicator=split+sma(7)+volume+rsi(7);charttype=candlestick;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined;

22 Tim Starns March 10, 2013 at 12:24 pm

I guess that they won't really know what the percentages of each of the SEG/HREE concentrates will be until the plant reaches a stabilized production, but 940 tpa of sounds like a very valuable product indeed. Doubtless Rhodia is watching this carefully.
Can those percentages be roughly estimated from the percentages of the feedstock and what would the "basket value" per ton be? I suggest that either selling them outright or having them tolled might provide a financial "cushion" value for LAMP during the first years of operation.

23 Tim Ainsworth March 10, 2013 at 10:51 pm

Tim,
The only break out of those figures that I have been able to find is in the Dept of Energy Critical Metals report Table 4-2 with the footnote re Mt Weld: "71 Production capacity and percentage distribution of individual elements are based on Lynas Corp website and DOE staff
communication with Kingsnorth March 2011." Dudley Kingsnorth worked for Lynas at Mt Weld for a period and now in academia his numbers appear to have a broad acceptance.
From the table: 480t Sm, 84t Eu (2nd highest income stream after Nd), 170t Gd, 21t Tb, 21t Dy & 63t Y.
You'll find they don't total the 960t shown in Lynas presentations as Kingsnorth's total production is 21,000t, which was the original expansion plan.
Earlier presentations from Lynas indicated the SEG/HRE from Ph1 + the SEG + HRE from Ph2 would be toll processed, without providing any further detail.
Given the Rhodia/Lynas working relationship, their 10yr supply contract for Ce/La = autocat + Eu/Tb = phosphors, the fact that last month Rhodia restarted the last of the 18 units in their SX plant at La Rochelle, ............well I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions but I think it is a reasonable assumption that the toll processor is also a customer.
As Jack mentioned above, Lynas's customer specific, made to order, product and the potential Siemens JV/Rhodia relationships etc suggest Lynas have been working very closely with end users to determine & meet specific needs in the supply chain. These hints give me confidence Lynas will survive this low demand period thru start up, and in fact help build their own market by establishing a reliable, direct supply chain to meet customer needs. This has all been laid out for some time in RED, Rare Earths Direct, the Lynas marketing platform and it's pleasing that Jack's comments appear to confirm it was more than a glossy brochure.

24 Dr.L.K.Agarwal March 11, 2013 at 4:10 am

Thank you for the detailed report and good luck to Lynas which deserves congratulations for having succeeded in hopping over the anti-group hurdles, best utilisation of solvent extraction methodology.

25 rina yong March 11, 2013 at 4:57 am

Compare your tolerance of this rare earth plant' wastes to those local dwellers , who suffers most ?..
Nobody likes rare earth waste . Some rare earth owners prefer not to know where their rare earth waste liberated to , an attitude that is both foolish and selfish . Foolish because such rare earth waste can be monitored by noting changes in the spread of pollutants , unusual consistency , color , odor all will warn the residents nearby of developing problems.
Selfish because if a rare earth plant isn't messing in his own yard , this plant must be messing in someone else's . This selfiishness insults neighbours and make the rare earth plant look like a slob when , really the owner is .
In many countries , leaving rare earth wastes around violates the law.
In some countries , failure to carry out weekly disposal checks carries a fine of 50K or more .
Unfortunately in Malaysia , most enforcement agencies failed to enforce the laws . If a big fines were levied and local media (if allowed to publish) ran the story, I think we should see a sudden improvement in cleanups. Since this is not happened, however despite all the law on the books, inconsiderate rare earth plant leave their calling cards behind.
Rare earth plant owner like this one who ignore the plants mess may also try to ignore you when you point the wastes out . If you see this type of rare earth plant continues walk away from the scene .
YES, DON'T GIVE UP !!
Yes go ahead to fight for an amendment officially makes it your right to control, to make sure owning a rare earth plant is a local , non foreign privilege and a responsibility and not a "foreigner's toxic waste producing" business .
This Lynas issue of Kuantan picked up by HK news media have shown the whitish slag and yellowish discharges , the by-product of the LAMP processing of rare earth ore, floating on the Balok river . Technically ,it is a source of concern .
The cockles and other shell fish too smell of chemicals when cracked open ..Locals fisherman dare not eat the sea harvest but to sell them to the nearby seafood restaurant and hotel .
What a disgrace to say Lynas have clear its technical hurdles!!
??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Lynas???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=320784471373773

26 rina yong March 11, 2013 at 5:17 am

Now I am showing this Lynas pool here , date Date 25th 2013 after the rainstorm flood , that is 2 months , before the visit of Jack Lifton .
LYNAS say the WLP residue can be ‘recycled’: it may be possible to safely add it in small proportions to other materials, without compromising safety:to show that the WLP residue is safe .

I am challenging you,Dr.L.K.Agarwal, Dr Looi , Nick Tsurikov and Nike Curtis) to swim there as the proof it is not dangerous ..
See how those balls of yours Dr.L.K.Agarwal ,Dr Looi, Nick Tsurikov and Nike Curtis) will shrink or not ,,:)
(Dr Looi , Nick Tsurikov and Nike Curtis, Why not ask Lynas workers to jump in the pool for WLP residue to show it is safe . ,
Stupid of you using Dr , talking like Mr knows all , all the this technical aspect just from the 1 day visit ..?
As a medical staff, I prefer free good health for all.
Thank to all who understand that money cannot be brought into the grave for the next world. Dr L.K.Agarwal can you ?
I am against Lynas plant's dispensing carcinogenic rare earth wastes to all in Kuantan residents who consume the seafood there .
I reject those investors of this plant offering free cancer for its local residents there .

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=158562297611297&set=a.158561367611390.35092.151057301695130&type=3&src=https%3A%2F%2Ffbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net%2Fhphotos-ak-ash4%2F252783_158562297611297_513986517_n.jpg&size=864%2C576
https://fbcdn-sphotos-a-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/382499_158564154277778_1968136571_n.jpg
???, ?????“???? ??? Samsu / penapaian anngur
????????”????????
??? ??? ???? ????????????????

???????, ??-???? ? Nick Tsurikov ?????????!!!..
??????, ??-???? ?Nick Tsurikov .. ??????? ??????:)
???, ??-???? ?Nick Tsurikov ..?????????WLP????????????
???, ??????????????LOOI..
???,, .??????.. ???? ? ?????
https://fbcdn-sphotos-h-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s480x480/394804_3830082925518_1922595541_n.jpg

27 Tim Starns March 11, 2013 at 1:21 pm

Thanks Tim A, from Tim S. Your found the info I was looking for.

28 Tim Starns March 11, 2013 at 1:51 pm

Just ballparking, using some current pricing (for dy,eu,tb,sm,gd,y) and my (mis) caculations, that would be in the nighborhood of 10 million per month at full value? But, they only actually capture maybe 90% of that at best. Still, not bad ....
PLEASE CORRECT ME.

29 rina yong March 12, 2013 at 1:44 am

LYNAS REVISITED will you support this ?
A VERY GOOD EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF PEOPLE SOME OF THESE prolynas gangsters ARE !
A DISGRACE BEHAVIOR OF THE UMNO YOUTH AT THE FAMOUS KUANTAN TC BEACH ..SHOUTING WHAT IS THIS !!! get lost
Apa ini ?, Pemuda Umno buat kacau ini !!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AfKm1kflzNo

30 Tim Ainsworth March 12, 2013 at 4:17 am

Hi Tim S,
I'd suggest using JPM's estimate of realised prices at $27kg as Lynas has no plans to sell on the spot market. This number is supported by applying the same proportional discount as Molymess's actual reported price Q4 of $19kg v their basket $25kg. I.e. 25% discount x Lynas basket $36kg ($9) = $27kg.
The question from there is do you then multiply x potential production volumes or potential sales numbers? Or are both the same?
As noted above Lynas have spent many years identifying and working with end users to have 70% of total production nominally under contract but IMO the market is waiting to see this demand materialise. Lynas have the ability to slow the ramp up of Ph2 (and probably still get to positive cash flow) so that decision around July/August might be the first indication.

31 Luke J. May 16, 2013 at 11:14 pm

Rina,

what kind of birth problems caused you to become a troll ?

We get it, you don't want the safest rare earth processing factory to be anywhere in Malaysia... now get this, it is not up to a minority to make these decisions.

Welcome to democracy

32 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:13 am

*
*
:( :-[ :( :-[ :( :-[ :( :-[

STOPPING LYNAS =

SMASHING THE RICE BOWLS AND DESTROYING THE LIVELIHOOD OF ABOUT THE 1,750 PEOPLE DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY EMPLOYED BY LYNAS AND WHOSE SALARIES OR INCOME ARE NEEDED TO PUT FOOD ON THE TABLES FOR THEIR FAMILIES TO SURVIVE.

DO THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS CARE WHETHER THESE POOR HARD WORKING INNOCENT MAINLY KAMPONG FELLOW HUMANS HAVE A JOB AND A HOME AND FOOD FOR THEIR CHILDREN ?

So why talk about caring for the health of the Malaysian people?

This is nothing more than just despicable hypocrisy in it's most blatant form.

ALL THEY THINK ABOUT IS TO DESTROY LYNAS AND STOP THE CONSTRUCTION OF ANY NEW PROJECTS WHICH PROVIDE JOBS, SHELTER, FOOD AND A DECENT LIFE FOR THE POOR PEOPLE..........WHILE THEY THEMSELVES HAVE A COZY JOB, SHELTER AND PLENTY OF FOOD FOR THEIR CHILDREN.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)

:( :( :( :(

33 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:17 am

*
? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;)

ANYTHING THAT IS LESS THAN 1.25 Bq/g IN THE EU OR 1.20 Bq/g IN THE USA, IS CONSIDERED TO BE SAFE ENOUGH TO BE EATEN.

If Lynas did not separate out their "waste" into 3 components i.e. WLP, FGD and NUF, the Lynas "waste" would have a specific activity of only 1.35 Bq/g.

This is only marginally above the "safe to eat" level in the EU and the USA of 1.25 Bq/g and 1.2 Bq/g respectively.

AND IF WE ADD AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MALAYSIAN SOIL TO THE ABOVE NON-SEPARATED "WASTE" THE ACTIVITY IS ONLY = 0.72 Bq/g.

THIS IS WELL WITHIN THE SAFE LIMIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION (IF EDIBLE) IN BOTH THE EU AND THE USA ! ! !

SO WHAT'S SO DANGEROUS ABOUT THE LYNAS WASTE ?

IT CAN BE SAFELY EATEN (IF EDIBLE) FROM A RADIATION POINT OF VIEW WHEN BLENDED WITH AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MALAYSIAN SOIL ! ! !

Kindly note:

Blending is an internationally accepted and legitimate way of decreasing the impact of a norm (naturally occuring radioactive material) on the environment and follows the basic safety principle of the World Health Organisation, International Labour Organisation and seven more UN and other reputable international organisations - with guidelines on this existing in many countries.

Total "waste" from Lynas plant = 290,400 tonnes/yr consisting of:

1. water leach purification residue (WLP) = 64,000 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 6 bq/g

2. flue gas desulphurisation residue (FGD) = 55,800 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.049 bq/g

3. Neutralisation underflow residue (NUF) = 170,600 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.029 bq/g

Average Malaysian soil >>>> ~ 0.082 bq/g

if we are to mix the WLP, FGD and NUF together, we will end up with a mixture of "waste" with a radioactivity of only 1.349 bq/g and if we add an equal amount of Malaysian soil to the mixture we will end up with a valuable mixture of soil enriched with magnesium, calcium and phosphate with a radioactivity of only 0.715 bq/g.

And since this is way below 1.20 bq/g, it is considered non-radioactive even in the USA and EU.

Regulatory limits on radioactivity in foods (source: IAEA)

USA foodstuff = 1.20 bq/g (1,200 bq/kg)

EU foodstuff = 1.25 bq/g (1,250 bq/kg)

Accepted global limits on radioactivity levels in foods is 1000 bq/kg (1,200 bq/kg in the USA and 1,250 bq/g in the EU).

Dominated by cesium-137 and SR-90, these levels were set by organisations like the IAEA and UNSCEAR after decades of study.

In Malaysia, any material that has a radioactivity of over 1 bq/g will be considered to be radioactive and needs AELB permission to be transported.

In the EU and USA, below 1.2 bq/g is considered to be non-radioactive and if it is edible, is also fit to be eaten.

Please note that: The 40 year old rare earth plant in La Rochelle, France had in the past used part of their waste to fill up the low-lying areas of their plant and this has not caused any problem !

In fact, prior to the end of 1974, this plant released all radioactive liquids and solids directly into the sea (where locals as well as tourists are swimming) without causing any problem.

Note:

For transportation purposes, A RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IS DEFINED AS ANY MATERIAL WHICH HAS A SPECIFIC ACTIVITY GREATER THAN

a .... > 74 Bq/g in USA

b .... > 10 Bq/g in Australia and

c .... > 1 Bq/g in Malaysia ! ! !

Why?

Because the 1989 Malaysian Transport Regulations are closely based on the out-of-date 1985 IAEA Transport Regulations.

As a result any material that contains Uranium and Thorium with a combined activity of just 1 Bq/g needs to be regulated by AELB.

IT'S TIME FOR MALAYSIA TO "DOWNGRADE" IT'S STANDARDS TO THAT OF THE STANDARDS OF THE MORE ADVANCED COUNTRIES ! ! !

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

34 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:19 am

? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;)

*
LYNAS ACTUALLY DO NOT PRODUCE ANY "WASTE" BUT RATHER IT PRODUCES ONLY SOME VALUABLE EASILY RECYCLABLE RESIDUE.

A "waste" is by definition something that is unwanted and needs to be removed as a rubbish.

The residue from the Lynas operation is not unwanted for it can be easily converted into the 3 types of useful, profitable gypsum products.

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of three major residue streams, namely the

1. WLP .. Water Leach Purification Residue (WLP) from the cracking and separation process,

2. FGD .. the Flue Gas Desulphurisation Residue (FGD) from the waste gas treatment system (scrubber) and the

3. NUF .. Neutralisation Underflow Solids from the wastewater treatment process (NUF).

ORE FOR LYNAS PLANT ~ 1,600 ppm (parts per million)

TWO MOST VOLUMINOUS LYNAS "WASTE" = 12 ppm

3rd RESIDUE STREAM = 1,500 ppm of Thorium

AVERAGE MALAYSIAN SOIL = 20 ppm OF THORIUM

The first two are classified as non-radioactive as its radioactivity is only half that of Malaysian soil and is much much less radioactive than the SAND THAT YOUR CHILDREN PLAY WITH in our beaches.

Lynas will recycle them as synthetic gypsum for plaster board, magnesium rich synthetic gypsum as a fertilizer and Iron Phospho Gypsum aggregate for use as clinker for road and other construction projects.

Gypsum is nothing more than just hydrated Calcium Sulphate (CaSO4.2(H2O) and comes probably from the neutralization of SO2 and Sulphuric acid vapour by our own Limestone (CaCO3) or Calcium Oxide in the scrubber.

The 3 types of Gypsum products are:

1. Iron Phospho Gypsum from the WLP with a very low NORM and radioactivity and after dilution according to international standard, can be used as clinker for road and in the construction industry.

2. Synthetic Gypsum with a radioactivity only 1/2 of Malaysian Soil.

3. Magnesium Rich Gypsum also with a radioactivity only 1/2 of Malaysian Soil and is a valuable fertilizer.

SO THE MAJOR PART OF THE RECYCLED RESIDUE PRODUCT ACTUALLY CONSISTS OF THE CALCIUM, SULPHATE AND WATER WHICH WERE BORN AND BRED IN MALAYSIA FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS.

THE MAJOR PART (85%) OF THE SO-CALLED RECYCLED "WASTE" IS ACTUALLY NATIVE TO MALAYSIA AND IN FACT HAS MORE RIGHT TO REMAIN IN MALAYSIA THAN THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS !

The global market for synthetic gypsum is approximately 150 million tonnes per annum.

At the current rates of production, supplies of synthetic gypsum co-products are beginning to outstrip natural gypsum, thus providing valuable new alternative materials and preserving the planet's natural resources.

"WASTE" WATER MANAGEMENT AT LYNAS PLANT

1) All process wastewater from the LAMP will undergo physico-chemical and biological treatment onsite prior to discharge.

The concentration of any residual chemical from the process (organic and inorganic) which is still remaining in the treated effluent will be monitored and assessed using the Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) parameter.

COD is defined as a measure of the oxygen-consuming capacity of inorganic and organic matter present in wastewater.

The use of COD as an indicator for both organic and inorganic pollutants arising from industrial wastewater is an internationally accepted practice.

(2) Under the Fifth Schedule of the Environmental Quality (Industrial Effluent) Regulations 2009, permissible limits for mercury, lead, arsenic and, other hazardous metals such as cadmium and chromium (trivalent and hexavalent) have been specified and enforced by the DOE.

Water quality data collected from the river (at 7 locations during the high and low tides) in 2008 indicate that mercury, lead and arsenic were not detected in the river water samples despite the fact that the river has been receiving discharges from the chemical and petrochemical industries operating within the Gebeng industrial area since the 1990s.

Sediment samples collected as part of the Lynas EIA baseline study indicate the absence of mercury and arsenic in all samples; and very low concentrations of lead.

The treated effluent from the LAMP will NOT contain cadmium, chromium (trivalent and hexavalent), mercury or arsenic.

Only lead will be present at 0.07 mg/l which is well below the Std. B limit of 0.5 mg/l.

(3) The water quality modeling approach employed in the Lynas EIA is consistent with the requirements of the DOE in Malaysia.

The modeling exercise considered the likely contribution of the Lynas discharge to the Balok River and, predicted the concentrations of key water quality parameters in the river under six scenarios representing both untreated and treated discharge.

(4) The water quality modeling carried out for the plant, which simulates the water quality of the Balok River upon receipt of the Lynas discharge, indicates that the impact of treated effluent alone on the river water quality is very low, and is likely to be diluted by a factor of 150 by the river water.

Although the COD within the river body at the point of the Lynas discharge is close to the Class III limits, the river BOD concentration is approximately only one-third of its standard value.

This suggests that the oxygen consumption due to the biological decay of organic material over the short term (5 days) will be relatively small.

COD is a measure of the total oxygen demand, but it does not give an indication of the rate at which the oxygen is consumed; BOD is comparatively a better indicator of this rate.

The bulk dilution analysis indicated that the treated Lynas effluent would only increase both COD and BOD concentrations in the river by relatively small amounts

Dato' Dr Looi

35 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:20 am

*
? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;)

85% OF LYNAS "WASTE" IS OF MALAYSIAN ORIGIN.

ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS STILL INSIST THAT THE SO-CALLED LYNAS WASTE BE SENT BACK TO AUSTRALIA.

ANNUAL PRODUCTION OF REE AND "WASTE"

(according to OEKO):

Annual import of Ore Concentrate = 65,000 tonnes

Annual production of REE = 22,500 tonnes

Therefore actual 'Waste" of Australian origin

= 65,000 - 22,500 = 42,500 tonnes per year

TOTAL "WASTE" from Lynas Plant = 290,400 tonnes/yr

consisting of

1. WLP = 64,000 tonnes/yr

2. FGD = 55,800 tonnes/yr

3. NUF = 170,600 tonnes/yr

THEREFORE AUSTRALIA CONTRIBUTES TO ONLY 14.5 % (42,000 divided by 290,400x100 %) of the so-called "waste" tonnage ! ! !

SO 85.5 % OF ALL THE "WASTE" PRODUCED BY LYNAS IS ACTUALLY NATIVE TO MALAYSIA.

AND HAS BEEN BORN AND BRED IN MALAYSIA FOR BILLIONS OF YEARS AND AS SUCH HAVE MORE RIGHT TO STAY IN MALAYSIA THAN ALL THE ANTI-LYNAS FOLKS !

DON'T YOU THINK THAT IT IS A SICK JOKE TO ASK AUSTRALIA TO TAKE "BACK" A SO-CALLED "WASTE" WHICH IS OF 85.5% MALAYSIAN ORIGIN ?

Note:

For transportation purposes, A RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL IS DEFINED AS ANY MATERIAL WHICH HAS A SPECIFIC ACTIVITY GREATER THAN

a .... > 74 Bq/g in USA

b .... > 10 Bq/g in Australia and

c .... > 1 Bq/g in Malaysia ! ! !

Why?

Because the 1989 Malaysian Transport Regulations are closely based on the out-of-date 1985 IAEA Transport Regulations.

As a result any material that contains Uranium and Thorium with a combined activity of just 1 Bq/g needs to be regulated by AELB.

IT'S TIME FOR MALAYSIA TO "DOWNGRADE" IT'S STANDARDS TO THAT OF THE STANDARDS OF THE MORE ADVANCED COUNTRIES ! ! !

Dr Looi

36 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:25 am

*
? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;) ? :) ;)

UNSCEAR ADMITS THAT THEY WERE WRONG TO IMPLY THAT THERE IS NO SAFE LEVEL OF RADIATION !

There IS a safe level and that is,

RADIATION DOSES LESS THAN ABOUT 10 rem (100 mSv ) per year ARE SAFE.

(Note: 100 mSv = 5,OO0,000 % Lynas worst case scenario)

*
Have a look at this article recommended by Nick Tsurikov, the International Radiation Safety Expert and Co-author of the IAEA Radiation Safety Report.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/01/11/like-weve-been-saying-radiation-is-not-a-big-deal/

Excerpts of Article in Forbes:

"UNSCEAR (THE UNITED NATIONS SCENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC RADIATION) HAS FINALLY ADMITTED THAT WE CAN'T USE THE LNT HYPOTHESIS TO PREDICT CANCER FROM LOW DOSES OF RADIATION.

Now the Japanese people can start eating their own food again and stop being as afraid. Source: United Nations

A very big report came out last month with very little fanfare.

IT CONCLUDED WHAT WE IN NUCLEAR SCIENCE HAVE BEEN SAYING FOR DECADES -

RADIATION DOSES LESS THAN ABOUT 10 rem ( 0.1 Sv ) ARE NO BIG DEAL.

(Note: 0.1 Sv = 100 mSv or 50,000 times Lynas worst case scenario)

The linear no-threshold dose hypothesis (LNT) does not apply to doses less than 10 rem (0.1 Sv), which is the region encompassing background levels around the world, and is the region of most importance to nuclear energy, most medical procedures and most areas affected by accidents like Fukushima.

The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (UNSCEAR 2012) submitted the report that, among other things, states that uncertainties at low doses are such that UNSCEAR “does not recommend multiplying low doses by large numbers of individuals to estimate numbers of radiation-induced health effects within a population exposed to incremental doses at levels equivalent to or below natural background levels.”

You know, like everyone’s been doing since Chernobyl. Like everyone’s still doing with Fukushima.

Finally, the world may come to its senses and not waste time on the things that aren’t hurting us and spend time on the things that are.

And on the people that are in real need. Like the infrastructure and economic destruction wrought by the tsunami, like cleaning up the actual hot spots around Fukushima, like caring for the tens of thousands of Japanese living in fear of radiation levels so low that the fear itself is the only thing that is hurting them, like seriously preparing to restart their nuclear fleet and listening to the IAEA and the U.S. when we suggest improvements.

The advice on radiation in this report will clarify what can, and cannot, be said about low dose radiation health effects on individuals and large populations.

Background doses going from 250 mrem (2.5 mSv) to 350 mrem (3.5 mSv) will not raise cancer rates or have any discernable effects on public health.

Likewise, background doses going from 250 mrem (2.5 mSv) to 100 mrem (1 mSv) will not decrease cancer rates or effect any other public health issue.

Note – although most discussions are for acute doses (all at once) the same amount as a chronic dose (metered out over a longer time period like a year) is even less effecting. So 10 rem (0.1 Sv) per year, either as acute or chronic, has no effect, while 10 rem per month would.

UNSCEAR also found no observable health effects from last year’s nuclear accident in Fukushima. No effects.

The Japanese people can start eating their own food again, and moving back into areas only lightly contaminated with radiation levels that are similar to background in many areas of the world like Colorado and Brazil."

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).
*

37 looihw July 15, 2013 at 7:35 am

LOW DOSE RADIATION DO NOT CAUSE CONGENITAL DEFECTS

In a unique study by scientists at the John Hopkins University, published in 1988 by American Journal of Epidemiology, researchers investigated the association of parental occupational exposure to low-level external whole-body penetrating ionizing radiation and risk of congenital malformations in their offspring.

THE UNIQUE FEATURE OF THIS STUDY WAS THE LINKING OF QUANTITATIVE INDIVIDUAL MEASUREMENTS OF EXTERNAL WHOLE-BODY PENETRATING IONIZING RADIATION EXPOSURE OF EMPLOYEES AT THE HANDFORD SITE IN WASHINGTON STATE, USING PERSONAL DOSIMETERS AND THE DISEASE OUTCOME i.e. CONGENITAL MALFORMATIONS.

The study population included 672 malformation cases and 977 matched controls from births occurring from 1957 through 1980.

Twelve specific malformation types were analyzed for evidence of association with employment of the parents at Hanford and with occupational exposure to ionizing radiation.

Two defects, congenital dislocation of the hip and tracheoesophageal fistula, showed statistically significant associations with employment of the parents at Hanford, BUT NOT WITH PARENTAL RADIATION EXPOSURE.

Neural tube defects like spina bifida showed a slightly significant association with parental preconception exposure, but the number of cases is too small to be conclusive of a definite co-relation.

Eleven other defects, INCLUDING DOWN SYNDROME AND CEREBRAL PALSY showed no evidence of such an association.

When all malformations were analyzed as a group, there was no evidence of an association with employment of the parents at Hanford.

Given the number of statistical tests conducted, some or all of the observed positive correlations are likely to represent false positive findings.

In view of strong contradictory evidence in this well conducted study and the fact that there is NO CONGENITAL DEFECTS DEMONSTRATED IN STUDIES ON THE ATOMIC BOMB SURVIVORS IN HIROSHIMA AND NAGASAKI,

THE CONCLUSION IS THAT "IT IS UNLIKELY THAT LOW DOSE RADIATION CAN CAUSE CONGENITAL DEFECTS."

After analysing thousands of well conducted studies, even UNSCEAR has now admitted THAT THEY WERE WRONG TO IMPLY THAT THERE IS NO SAFE LEVEL OF RADIATION !

There IS a safe level and that is,

RADIATION DOSES LESS THAN ABOUT 10 rem (100 mSv ) per year ARE SAFE.

(Note: 100 mSv = 5,OO0,000 % Lynas worst case scenario)

*
Have a look at this article recommended by Nick Tsurikov, the International Radiation Safety Expert and Co-author of the IAEA Radiation Safety Report.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/01/11/like-weve-been-saying-radiation-is-not-a-big-deal/

Excerpts of Article in Forbes:

"UNSCEAR (THE UNITED NATIONS SCENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON THE EFFECTS OF ATOMIC RADIATION) HAS FINALLY ADMITTED THAT WE CAN'T USE THE LNT HYPOTHESIS TO PREDICT CANCER FROM LOW DOSES OF RADIATION."

Dato’ Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

38 looihw July 15, 2013 at 7:44 am

IS THORIUM-232 THE CAUSE OF CANCER IN PATIENTS GIVEN THOROTRAST INTRAVENOUSLY ?

I have known about the controversy of Thorotrast (a 25 cc vial of a 25% colloidal suspension of Thorium dioxide) since I was a medical student in Manchester about 45 years ago and in fact I have been collecting a fair amount of data with regards to this contrast media.

Thorotrast was given as a contrast media via the vein and the dose of Thorium used was huge, though this depends on the type of radiological procedure done.

It had been estimated that as many as 4 million people were given this contrast in the 1930 to late 1950s.

It has been claimed that there was an increase in the incidence of cancers especially of the liver.

However, we need to consider a number of factors before we can be sure that this is the real culprit.

1) The radiation dose from those old X-ray machines in the 1930 to 1950s are hundreds of times that of the present machines.

For instance an 1896 X-ray machine was tested and found to have exposed the body to 1,500 times more radiation than modern technology does, largely because each image took 90 minutes to develop, dramatically increasing the patient's cumulative exposure to the rays. By 1930 to 1950s, the radiation dose have improved a lot but still much higher than the present X-ray machines.

Modern day X-rays require only about 21 milliseconds, and technicians place lead coverings over the body to protect vital organs from even this slight exposure.

Even in the 60s, the dose of X-rays from Tuberculosis screening is about 100 times higher than that of today's Chest X-Ray.

The fluoroscope leaves the X-ray beam "on" while the physician does his examination and as such, the fluoroscope has the potential to deliver very high X-ray doses.

In the 1920s, fluoroscopy became very popular procedure not only among radiologists, but also among many kinds of physicians.

Radiological methods of diagnosis became so important that no investigation of a patient is considered complete without the X-rays, which generally include fluoroscopy. These studies are often carried out by a general practitioner or surgeon in his office.

In 1942, Dr. Franz Buschke and Herbert M. Parker wrote (Buschke 1942):
"Recently we became aware of the fact that apparently a number of pediatricians include fluoroscopy in the monthly routine examinations of infants in their care during the first and second years of life." This pediatric practice is confirmed in Pifer 1963 and in Blatz 1970.
After studying the radiation output of seven fluoroscopes in the offices of "reputable pediatricians selected at random," Buschke and Parker estimated (Buschke 1942, p.527): "If the average rapid fluoroscopy by an experienced and well-adapted examiner takes twenty seconds, about 8.3 roentgens [entrance dose] will be delivered at this rate or 100 roentgens during the first year of life." The roentgen is a dose-unit which is approximately equivalent to a rad (actually it is less as the ICRU defined the roentgen to be 2.58e -4 C/Kg in 1971).
cont.
Fluoroscopy was popular also in hospitals.
(Braestrup 1942, p.213):
"During the past years, we have measured the roentgen output of large numbers of fluoroscopes, using the settings at which they are normally operated ... and have found a very wide variation ... Attention is called particularly to test B-116, where the R [roentgen] per minute at the panel was 127, that is, an erythema dose would be reached in about three minutes. Such a unit could be classified as a lethal diagnostic weapon and yet there are many of these still in use."
Of the various types of radiologic equipment, the mobile unit probably has been responsible for more radiation damage than any other piece of apparatus. These accidents have in most cases occurred while the mobile unit was used for fluoroscopy by surgeons, who apparently did not realize the high output obtained at short distances."

In an attempt to prevent some injuries, A LIMIT OF 100 ROENTGENS (1,000 mSv) per fluoroscopic examination was set in New York City hospitals (Braestrup 1969).

So the patients who received the Thorotrast were subjected to a huge dose of X-rays from these antique X-ray machines.

This huge dose of X-rays may be the cause of most of the cancers, we just do not know as most of the studies are unable to assess the X-ray's dose. All these studies are done 20 to 30 years later.

So we cannot use other patients who have X-rays done in the 1930s to 1950s as a control group since most X-rays which do not need a contrast media consist of only 1 or 2 X-ray pictures.

A few of the studies do have controls but these controls were cases from later years especially after 1947 when the advancement in radiological techniques and hence dosage reduction is greatest.

It is generally accepted that the risk of radiation induced cancer is 1 in 20,000 per mSv..

As such, a dose of 1,000 mSv would mean a risk of 1 in 20. For 4 million patients injected with Thorotrast, THIS RADIATION WOULD GIVE RISE TO 200,000 CASES OF RADIATION INDUCED CANCERS !

In 1953, Dade W. Moeller (then of the Public Health Service; later, president of the Health Physics Society) published an estimate that the average entrance dose per fluoroscopic examination was about 65 roentgens (650 mSv) at mid-century (Moeller 1953, pp.58-59).

The use of Thorotrast was discontinued by 1953.

2) The contrast studies are usually done for patients who are rather ill and may have multiple other disorders.
The cancers usually appear (as most cancers do) about 20 to 30 years later when the patients reach the "cancer" age. Because of this long lapse of cause and effect, all the studies are retrospective in nature.
And as you know, all retrospective studies are full of problems and inaccuracies.

3) A lot of these patients, have other disorders which may also lead to cancer like alcoholic cirrhosis and hepatitis B. In fact the first case of liver cancer I saw in Manchester was an old alcoholic with severe liver cirrhosis. But he also had Thorotrast contrast study more than 20 years earlier. Because of this history, the surgeon had to report him as a Thorotrast induced cancer.

4) With about 4 million by now old people, we are bound to come across a lot of cancer cases. So how many if any of these (taking into account all the above problems) are really caused by the radiation from the massive dose of intravenous Thorium-232... nobody can be really sure. If anybody says he can tell, then either he is lying or he does not know what he is saying.

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

39 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:28 pm

THE GERMAN OEKO Institute REPORT ON LYNAS

COMMENT:

The above report reminds me of the Chinese saying "If you have enough money, you can make even the Devil pull your cart for you !"

There is actually nothing new in this report but rather the same old mundane arguments that have been persistently harped on by the Anti-Lynas clique.

What this report does is exploiting the well known technique of presenting the incontestable facts in a devious complicated way so as to confuse the general population and to evoke a response that is completely opposite to that if the same facts were presented in a SIMPLE HONEST WAY !

For instance, instead of saying that my rocket propelled car is capable of a maximum speed of 100 Km/hr (which is obviously very slow for a rocket car),

I can just boast and say that my rocket car is capable of going at

100 x10^3x10^15 femtometers/hr or

100,000,000,000,000,000,000 femtometers/hr !

This makes it look like going at warp speed !

Example 1: "USING A UNIT OF MEASURE UNFAMILIAR TO MOST PEOPLE."

The RADON-220 concentration is stated as 167 fg (femtogram) at secular equilibrium.

167 fg looks like a huge amount of dangerous gas which will cause cancer in a lot of people in Kuantan.

Only people in the scientific community will know that 167 femtogram is an incredibly miniscule quantity.

If the data is put in an honest uncomplicated way like this below, you would see that it is such a tiny amount that it can be safely ignored:

"1 TONNE OF LYNAS ORE WILL PRODUCE ONLY A TINY AMOUNT OF RADON-220 GAS i.e.

0.000000000000167 grams

of gas and since Radon-220 has a half-life of only 55 seconds, the concentration will be halved in every 55 seconds and after about 10 minutes this amount will be near 0 !

And again, only the tiny fraction of gas at or very near the surface of the pile of Lynas ore or WLP residue will be able to live long enough to escape into the air.

In the air, when it is spread over the 500 acres of the Lynas facility, IT WILL BECOME VIRTUALLY UNDETECTABLE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF

THE PLANT AND WILL POSE NO HEALTH RISK TO ANYBODY or even to any living creature ! "

An almost similar trick was used by another of the Anti-Lynas commissioned report i.e. the NTN report.

Here it was claimed that the Lynas ore contained 62 Bq/g instead of 6.2 Bq/g and as such implied that Lynas was lying.

There are essentially two ways of doing this, one is old fashioned way which use the total activity and the other is the modern currently in use and internationally accepted one and this uses only the concentration of the "mother" radionuclide.

Old method: "Since each atom of Thorium-232 decays into 11 other atoms of other radionuclides (12 atoms involved), each Bq of Thorium-232 had been assumed to be multiplied by a factor of 10 (10 because the end result Lead-208 is considered non-radioactive XXX though this may not be true as it still has a half life of 19 million billion years, and Bismuth-212 decays either into Polonium-212 or to Thallium-208 both of which then decay into Lead-208..so Po-212 and Tl-208 can be considered as 1 Bq only)."

Quote: International Radiation Safety Expert Nick Tsurikov:

" On this basis, if a material contains 400 parts per million of thorium – its specific activity is calculated as follows:

a) Outdated method – 400 x 4.09 (specific activity of Th-232) x 10 (number of radio nuclides in the thorium decay chain) = 16,360 Bq/kg, or 16.4 Bq/g

b) International standard (IAEA, AELB and Australia) – 400 x 4.09 = 1,630 Bq/kg, or 1.64 Bq/g."
Unquote.

The Anti-Lynas folk is now using this old fashion way of looking at specific activity to confuse the people.

Because of all this, they claim that the Lynas "waste" is not 6.2 Bq/g but 62 Bq/g and Lynas has been misleading the people about the radioactivity.

The truth is that nobody, except some of the Chinese in China still use this non-standard way of looking at specific activity of a series radionuclide.

The old method has been discontinued internationally since about 1997.

Actually, when we use the standard description "Lynas waste has only 6.2 Bq/g", we have already factored in the radiation from all the daughter radionuclides.

All the dose coefficients given by IAEA of 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/g for radiation at 1 metre from a pile of Thorium, and by UNSCEAR of 0.604 microSv/hr/Bq/gm for radiation dose from an infinite field of Thorium DEMANDS THAT WE USE THE STANDARD WAY OF DESCRIBING SPECIFIC ACTIVITY i.e. 1 Bq of activity in both a series or single non-series decay means 1 atom of the "mother" radionuclide decaying.

So as far as the dosage in terms of biological effects is concerned, whether we use the standard 6.2 Bq/g or the old Chinese way of 62 Bq/g to describe the radioactivity of the Lynas "waste", there is NO DIFFERENCE, as, if we were to use the old Chinese 62 Bq/g, we will have to divide the IAEA and UNSCEAR coefficients by a factor of 10.

Example 2: "ADDING COMPLICATED IRRELEVANT DATA TO REPORT in order to confuse and to give an air of authority and legitimacy"

The concentration of Uranium-238 oxide in the Lynas ore is only 29 ppm,

whereas the Uranium-238 from Zircon from Kampar in Malaysia is 0.25% or

2,500 ppm (Journal of Nuclear and Related Technology Gol.7, June 2010) !

And yet the OEKO Anti-Lynas report showed an irrelevant chart with the minute details of Uranium-238 decay and its decay products.

The U-238 oxide content in the Lynas ore and residue is too small to be of any significance.

Example 3: " COMPARING A TOXIN OR RADIONUCLIDE WITH SOMETHING LOWER BUT HIDING ALL HIGHER COMPARATIVE DATA".

Quote OEKO: "Thorium content of the ore

• very high compared to the lowest bandwidth of uranium content of commercially mined uranium ores today (> 0.03% U, e.g. at Rössing/Namibia), while the uranium content of the ore concentrate is lower by a factor of 10 compared to those uranium ores,

• considerably higher than the thorium content in many other REE ores, e.g. by a factor of roughly 3 larger than at Mountain Pass (USA), but by a factor of roughly 10 less than in (historically or currently mined) monazites.

COMMENT:

The concentration of our own Tin Tailings or Amang is 284 Bq/g or 69,608 ppm.. so what so great about the 1,600 ppm in the Lynas ore !

And according to the AELB we have more than 10 plants handling these amang which are 4,700% more radioactive than the Lynas ore.

There are lots of data in this OEKO report which are intentionally displayed in a way to evoke an effect which will have the complete opposite of what it would be if presented in an HONEST, UNCOMPLICATED WAY.

Nick Tsurikov the international radiation safety expert who is the co-author of the IAEA safety report had categorically maintained that there is absolutely no radiation or significant toxic waste problem from the Lynas plant.

Quote Nick Tsurikov:

1. RADIATION FROM THE PLANT WILL BE UNDETECTABLE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES (of the plant);

2. THORIUM IN OTHER WASTE IS INSOLUBLE AND CANNOT "POISON" ANY PLANTS, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT - EVEN IN THEORY;

3. Maximum dose to workers is not expected to be more that ~25% of the limit, therefore - in accordance with international guidelines - personal monitoring is not even necessary: the doses are so low that they can be assessed for a 'work group', no need for 'individual' assessments.
Unquote.

Dato' Dr Looi

40 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:29 pm

AS REPORTED IN THE FZ SUNDAY during the Videoconferencing with Gerhard Schmidt of OEKO Institute.

Gerhard Schmidt, of Oeko Institute said, the WLP waste produced by Lynas, with the highest radioactive content, would be 1,000 TIMES ABOVE INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PROTECTION LEVELS for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control.

Comment:

By Nick Tsurikov the Renown International Radiation Safety Expert who is the co-author of the IAEA safety report:

" GERHARD SCHMIDT IS SO OBVIOUSLY WRONG that it is not even funny.

The WLP waste produced by Lynas would be 6 to 7 times above internationally accepted protection levels for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHATSOEVER WHERE HE GOT "1000 TIMES" FROM...

But I would like to respectfully note that a researcher/scientist from Germany is unlikely to have more knowledge and understanding of the issue than numerous reputable UN and other organisations, such as:

- World Health Organisation,

- UN Environment Programme,

- International Labor Organisation,

- International Atomic Energy Agency,

- Pan-American Health Organisation etc. etc.,

Which ALL agreed once again in the 2011 'basic safety standards' that the materials below 1 Bq/g are beyond regulatory concern.

If there is some other international opinion, it surely is not accepted by the vast majority of the world..."

Dr Looi

41 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:35 pm

Sorry, a Typo:
In old method:
the paragraph should read as:

"Old method: "Since each atom of Thorium-232 decays into 11 other atoms of other radionuclides (12 atoms involved), each Bq of Thorium-232 had been assumed to be multiplied by a factor of 10 (10 because the end result Lead-208 is considered non-radioactive and Bismuth-212 decays either into Polonium-212 or to Thallium-208 both of which then decay into Lead-208..so Po-212 and Tl-208 can be considered as 1 Bq only)."

42 looihw July 15, 2013 at 1:57 pm

QUOTE REPORT ON LYNAS BY OEKO :

"3.1.3 Gamma doses and dose limitations

The gamma rays, emitted during the decay, can easily be detected.

In the vicinity of the ore concentrate a gamma dose rate of 2 to 3 ?Sv/h can be measured, adding up to approx. 26 mSv/a if a person were to stay for a whole year (8,760 h/a) in this vi-cinity..

This dose would

• slightly exceed the adopted protection level for workers of 20 mSv/a,

• exceed accepted protection levels for the general public from the controlled emissions of nuclear installations of 1 mSv/a by a factor of 26.." UNQUOTE.

COMMENT:

The dose coefficients given by IAEA is 0.39 microSv/hr/Bq/g for radiation at 1 metre from a pile of Thorium, and by UNSCEAR is 0.604 microSv/hr/Bq/gm for radiation dose from an infinite field of Thorium.

Therefore if a worker is at 1 metre from a pile of Lynas waste, he would be exposed to a dose of:

0.39 x 6 = 2.34 uSv/h

AND SINCE NO LIVE SANE WORKER CAN EVER STAND IN FRONT OF A PILE OF RADIOACTIVE WASTE 24 HOURS A DAY, 365 DAYS A YEAR, WE CANNOT SAY THAT:

the annual dose is "approx. 26 mSv/a if a person were to stay for a whole year (8,760 h/a) in this vi-cinity!"

This shows that our learned friend Gerhard Schmidt has absolutely no idea on how the dosage workers are exposed to, is calculated.

IN THE MEDICAL FIELD, WE NORMALLY TAKE THE MAXIMUN HOURS THAT A WORKER CAN BE EXPOSED, TO BE 2,000 HOURS PER YEAR.

A WORKER NORMALLY WORKS 40 HOURS PER WEEK, GIVING A TOTAL OF 2,080 hrs per year.

This is already an overestimation for no worker would be able to stand at 1 metre from a pile of Lynas waste for every second of the day while he is working!

So the actual dose that a worker at Lynas receive, cannot be more than:

2.34 x 2,000 = 4.68 mSv per year.

This dosage is well below that of the protection level for workers of 20 mSv/a as prescribed by the ICRP.

In fact a study by Lynas showed that the vast majority of the workers in a worst case scenario would only spend a maximum of 300 hrs/year of exposure at 1 metre to a large pile of WLP and not 8,760 hrs/yr as claimed by Gerhard Schimidt !

As far as the claim that the dose exceed accepted protection levels for the general public from the controlled emissions of nuclear installations of 1 mSv/a by a factor of 26:

THIS IS ANOTHER SICK JOKE BECAUSE NO NORMAL, SANE MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WILL BE ALLOWED BY THE LYNAS SECURITY TO STAND NEXT TO A LARGE PILE OF LYNAS "WASTE" 24 hrs OF THE DAY FOR 365 DAYS IN A YEAR ! ! !

HE OR SHE WILL BE EJECTED FROM THE PLANT LONG BEFORE !

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London)
Kuantan,

43 looihw July 15, 2013 at 2:11 pm

QUOTE: Gerhard Schmidt, of Oeko Institute:

"MAIN RESULTS: WASTE MANAGEMENT

Our own dose calculation based on Lynas waste data shows:

# The WLP waste with the highest radioactive content would be by a factor of more than 1,000 above internationally accepted protection levels for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control (Beyond Regulatory Concern, BRC level).

# Even if diluted 1:1 with gypsum the WLP waste is 200-fold above those internationally accepted levels!

# Even if diluted 1:100 with gypsum (technically unrealistic) the doses would still exceed BRC level!

# Even the less contaminated wastes FGD and NUF are above that level and require 1:4 resp. 1:9 mixing before they can be released (assumed that the material properties meet the necessary requirements and their toxic by-product content is below any non-radiological environmental concern)."
Unquote.

COMMENT:

The operation of the plant will result in the generation of three major residue streams, namely the

1. WLP .. Water Leach Purification Residue (WLP) from the cracking and separation process. This is the only slightly radioactive residue at ~ 6 Bq/gm or about 5.7 Bq/g of Thorium-232.

2. FGD .. the Flue Gas Desulphurisation Residue (FGD) from the waste gas treatment system (scrubber) ~ 12 ppm,

3. NUF .. Neutralisation Underflow Solids from the wastewater treatment process (NUF) ~ 7 ppm of Thorium-232

BOTH THE FGD AND NUF HAS LESS THAN 12 ppm (parts per million) of THORIUM-232.

MALAYSIAN SOIL HAS AN AVERAGE OF 20 ppm of Thorium

Quote Nick Tsurikov, International Radiation Safety Expert and Co-Author of the IAEA Safety Report on Radioactivity:

" If you do look through the Lynas RIA together with UN (not IAEA) reports - you will clearly see that two most 'voluminous' residues from LAMP will have less than 12 parts per million of thorium - and the average Malaysian soil - 20 parts per million of thorium.

In fact most of Lynas residues are only half as radioactive as the sand the kids all over Malaysia play in the kindergartens" Unquote.

SO, ACCORDING TO OEKO, If 12 ppm are above that level and require 1:4 resp. 1:9 mixing before they can be released,

WHAT ABOUT ALL THE SOIL IN THE WHOLE OF MALAYSIA WHICH HAS 20 ppm OF THORIUM ?

THE WHOLE OF MALAYSIA IS above internationally accepted protection levels for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control (Beyond Regulatory Concern, BRC level).

ALL MALAYSIANS HAVE TO MIGRATE TO GERMANY OR SWIM TO AUSTRALIA !

THIS IS JUST PURE INSANITY ! ! !

With reference to the misleading claim that the radioactivity from the Lynas "waste" was 1,000 TIMES ABOVE INTERNATIONALLY ACCEPTED PROTECTION LEVELS for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control, have a look at this rebuttal by Nick Tsurikov the Renown International Radiation Safety Expert who is the co-author of the IAEA safety report:

" GERHARD SCHMIDT IS SO OBVIOUSLY WRONG that it is not even funny.

The WLP waste produced by Lynas would be 6 to 7 times above internationally accepted protection levels for the release of radioactive materials from regulatory control.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHATSOEVER WHERE HE GOT "1000 TIMES" FROM...

But I would like to respectfully note that a researcher/scientist from Germany is unlikely to have more knowledge and understanding of the issue than numerous reputable UN and other organisations, such as:

- World Health Organisation,

- UN Environment Programme,

- International Labor Organisation,

- International Atomic Energy Agency,

- Pan-American Health Organisation etc. etc.,

Which ALL agreed once again in the 2011 'basic safety standards' that the materials below 1 Bq/g are beyond regulatory concern.

If there is some other international opinion, it surely is not accepted by the vast majority of the world..." Unquote.

Warmest regards,

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK) MRCP(London)

44 looihw July 15, 2013 at 2:36 pm

? :) ? ;)

1. Richard Martin, famous journalist with extensive experience in Thorium

“A CHUNK OF THORIUM IS NO MORE HARMFUL THAN A BAR OF SOAP

? :) ? ;)

2. United States Government Rare Earth Adviser and Expert Jack Lifton:

“LYNAS PLANT IS LARGEST AND SAFEST IN THE WORLD.”

? :) ? ;)

3. Christoph Wilhelm, in charge of decommissioning Germany’s nuclear plants from Karlsruhr Institute of Technology:

“I WOULD MOVE MY WIFE and YOUNG CHILDREN TO LIVE IN THAT PLANT BECAUSE THE BACKGROUND RADIATION IS LOWER THAN WHERE I LIVE IN GERMANY.”

*
4. Scientists at John Hopkins University

” LOW DOSE RADIATION CANNOT CAUSE CONGENITAL DEFECTS”

? :) ? ;)

5. Nick Tsurikov, Renown International Radiation Safety Expert:

“THORIUM IN ‘WASTE’ IS INSOLUBLE AND CANNOT POISON ANY PLANTS, ANIMALS OR THE ENVIRONMENT – EVEN IN THEORY.”

? :) ? ;)

6. Professor WADE ALLISON OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY:

“THE DOSE LIMIT CAN SAFELY BE RAISED TO 100 mSv, based on current health statistics.”

? :) ? ;)

7. Nick Tsurikov, Renown International Radiation Safety Expert:

“RADIATION FROM THE PLANT WILL BE UNDETECTABLE OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES (of the plant).”

? :) ? ;)

8. MORMAN FREDERICK MOORE, THE AUSTRALIAN MINISTER FOR MINES AND PETROLEUM:

“IF LYNAS HAVE CHOSEN TO OPERATE IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA, IT WOULD BE WELCOMED WITH OPEN ARMS” !

? :) ? ;)

9. UNSCEAR (The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation):

"RADIATION DOSES LESS THAN ABOUT 10 rem ( 0.1 Sv ) ARE SAFE."

(Note: 0.1 Sv = 100 mSv or 50,000 times Lynas worst case scenario)

The linear no-threshold dose hypothesis (LNT) does not apply to doses less than 10 rem (0.1 Sv)

? :) ? ;)

10. Christoph Wilhelm from the Karlsruhr Institute of Technology, the man in charge of decommissioning Germany’s nuclear plants inspected the LAMP re radiation safety and made this comment

“I WOULD MOVE MY WIFE AND YOUNG CHILDREN TO LIVE IN THAT PLANT BECAUSE THE BACKGROUND RADIATION IS LOWER THAN WHERE I LIVE IN GERMANY.”

? :) ? ;)

11. PROFESSOR DAVID BRADLEY, University of Surrey UK, with three-decade experience in the radiation protection and radiation physics field and have conducted more than 200 researches and publications in radiation protection and medical physics said:

" THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT THE LYNAS ADVANCED MATERIALS PLANT WOULD CAUSE AN ENVIRONMENTAL OR HEALTH CONCERN."

? :) ? ;)

45 looihw July 15, 2013 at 3:16 pm

HOW AND WHY THE ANTI-LYNAS MADNESS STARTED IN MALAYSIA

You will notice that only the Malaysian Chinese and no other racial groups are involved in this comical anti-lynas debacle.

At present, about 95% of these rare earths are mined and refined in China.

If you look at all the foreign blogs and press, you will see that most of the commentators are saying that CHINA IS THE HIDDEN CULPRIT BEHIND ALL THIS NONSENSE !

You cannot blame the foreigners for doing so as:

PRACTICALLY ALL ANTI-LYNAS NINCOMPOOPS ARE CHINESE

PRACTICALLY ALL NON-CHINESE ARE PRO-LYNAS,

SO THE LOGICAL CONCLUSION ?

CHINA IS THE ULTIMATE CULPRIT ! ! !

And this has triggered a lot of ill will, animosity, hatred and disgust for what was perceived as "CHINA'S DIRTY TRICKS AND MANIPULATIONS.'

However, this is not the real truth.

Quote notorious Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: "It may enlighten some readers here, if you are open minded enough to listen and to learn the truth,

IT WAS A FEW CHURCH LEADERS IN KUANTAN

who have first started to discuss the Lynas issue and to raise awareness of their congregation to oppose this project." Unquote.

So what really happens is that a few of the innocent church leaders in Kuantan who are always concerned about the sufferings of others, suddenly realised that a huge REE plant is being built nearby.

Unfortunately at about the same time, the Fukushima disaster occurred.

And to their horror, they found that the raw material to be used in the Lynas plant was "radioactive" and with only a primitive knowledge of radiation, these concerned church leaders were flabbergasted and as Jade Lee said "instigated their congregation to oppose this project."

Presumably, these leaders have only a rudimentary knowledge of economics and must have been very suspicious of why Australia would want to send the ore all the way to Malaysia for processing and falsely believing that Australia must be truly terrified about the refining process with all its "dangerous, radioactive waste."

Once the madness started, a few of the local Chinese Newspapers, picked up the story and amplified the fear by persistently reporting on every word that the anti-lynas say, even though they are something that is obviously absurd.. like the Lynas plant is a nuclear plant and is going to explode and spread radioactivity all over the country.

These Chinese Newspapers which are traditionally anti-establishment, may also be partly irritated by Lynas brag that Lynas is going to end the monopoly of China on the Rare Earth market by producing almost a third of the present world production.

Then, as usual, the local politicians saw the fantastic opportunity to accuse the establishment of allowing such a dangerous plant to be established in Kuantan.

Because the general election is coming soon, they could not let this golden opportunity to pass by, and so jump right into the fray.

With their massive financial backing, the opposition, together with some naive unthinking minds started the anti-lynas campaign

Since the local politician is a psychologist, this politician must be well versed in the techniques of convincing the population into believing something that is absolutely ridiculous.

It looks like they are using the same brainwashing techniques used by that devious demonic master brainwasher before and during the 2nd World War i.e. Hitler.

Brainwashing techniques are based on the consistently persistent repetition of propaganda focused on just a few issues and continuously repeated in a slightly different way.

According to Adolf Hitler in- "War Propaganda", in volume 1, chapter 6 of Mein Kampf (1925)

"But the most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly and with unflagging attention. It must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Here, as so often in this world, persistence is the first and most important requirement for success." Unquote.

One Chinese Newspaper in particular, has been reporting on a daily basis of everything that these anti-lynas folks were saying or doing, no matter stupid it is, like making fake coffins and doing silly walks.

This propaganda in the Chinese media is, like what is mentioned in Hitler's Mein Kampf, is focused, constant, continuous and persistent.

There are 4 stages in this Hitler type of brainwashing procedure:

1. DISSEMINATION OF PROPAGANDA (usually well camouflaged lies)

2. HARASSMENT OF NON-BELIEVERS

3. INTIMIDATION OF DISSIDENTS and

4. ELIMINATION OF THE OBSTINATE DISSIDENTS

THE ANTI LYNAS RED GUARDS HAVE DEPLOYED AN ARMY OF CYBER HARASSERS AND CYBER THUGS IN ALL THE MALAYSIAN BLOGS AND OTHER NEWS MEDIA TO INTIMIDATE ANYONE WHO OPPOSE THEM AND THEY ARE VERY SUCCESSFUL SO FAR.

VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THE BRAINWASHED ZOMBIES.

THE MAIN AIM OF THESE CYBER THUGS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GETTING RID OF LYNAS, OR ANYTHING TO DO WITH HELPING CHINA MAINTAIN THEIR GRIP ON THE REE MARKET, BUT THEY ARE USING THIS GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO BRAINWASH AND INSTILL HATRED FOR THE PRESENT GOVERNMENT, THUS ENABLING THEM TO WIN THE COMING GENERAL ELECTION.

At present they have been hindered by a tiny group of dissidents in Kuantan and they are now blocked at stage 3.

As a result of the Chinese media, most of the Chinese were well brainwashed into believing the absolute crap that these anti-lynas people were propagating and disseminating.

Fortunately, all the other racial groups do not read Chinese and the propaganda do not affect them and as a result, the Malays and Indians are unaffected.

QUOTE Anti-Lynas Jade Lee: "When a few so claimed rare earth scientists came to Kuantan to speak about the safe rare earth processing, they were criticised and BOOED OUT OF TOWN IN SHAME" Unquote.

THE THREE RARE EARTH SPECIALISTS, RECOMMENDED BY THE CCP OF CHINA, WHO WERE INVITED BY A FEW OF THE LOCAL ASSOCIATIONS TO ENLIGHTEN THE PEOPLE OF KUANTAN WERE RUDELY AND CRUDELY HARASSED BY THE ANTILYNAS LEADER AND HIS RED GUARDS IN A SHAMELESS AND DESPICABLE WAY.

THESE INNOCENT FOREIGN GUESTS WERE BEING BOOED, SHOUTED AT, JEERED, MOCKED, CRITICIZED, TERRORIZED AND DEGRADED BY THESE
DESPICABLE, UNCOUTH COMMON HARASSERS WHO UNWITTINGLY DISPLAYED THEIR ABSOLUTE STUPIDITY FOR ALL TO SEE.

THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOUR BRINGS SHAME TO ALL MALAYSIANS AND SHOULD BE STRONGLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY CONDEMNED.

THESE THREE POOR OLD CHINESE SCIENTISTS, TWO OF WHOM WERE IN THEIR 70'S, WITH YEARS OF VALUABLE EXPERIENCE, WERE FLABBERGASTED BY SUCH STUPID, CHILDISH, DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.

THE USE OF SUCH THUGGERY UNEQUIVOCALLY CATEGORIZES THE USERS INTO THE LOWEST RUNG OF SOCIETY AND REFLECTS BADLY ON THEIR CHARACTER, INTELLIGENCE AND UPBRINGING !

BECAUSE OF THEIR BULLYING TACTIC, VERY FEW PEOPLE DARE TO SPEAK UP, AND ALL THOSE WHO DARE TO DO SO ARE BEING INTIMIDATED, HARASSED AND BOYCOTTED BY THESE ZOMBIES

Dato' Dr Looi Hoong Wah.
FAMM, MB., ChB(Manchester), MRCS(England), MRCP(UK), MRCP(London).

46 looihw July 19, 2013 at 3:33 am

*
*
If Lynas DID NOT SEPARATE OUT THEIR "WASTE" INTO the 3 COMPONENTS i.e. WLP, FGD and NUF, the Lynas "waste" would have a specific activity of only 1.35 Bq/g.

1.35 Bq/g is only marginally above the "safe to eat" level in the EU and the USA of 1.25 Bq/g and 1.2 Bq/g respectively.

AND IF WE ADD AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MALAYSIAN SOIL TO THE ABOVE NON-SEPARATED "WASTE" THE ACTIVITY IS ONLY = 0.72 Bq/g.

0.72 Bq/g is well within the international (including Malaysia, the EU and the USA) SAFE LIMIT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION (IF EDIBLE) ! ! !

SO WHAT'S SO DANGEROUS ABOUT THE LYNAS WASTE ?

IT CAN BE SAFELY EATEN (IF EDIBLE) FROM A RADIATION POINT OF VIEW WHEN BLENDED WITH AN EQUAL AMOUNT OF MALAYSIAN SOIL !

Blending is an internationally accepted and legitimate way of decreasing the impact of a norm (naturally occurring radioactive material) on the environment and follows the basic safety principle of the World Health Organisation, International Labour Organisation and seven more UN and other reputable international organisations - with guidelines on this existing in many countries.

Once blended, all the so-called "waste" is by International and Malaysian standards NON-RADIOACTIVE and is fit even for human consumption.

AND SO IT IS SILLY TO ASK LYNAS TO SEND THE "RADIOACTIVE WASTE" OUT OF THE COUNTRY BECAUSE "the radioactive waste" NO LONGER EXIST after blending !

Regulatory limits on radioactivity in foods (source: IAEA)

USA foodstuff = 1.20 bq/g (1,200 bq/kg)

EU foodstuff = 1.25 bq/g (1,250 bq/kg)

Accepted global limits on radioactivity levels in foods is 1000 bq/kg (1,200 bq/kg in the USA and 1,250 bq/g in the EU).

Total "waste" from Lynas plant = 290,400 tonnes/yr consisting of:

1. water leach purification residue (WLP) = 64,000 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 6 bq/g

2. flue gas desulphurisation residue (FGD) = 55,800 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.049 bq/g

3. Neutralisation underflow residue (NUF) = 170,600 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.029 bq/g

Average Malaysian soil >>>> ~ 0.082 bq/g

if we are to mix the WLP, FGD and NUF together, we will end up with a mixture of "waste" with a radioactivity of only 1.349 bq/g and if we add an equal amount of Malaysian soil to the mixture we will end up with a valuable mixture of soil enriched with magnesium, calcium and phosphate with a radioactivity of only 0.715 bq/g.

And since this is way below 1 bq/g, it is internationally considered non-radioactive including in Malaysia, the USA and the EU.

Accepted global limits on radioactivity levels in foods is 1000 bq/kg (1,200 bq/kg in the USA and 1,250 bq/g in the EU).

Dominated by cesium-137 and SR-90, these levels were set by organisations like the IAEA and UNSCEAR after decades of study.

Dr Looi

47 samariter-einsiedeln.ch August 5, 2013 at 6:47 pm

Asking questions are truly nice thing if you are not understanding something fully,
but this post presents good understanding even.

48 Pete Sin August 28, 2013 at 4:35 am

I not a chemist, and seriously i know nothing how harmful Redioactive waste(come out from LAMP) can harm a human body, basically i am very normal human being, not Ganghi or Mother Teresa (which mean i not great!!!).

So, as a normal human being, i hope to get all you guys agreed on "human are selfish", which mean we always go something should benefit us first. (Am i right? yes not all but majority, if you think you are not, email me (shyealimsin@gmail.com) for a debate, i let you know how selfish you are!!!!)

Actually , the mother earth (our environment) already destroy by human selfishness..... So, stop anti Lynas because anyone of you cares.... Obviously, in bigger picture non of you cares. But, as a Malaysian, as a human being and as a business, man i looking only in benefit!!!!

So, Lynas and Malaysia Government, please answer me this!!!!!

For Malaysia Government!!!
1) What direct benefit Lynas invest in Malaysia (So me the data)
2) How this profit can be sustain? or is it sustainable(i mean profit sustaiable) average annual growth rate and percantage of GDP??
3)Risks assessment (Is the profit above is cover the opportunity cost risks loss??)
4)Why Lynas choose Malaysia if the profit so attractive?
5)Why they do not build in thier own country since so much benefit will bring to a country?

For Lynas

1)Dato Looi said : AND SO IT IS SILLY TO ASK LYNAS TO SEND THE "RADIOACTIVE WASTE" OUT OF THE COUNTRY BECAUSE "the radioactive waste" NO LONGER EXIST after blending !

Regulatory limits on radioactivity in foods (source: IAEA)

USA foodstuff = 1.20 bq/g (1,200 bq/kg)

EU foodstuff = 1.25 bq/g (1,250 bq/kg)

Accepted global limits on radioactivity levels in foods is 1000 bq/kg (1,200 bq/kg in the USA and 1,250 bq/g in the EU).

Total "waste" from Lynas plant = 290,400 tonnes/yr consisting of:

1. water leach purification residue (WLP) = 64,000 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 6 bq/g

2. flue gas desulphurisation residue (FGD) = 55,800 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.049 bq/g

3. Neutralisation underflow residue (NUF) = 170,600 tonnes/yr >>>> ~ 0.029 bq/g

Average Malaysian soil >>>> ~ 0.082 bq/g

if we are to mix the WLP, FGD and NUF together, we will end up with a mixture of "waste" with a radioactivity of only 1.349 bq/g and if we add an equal amount of Malaysian soil to the mixture we will end up with a valuable mixture of soil enriched with magnesium, calcium and phosphate with a radioactivity of only 0.715 bq/g.

And since this is way below 1 bq/g, it is internationally considered non-radioactive including in Malaysia, the USA and the EU.

Accepted global limits on radioactivity levels in foods is 1000 bq/kg (1,200 bq/kg in the USA and 1,250 bq/g in the EU).

Dominated by cesium-137 and SR-90, these levels were set by organisations like the IAEA and UNSCEAR after decades of study.... (thats too long )

My question is, is that true? If true , then why not for your 3rd phase construction using the waste from that to build??? I will do the mixing for you.

2) Why you choose Malaysia? I believe if your deal are so harmless and generate so much benefit for a country , you should build it in your own country ( as i said i believe human are selfish so why you give such good benefit to help us? )

3) Do all the safety aspect are in consideration? And the processing cause the environmental problem is not a news how you can prove your processing are safe?

4) Do your Chief research engineer from China Bautou? While they have the biggest scandal of pollution create by Rare earth processing. ( that's make your ground of the plant is safe ground shaken.)

5) Why only hire Malays to work??? 400 Staff 99% Malays can you explain? Malaysia have 3 major race atleast so the ratio is just not justify.

SO, i need answer for all this to judge should MALAYSIA to reject this LAMP in MALAYSIA!!!! But i believe any person have sense of human(selfishness) should get the answer already. and clearly this Fucking LAMP and not making Malaysia Brighter!!!!

For the fuck sake of Mr JACK LIFTON , since you so impress about this fucking LAMP, why not take this LAMP and tell MR Obama make USA brigther??? Give such comment. Mind your own country shiT!!

A Malaysian that Love Malaysia and love being a fucking selfish human!!!
Pete Sin

49 Lee October 2, 2013 at 2:15 pm

Jack,

You probably want to review your story about the Lynas plant in Malaysia. Seemed it's not as state-of-the-art as you have asserted.... It is facing many technical and equipment problems.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/rare-earths-miner-lynas-admits-further-output-trouble/story-e6frg9df-1226730292287

50 h w looi October 4, 2013 at 12:23 pm

*
Quote Pete Sin: "What direct benefit Lynas invest in Malaysia" Unquote

Comment:

Even a primary school child should know that the construction of a multi-billion dollar industrial plant would bring enormous financial benefits to the local community as well as to the country.

Construction of the plant had provided a substantial boost to suppliers of commodities like concrete and steel and manufacturers of hundreds of other components. For example, the plant had used thousands of cubic metres of concrete—as well as
Thousands of tons of steel and miles of piping
Hundreds of miles of electric wiring and hundreds of electrical components and all these are supplied by our local contractors.
The construction of the plant itself would had added hundreds of millions to the gross domestic product.

Each year, the plant will generate billions in sales of the rare earth (economic output) and millions more in total labour income. These figures include both direct and secondary effects. The direct effects reflect the plant’s expenditures for goods, services and labour. The secondary effects include subsequent spending attributable to the presence of the plant and its employees as plant expenditures filter through the local economy (e.g., restaurants and shops buying goods and hiring employees).

And the subsequent production of the plant is expected to be in the billions of ringgit and this is considered to be part of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). Billions more would be added to the GDP as a result of the spin-off effect.

And when our GDP is increased by the billions, the government will be allowed to print more billions of ringgit (CREATING MONEY OUT OF THIN AIR ) to pay for the schools, hospitals, subsidies and scholarships etc for the people, without any devaluation of our ringgit by the foreigners.

Key Facts
Each year, the plant will generate millions to billions of ringgit as a spin-off effect in sales of goods and services in the local community and millions more in total labour income.
Operation of the plant creates more than 350 highly paid permanent jobs. These jobs pay much more than those working the super markets or places like Kentucky Fried Chicken.
The permanent jobs at the plant create an equivalent number of additional jobs in the local area to provide the goods and services necessary to support the plant work force (e.g., grocery stores, dry cleaners, car dealers). Even the sex workers in Kuantan would benefit!
Construction of the new plant had created up to thousands of jobs at peak construction.

Local contractors had benefited enormously from the construction of the plant, in terms of hundreds of millions of ringgit

The yearly production of billions of ringgit of rare earth will add billions to our GDP and produce billions in export earnings (even though the money belongs to Lynas share holders, the national statistics will show up as our own in terms of GDP growth and export growth).

The economic job multiplier effect of any industrial plant is 4 to 5. So although the Lynas plant gives direct employment to 350 high paying jobs to the Kampong folks, the actual number of jobs created is more in the region of 1,750 !

Why do we have to give Lynas the 12 yrs tax free incentive?

Quote Optiplex330:

"Giving tax break is very common to entice people to set up business. If you are an Indian or Chinese your forebear coming from India or China know that very well. They were enticed to come to Malaysia to open up the country, and land were practically given free. Old people told me their land rental is a single pepper corn. Those who don't know about tax break know zero about businesses. Having said that, I think the maximum is 10 yrs so Lynas is unusual in that it is given 12 years.

A classic example: Businesses have to give Bumi 30% share but when Intel came to Penang, they were allowed SPECIAL treatment and don't have to give a single share to Bumi (may be this explain the extra 2 yrs tax break?). Why? This is because the government badly wanted Intel because when they come, they will bring along an entire electronic industry to Malaysia. So while government do not directly benefited from Intel, the follow on industry created by Intel greatly benefited Malaysia.

And also for this reason, those who think Lynas produces only about 300 jobs and no tax revenue for Malaysia are just being short sighted. They don't know that because of Lynas, a Green Technology industry could be born and Siemens is the 1st to announce coming precisely because of Lynas. But because of Anti-Lynas, Siemens may pull out so there go more jobs and tax revenue for Malaysia."

In Other Words, The Plant WILL Boost Local and Country's Economy.
The Lynas plant WILL provide substantial economic benefits during the decades of operation. The jobs, employee's taxes, and direct and secondary spending WILL strengthen the economy.

SO DO NOT ASK THE NON-PHYSICAL and RATHER CHILDISH QUESTION OF WHAT BENEFIT DO MALAYSIA GET FROM THE LYNAS PLANT!

Dr Looi

51 h w looi October 4, 2013 at 1:08 pm

*
*
Quote Pete Sin: " Why they do not build in thier own country since so much benefit will bring to a country?"

COMMENT:

Lynas built in Malaysia because of economic reasons, just like the radioactive TIN ore from Australia, imported and shipped all the way to MSC (Malaysian Smelting Corporation) in Penang for refining.

REE ore was and to some extent is still being shipped all the way from Australia and China to the 40 year old REE plant in La Rochelle in France for refining.

In the water scarce arid area of Western Australia, the labour cost is very high.

For instance, a CLEANER IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA IS PAID THE MALAYSIAN EQUIVALENT OF RM 150,000 PER YEAR AND A TECHNICIAN WELL OVER RM 300,000 !

Easy access to cheap water, low gas price, near to suppliers of Sulphuric acids and other chemicals, next to a first class port and a 12 year tax break are also factors which persuaded Lynas to build their plant in Gebeng

1. Chemical Engineer : Malaysia = RM 10,000/month

Australia = RM 40,000/month
*

2. Water

Malaysia = RM 0.84/ cu m

Australia = RM 6.00/cu m

*
3. Electricity :

Malaysia=RM 0.23 /kWh
*
Australia=RM 0.96 /kWh
*

4. Caustic Soda

Malaysia = RM 500/ton

Australia = RM 1,500/ton

All in all, the cost of shipping the ore to Malaysia constitute only a fraction of the total cost of production (COP).

For instance the "basket selling price" of REE in Lynas is about $30/kg or $30,000 per tonne and the contribution of shipping cost to this one tonne is only about $1,000 to $2,000 or only 3.3% to 6.6% of the selling price!

Dr Looi

52 h w looi October 5, 2013 at 4:02 am

Erratum:

Corrected version of last paragraph after checking with source:

"For instance the "basket selling price" of REE in Lynas is about $30/kg or $30,000 per tonne and the contribution of shipping and other transport costs to this one tonne is less then $1,000 or less than 3% of the selling price!"

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: