The feasibility assessment took into account the historical level of actual retrofits and new generation construction, typical timelines to complete various types of projects, potential bottlenecks in specialized types of labor, and the required planned outages in coal plants to install and test the environment control equipment. The study finds that the projected amount of retrofits on coal units and the amount of new generation to replace retiring coal units in the MISO region will exceed the historical maximum achieved for simultaneous deployments of retrofits and new builds by 51% to 162%, based on MISO’s current projections of retrofit requirements and announced projects.  For nationwide retrofits, the requirements imposed by MATS would be below historical maximums if the EPA’s projections are correct, or up to 93% above historical maximums if industry estimates are more accurate.  “We believe that the EPA estimates may be optimistic while industry estimates may be pessimistic, especially in the highest retrofit cases,” noted Dr. Metin Celebi, a Brattle principal and lead author of the study.

With respect to the timeline needed for retrofits, the study finds that some types of upgrades can be completed before 2015 without difficulty, including activated carbon injection (ACI) and dry sorbent injection (DSI), which can be implemented within approximately a year and a half.  Most projects, however, have a longer lead time of approximately three to four years, including wet and dry scrubber, baghouse, electrostatic precipitator (ESP), and selective catalytic reduction (SCR), as well as new gas combustion turbines (CTs) and combined cycles (CCs).  Some of these longer lead time projects may not be completed by the MATS compliance date (April 2015, with a potential one-year extension) to the extent they have not already started.

The study evaluated the potential for craft labor to become a bottleneck that could introduce project delays and increase costs.  Comparing the projected labor needs against the current labor supply for each craft revealed that boilermakers are the most likely bottleneck.  As many as 7,590 boilermakers (or 40% of boilermakers currently employed nationally) could be needed to complete the projected retrofits and new generation construction by 2015.  This potential demand is more than four times the number of boilermakers currently employed in the Utility System Construction Industry. Therefore, meeting the projected demand for boilermakers will likely require a combination of adjustments on the supply side, including training new labor, relocation, extending work hours, and attracting craft labor from other industries.

With respect to the incremental outage periods necessary to implement the projected retrofits, the study estimates that some upgrades, such as dry scrubber, DSI, selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR), and ACI, require that the outage duration need only be extended a few days or a week, although some types of upgrades impose much longer outages. Wet FGD, baghouse, and SCR retrofits are likely to require that outages be extended by approximately three weeks.  Considering the fleet-wide impacts of these outages, it appears that MISO may have to schedule approximately 45% more MW of coal outages per season for MATS compliance by fall 2015, assuming that many plants will gain a one-year compliance extension.  These additional outage requirements appear to be feasible to implement under MISO’s low-retirement scenarios without causing system reliability concerns.  The study notes, however, that implementing the incremental outages under scenarios with higher coal retirement scenarios (12 GW and 19 GW) would likely require a combination of extending the six-month outage season to nine months and requesting an additional one-year reliability extension to 2017 for MATS compliance.

“Overall, it will be a major challenge for the industry, states, and MISO to comply with MATS for a number of reasons,” said Dr. Celebi. “The industry will need to install retrofits at a pace and scale that exceeds the historical demonstrated capability, while the system operator is likely to experience a substantial operational challenge in the transition to schedule the outages to install and test the required environmental retrofits on coal units.”

The study, “Supply Chain and Outage Analysis of MISO Coal Retrofits for MATS,” was prepared byBrattle economists Metin Celebi, Kathleen Spees, and Quincy Liao, with assistance from Steve Eisenhartat the VATIC Associates. It is available for download at www.brattle.com.

The Brattle Group provides consulting services and expert testimony in economics and finance to corporations, law firms, and public agencies worldwide.  Areas of expertise include antitrust and competition, valuation and damages, utility regulatory policy and ratemaking, and regulation and planning in network industries. For more information, please visit www.brattle.com.

SOURCE The Brattle Group

Beaver Valley’s 911-megawatt Unit 1 began producing electricity at 10:00 a.m. today.  The plant, currently operating at 40 percent power, is expected to reach full power this week.

During the outage, 65 of the 157 fuel assemblies were exchanged and safety inspections were successfully conducted.  In addition, numerous maintenance and improvement projects were completed to ensure continued safe and reliable operations.

Prior to the outage, Beaver Valley Unit 1 operated safely and reliably for 359 consecutive days and generated more than 9.3 million megawatt hours of electricity since the completion of its last refueling inNovember 2010.  The plant also posted an industry top-decile forced-loss rate of 0.01 percent during the past 18 months of operation.

FirstEnergy is a diversified energy company headquartered in Akron, Ohio.  Its FENOC subsidiary also operates the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station in Oak Harbor, Ohio, and the Perry Nuclear Power Plant in Perry, Ohio.

Forward-Looking Statements:  This news release includes forward-looking statements based on information currently available to management. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. These statements include declarations regarding management’s intents, beliefs and current expectations. These statements typically contain, but are not limited to, the terms “anticipate,” “potential,” “expect,” “believe,” “estimate” and similar words. Forward-looking statements involve estimates, assumptions, known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially due to: the speed and nature of increased competition in the electric utility industry, the impact of the regulatory process on the pending matters before FERC and in the various states in which we do business including, but not limited to, matters related to rates, the status of the PATH project in light of the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., (PJM)  direction to suspend work on the project pending review of its planning process, its re-evaluation of the need for the project and the uncertainty of the timing and amounts of any related capital expenditures, the uncertainties of various cost recovery and cost allocation issues resulting from ATSI’s realignment into PJM, economic or weather conditions affecting future sales and margins, changes in markets for energy services, changing energy and commodity market prices and availability, financial derivative reforms that could increase our liquidity needs and collateral costs, the continued ability of FirstEnergy’s regulated utilities to collect transition and other costs, operation and maintenance costs being higher than anticipated, other legislative and regulatory changes, and revised environmental requirements, including possible GHG emission, water intake and coal combustion residual regulations, the potential impacts of any laws, rules or regulations that ultimately replace CAIR, including CSAPR which was stayed by the courts on December 30, 2011, and the effects of the EPA’s MATS rules, the uncertainty of the timing and amounts of the capital expenditures that may arise in connection with any litigation including NSR litigation or potential regulatory initiatives or rulemakings (including that such expenditures could result in our decision to shut down or idle certain generating units), the uncertainties associated with the company’s plan to retire its older unscrubbed regulated and competitive fossil units, including the impact on vendor commitments and PJM’s review of the company’s plans for, and timing of, those retirements, adverse regulatory or legal decisions and outcomes with respect to our nuclear operations (including, but not limited to the revocation or non-renewal of necessary licenses, approvals or operating permits by the NRC including as a result of the incident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant), issues that could result from our continuing evaluation of the indications of cracking in the Davis-Besse plant shield building imposed by the Confirmatory Action Letter issued by the NRC, adverse legal decisions and outcomes related to Met-Ed’s and Penelec’s ability to recover certain transmission costs through their transmission service charge riders, the continuing availability of generating units and changes in their ability to operate at or near full capacity, replacement power costs being higher than anticipated or inadequately hedged, the ability to comply with applicable state and federal reliability standards and energy efficiency mandates, changes in customers’ demand for power, including but not limited to, changes resulting from the implementation of state and federal energy efficiency mandates, the ability to accomplish or realize anticipated benefits from strategic goals, FirstEnergy’s ability to improve electric commodity margins and the impact of, among other factors, the increased cost of fuel and fuel transportation on such margins, the ability to experience growth in the distribution business, the changing market conditions that could affect the value of assets held in FirstEnergy’s NDTs, pension trusts and other trust funds, and cause FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries to make additional contributions sooner, or in amounts that are larger than currently anticipated, the impact of changes to material accounting policies, the ability to access the public securities and other capital and credit markets in accordance with FirstEnergy’s financing plan, the cost of such capital and overall condition of the capital and credit markets affecting FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries, changes in general economic conditions affecting FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries, interest rates and any actions taken by credit rating agencies that could negatively affect FirstEnergy’s and its subsidiaries’ access to financing or their costs and increase requirements to post additional collateral to support outstanding commodity positions, LOCs and other financial guarantees, the state of the national and regional economy and its impact on major industrial and commercial customers of FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries, issues concerning the soundness of domestic and foreign financial institutions and counterparties with which FirstEnergy and its subsidiaries do business, the risks and other factors discussed from time to time in FirstEnergy’s and its applicable subsidiaries’ SEC filings, and other similar factors. The foregoing review of factors should not be construed as exhaustive. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all such factors, nor assess the impact of any such factor on FirstEnergy’s business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. FirstEnergy expressly disclaims any current intention to update, except as required by law, any forward-looking statements contained herein as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

SOURCE FirstEnergy Corp.

Once construction is completed, Waste Management Mahoning Landfill is designed to generate 4.8 megawatts of electricity, enough to power over 3,500 homes. The plant will be operational by the end of this year.

Methane gas, which is produced in the landfill from the decomposition of waste, will be channeled into engines that are used to create electricity. The electricity generated at Waste Management Mahoning Landfill will go into the electrical power grid.

“Creating this facility ensures that the waste we generate will be converted into a beneficial use,” saidJerry Ross, Senior District Manager of Waste Management Mahoning Landfill. “By investing in landfill-gas-to-energy, we are developing renewable ‘green’ energy to power homes.”

The U.S. EPA has endorsed landfill gas as an environmentally friendly resource that reduces reliance on coal, oil and other fossil fuels. Like wind and solar power, landfill gas is a resource that can be harnessed to produce energy and has many benefits and advantages compared to fossil fuels and other alternative energy sources.

Waste Management owns or operates over 130 landfill gas-to-energy facilities in North America. Waste Management pioneered landfill-gas-to-energy technology over two decades ago and operates more facilities than any other company in the United States.

In 2007, Waste Management announced four sustainability goals, which included increasing the amount of waste-based energy produced. Currently, the company creates enough energy to power 1.1 million homes, and it is looking to double to reach two million by 2020. Mahoning Landfill is a big step in accomplishing this goal and represents another source of renewable energy. Waste Management is the leading provider of integrated waste management services and one of the largest residential recyclers inNorth America.

SOURCE Waste Management

“President Obama has set a 10-year goal to develop and deploy cost-effective clean coal technology,” the campaign website said. Clean coal was not included on the list of energy sources posted on the Obama-Biden campaign website earlier this week.

The following statement can be attributed to Bill Rosenberg, a partner in Indiana Gasification and a former Assistant Administrator for Air at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

“President Obama has long supported clean coal as a critical component of any comprehensive domestic energy program. Clean coal will create jobs, reduce this nation’s carbon footprint and bolster America’s energy security,” Rosenberg said.

“Here’s the best news. Clean coal will also increase domestic oil production and reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil,” Rosenberg emphasized. “The CO2 produced by the gasification process can be compressed, shipped by pipeline from facilities in the Midwest and elsewhere to the Gulf Coast, then injected into depleted oil wells for enhanced oil production,” he added. “Enhanced oil recovery from the Indiana Gasification project will produce 10 million to 20 million barrels of oil a year. Incredibly, that could be as much as one percent of annual U.S. domestic oil production,” Rosenberg said.

“At $100 per barrel of oil, the domestic oil production from the Indiana Gasification facility will reduce our imports of foreign oil, including petroleum from the Middle East and unstable nations such as Venezuela, by up to $2 billion a year,” he added.

“Clean coal is a win-win for an administration that has made substantial investment in carbon capture and utilization, including 22 projects around the country,” Rosenberg said.

SOURCE Indiana Gasification, LLC

Alpha Natural Resources has also appointed three directors to administer the foundation:  Dr. Michael Karmis, Ph.D., Dr. David Wegman, M.D., M.Sc., and Dr. Keith Heasley, Ph.D.  The three directors are highly-qualified experts in mine health and safety and come from diverse professional and academic backgrounds.  The Alpha Foundation plans to host a kick-off meeting this summer where the directors will discuss funding priorities.

Kevin Crutchfield, CEO of Alpha Natural Resources, said, “The safety of our employees is the highest value of our company, and mine safety and health is imperative to the success of our industry.  We are proud to establish and fund the Alpha Foundation and also appoint three leading experts to advance its objectives.  This presents a tremendous opportunity to drive the latest developments and innovation in mine safety and health to the benefit of miners around the world.”

The Alpha Foundation was established pursuant to the company’s Non-Prosecution Agreement with the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia (USAO SDWV) and the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), entered into on December 6, 2011.  The directors were appointed with the approval of the USAO SDWV.

Directors of the Alpha Foundation for the Improvement of Mine Safety and Health

Dr. Karmis is the Stonie Barker Professor of the Department of Mining and Minerals Engineering and the Director of the Virginia Center for Coal and Energy Research (VCCER) at Virginia Tech.  He is an expert in the areas of rock mechanics and ground control, mining systems, and the sustainable development of energy and mineral resources.

Dr. Wegman is Professor Emeritus in the Department of Work Environment at the University of Massachusetts Lowell and Adjunct Professor at the Harvard School of Public Health and the University of Massachusetts Medical School.  His epidemiologic research includes the study of acute and chronic occupational respiratory disease, occupational cancer risk and occupational musculoskeletal disorders, with special interests in the study of subjective outcomes as early indicators of health effects and in surveillance of occupational conditions and risks.

Dr. Heasley is a professor in the Department of Mining Engineering at West Virginia University, and is a licensed professional engineer and a registered professional engineer in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.  His primary research interests are numerical modeling in rock mechanics, computer applications in mining, and multiple-seam mine design and ground control.

About Alpha Natural Resources

With $7.1 billion in total revenue in 2012, Alpha Natural Resources ranks as America’s second-largest coal producer by revenue and third-largest by production. Alpha is the nation’s largest supplier of metallurgical coal used in the steel-making process and is a major supplier of thermal coal to electric utilities and manufacturing industries. In 2012, the company had more than 200 customers on five continents. More information about Alpha can be found on the company’s Web site at www.alphanr.com.

SOURCE Alpha Natural Resources

Mr. Jeffrey Wohler, Latitude Solutions CEO, states, “Latitude Solutions is expanding our service and product offerings.  Partnering with Zenbu Water Solutions LLC, who has proven experience and distribution capabilities will further our efforts.  This announcement demonstrates our business model and highlights the growing acceptance of Latitude’s state of the art technology. Our goal for 2012, to deploy our patented water remediation technology across multiple industries including: Oil & Gas, coal fired power plants, food processing, paper and pulp and medical markets will be accelerated by this alliance.”

Mr. Cleve Tidwell, CEO of Zenbu Water Solutions, added, “The clients that we represent recognize the importance and cost effectiveness involved when they re-use and reclaim produced and flow back wastewater. After an extensive search we selected Latitude Solutions, Inc. because of their industry leading Electro Precipitation™ technology and their ability to produce, operate and manage for each individual need.  There are a few early stage electro coagulation systems on the market that pose as just equipment companies but few seem to deliver a solution to the clients problems with just selling one machine.  Our business model at Zenbu Water Solutions LLC is in line with Latitude Solutions, Inc. to evaluate the complete problem and delivering a solid solution. Due to this new alliance, we will now allow a more effective and economical solution to be offered to our clients.”

About Latitude Solutions, Inc.

Latitude Solutions, Inc. provides innovative wastewater remediation solutions worldwide to Oil & Gas, energy, mining, food processing, agricultural and other industrial users worldwide utilizing its patented Electro Precipitation™, (EP™) technology. LSI’s proprietary Electro Precipitation™, Integrated Water Systems™ (IWS™) technology provides a sustainable solution to water related oil and gas production issues by rendering previously unusable production, flowback and other contaminated water suitable as reusable makeup water for ongoing operations, including hydraulic fracturing. This re-use process significantly reduces costs.

About Zenbu Water Solutions LLC

Zenbu Water Solutions LLC is a private company with headquarters in Denver, Colorado.  Zenbu was previously wholly owned by Zenbu Global, Inc. until 2010 when it spun off as a private company.  Our design team of engineers are ready to assist you solve your water treatment concerns. We will analyze your water results to assist you in a solution to solve your water treatment requirements.

The elimination of chemicals in processing wastewater is proving to be a welcome change to our customers by saving them money and creating a safer environment. The IWS Technology that we selected will be a big asset to the industry.

This new release may contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Investors are cautioned that such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, including without limitation, acceptance of the Company’s products, increased levels of competition for the Company, new products and technological changes, the Company’s dependence on third-party suppliers, and other risks detailed from time to time in the Company’s periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

 

SOURCE Latitude Solutions, Inc

Additionally, SES has recently been performing coal qualification testing on three high ash, sub-bituminous coals from Turkey for a large utility customer who is evaluating the use of SES’ gasification technology for small scale power generation projects. Three samples have been tested and the test results are being tallied to date, with preliminary data indicating positive outcomes for all three Turkish coals.

SES views this type of coal analysis and testing as an important step in project development by providing necessary technical and feasibility information for customers ahead of entering into technology licensing and equipment supply agreements.

“Our previously reported data on high ash coals demonstrate carbon conversion greater than 98 percent and we look forward to reporting technical, environmental and cost performance test results for both the high ash Turkish coal and the high ash Indian coal,” stated Robert Rigdon, President and CEO of SES. “We anticipate that successful completion of this testing could lead to one or more technology license opportunities currently under discussion. We view this type of coal testing as a key step and important gateway to further project development steps, aligning risk mitigation and technical validation with project success for our potential customers.”

About Synthesis Energy Systems, Inc.

SES provides technology, equipment and engineering services for the conversion of low rank, low cost coal and biomass feedstocks into energy and chemical products. Its strategy is to create value through providing technology and equipment in regions where low rank coals and biomass feedstocks can be profitably converted into high value products through its proprietary U-GAS® fluidized bed gasification technology, which SES licenses from the Gas Technology Institute. U-GAS^® gasifies coal cost effectively, without many of the harmful emissions normally associated with coal combustion plants. The primary advantages of U-GAS® relative to other gasification technologies are (a) greater fuel flexibility provided by the ability of SES to use all ranks of coal (including low rank, high ash and high moisture coals, which are significantly cheaper than higher grade coals), many coal waste products and biomass feed stocks; and (b) the ability of SES to operate efficiently on a smaller scale, which enables the construction of plants more quickly, at a lower capital cost, and, in many cases, in closer proximity to coal sources. SES currently has offices in Houston, Texas, and Shanghai, China. For more information on SES and SRS, visit www.synthesisenergy.com or call (713) 579-0600.

SES Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements other than statements of historical fact are forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to certain risks, trends and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Among those risks, trends and uncertainties are the early stage of development of SES, its estimate of the sufficiency of existing capital sources, its ability to successfully develop its licensing business, its ability to raise additional capital to fund cash requirements for future investments and operations including its China platform initiative, its ability to reduce operating costs, the limited history and viability of its technology, commodity prices and the availability and terms of financing opportunities, its results of operations in foreign countries, its ability to diversify, its ability to complete the restructuring of the ZZ Joint Venture, its ability to obtain the necessary approvals and permits for its future projects, the estimated timetables for achieving mechanical completion and commencing commercial operations for the Yima project as well as the ability of the Yima project to produce revenues and earnings, the sufficiency of internal controls and procedures and the ability of SES to effect the ZJX/China Energy transaction, grow its business and generate revenues and earnings as a result of its proposedChina and India platform initiatives, as well as its joint venture with Midas Resource Partners. Although SES believes that in making such forward-looking statements its expectations are based upon reasonable assumptions, such statements may be influenced by factors that could cause actual outcomes and results to be materially different from those projected. SES cannot assure you that the assumptions upon which these statements are based will prove to have been correct.

Important Notice from SES

In connection with the proposed ZJX/China Energy transaction, SES has filed a preliminary proxy statement, and intends to file a definitive proxy statement, with the SEC and intends to mail the definitive proxy statement to the stockholders of SES. SES and its directors and officers may be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the stockholders of SES in connection with the transaction. Information about the transaction is set forth in the preliminary proxy statement filed, and will be set forth in the definitive proxy statement to be filed by SES with the SEC.

You may obtain the preliminary statement and, when available, the definitive proxy statement, for free by visiting EDGAR on the SEC website at www.sec.gov. Investors should read the definitive proxy statement carefully before making any voting or investment decision because that document will contain important information.

SOURCE Synthesis Energy Systems, Inc.

VANCOUVER, May 14, 2012 /PRNewswire/ – Atlatsa Resources Corporation (“Atlatsa” or the “Company”) (TSXV: ATL; NYSE Amex: ATL; JSE: ATL) announces its operating and financial results for the three months ended March 31, 2012. This release should be read together with the Company’s Financial Statements and Management Discussion & Analysis available at www.atlatsaresources.com and filed onwww.sedar.com. Currency values are presented in South African Rand (ZAR), Canadian Dollars ($) and United States Dollars (US$).

Despite the anticipated first quarter challenges associated with a slow start-up after the year-end break, the quarter’s operating and financial performance was further affected by a regrettable mine fatality and a number of Section 54 safety stoppages, resulting in six operating shifts lost during the period.

Notwithstanding the abovementioned challenges the first quarter’s operating performance at Bokoni was better than the first quarter of 2011, with tonnes milled improving by 10%, whilst platinum group metal (“PGM*) ounces produced improved by 24% year-on-year. Development at the operations continues to improve, in an effort to sustain much-needed mining flexibility at Bokoni.

On an encouraging note, the new mine management team – appointed in February 2012 - has begun to introduce a number of on-mine initiatives to improve quality mining practices and this has translated into an improved recovered grade (PGM) at the operations. Historical challenges at the Bokoni concentrator plant have also been mitigated, with the number of mill stoppages now having reduced significantly, whilst plant recoveries are trending back towards normalised levels expected at the Bokoni concentrator.

Bokoni remains a mine in development, with its primary focus on its two key ramp up projects at its Brakfontein (Merensky) and Middelpunt Hill (UG2) expansions. These new generation shaft complexes at Bokoni will continue to ramp up over the next five years.

Notwithstanding the development focus at Bokoni, operating costs and efficiencies remain the key short- to medium-term challenges which, against a backdrop of a depressed ZAR PGM basket price, continue to result in earnings and cash flow margin pressure.

The implementation of a new series of initiatives to improve operating efficiencies and reduce unit costs has begun, and it is anticipated that these will begin to bear fruit in the second quarter of 2012.

*PGM means platinum group metals (4E), comprising platinum, palladium, rhodium and gold.

Operating and financial performance

Set out below are summaries of the key operating and financial results for Bokoni and the Company for the period under review.

Operating results – Bokoni Mines		Q1 2012	Q1 2011	% Change
Tonnes milled	T	243,054	219,991	10
Recovered grade	g/t milled,PGM	4.05	3.84	5
PGM oz produced	oz	27,799	22,500	24
UG2 mined to total output	%	33.8	30.0	13
Primary development	m	2,547	2,302	11
Capital expenditure	$m	6.9	6.5	6
Operating cost/tonne milled	ZAR/t	1,423	1,199	(19)
Operating cost/PGM oz	ZAR/PGM oz	12,442	11,772	(6)
Lost-time injury frequency rate (“LTIFR”)	Per 200,000 hours worked	2.17	1.91	(14)
Total permanent labor (mine operations)	Number	3,503	3,434	2
Total contractors (mine operations)	Number	1,611	1,922	(16)

 

Consolidated statement of comprehensive income summary
Expressed in Canadian Dollars (000′s)	Q1 2012	Q1 2011	Variance %
Revenue	34,079	30,698	11%
Cash operating costs	43,949	36,333	(21%)
Cash operating (loss)/profit*	(9,870)	(5,635)	(75%)
Operating margin	(29%)	(18%)	(61%)
EBITDA	(13,600)	(9,589)	(42%)
Loss after tax	(41,267)	(36,076)	(14%)
Non-controlling interest	(19,729)	(17,432)	(13%)
Loss attributable to Atlatsa shareholders	(21,538)	(18,644)	(16%)
Basic and diluted loss per share – cents	5	4	(25%)

Safety

It is with deep regret that the Company reported a fatal accident which occurred at Bokoni during Q1 2012, in which Mr Zimele Gwantshu, who was employed as a light-weight machine operator, was fatally injured in a fall of ground incident. As a result of this fatality and other Section 54 safety stoppages imposed by the Department of Mineral Resources, a total of six operating shifts were lost during Q1 2012.  The lost time injury frequency rate (LTIFR) for Q1 2012 regressed to 2.17 per 200,000 hours worked, from 1.91 in Q1 2011.

Production and development

Production at the operations was negatively affected by the slow start-up after the year-end break, safety related stoppages and the national COSATU stay-away at the end of February.

Notwithstanding these challenges, the 243,053 tonnes milled in Q1 2012 represents a 10% improvement on tonnes milled in Q1 2011, whilst the 27,799 PGM ounces produced during the quarter represents a 24% improvement on Q1 2011 results.

Improved mining discipline and initiatives at the Bokoni concentrator resulted in the recovered grade increasing by 5% when compared to Q1 2011, whilst concentrator recoveries for Merensky and UG2 ore improved to 88.5% and 83.7% respectively, indicating a positive trend towards returning to expected plant recovery levels.

Total primary development increased by 11% in Q1 2012 when compared to Q1 2011, as Bokoni continues to focus on creating much-needed mining flexibility in an effort to support improved operating efficiencies.

Revenue

Revenue from the sale of concentrate for Q1 2012 was $34.1 million compared to revenue of $30.7 millionfor Q1 2011. This increase in revenue was primarily attributable to increased production volumes, but negatively affected by a weakening of the average US$ basket price by 13% to US$1,273/oz  when compared to a basket price of US$1,457/oz achieved in Q1 2011.

Cash operating costs 

Cash operating costs for Q1 2012 were $43.9 million compared to $36.3 million for Q1 2011, representing a 21% year-on-year increase. These higher costs were primarily attributable to above-inflation increases in labour costs, increased stores charges and annual increases in utility charges, including a 25.8% annual increase in ESKOM power charges.

Unit costs, measured by ZAR/PGM oz, increased by 6% year-on-year to ZAR12,442/ PGM oz, highlighting the need to improve operating efficiencies and production volumes at Bokoni, which is scaled to produce at operating levels higher than those currently being achieved.

In an effort to reduce unit costs mine management is introducing a number of on-mine initiatives aimed at improving operating efficiencies, including the introduction of a new bonus system, as well as new payment and leave cycles. Furthermore, the high cost Merensky shaft operations at Bokoni are currently under review as part of a broader asset review and optimization strategy.

Capital expenditure

Capital expenditure incurred for the quarter amounted to $6.9 million, comprising  23% sustaining capital and 77% project expansion capital, as Bokoni continues to focus on its two key ramp-up projects at Brakfontein (Merensky) and Middelpunt Hill (UG2).

Finance charges

Total finance charges of $22.8 million were incurred in Q1 2012, of which $11.5 million was attributable to Atlatsa, contributing significantly to the Company’s net loss for the period.  Finance charges will be reduced substantially on implementation of the restructure plan announced by the Company and Anglo American Platinum on 2 February, 2012 (“the restructure plan”).

Earnings

The basic and diluted loss per share for Q1 2012 was 5 cents per share (“cps”) when compared to 4 cps for Q1 2011.

Note on cautionary and no conference call

Atlatsa is currently trading under cautionary and will not be holding a conference call or presentation to accompany these results. Further to finalization and publication of the financial effects of the restructure plan, the Company will resume detailed shareholder communications.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. The NYSE Amex has neither approved nor disapproved the contents of this press release.

Cautionary and forward-looking information

This document contains “forward-looking statements” that were based on Atlatsa’s expectations, estimates and projections as of the dates as of which those statements were made, including statements relating to the Bokoni Group restructure and refinancing and anticipated financial or operational performance. Generally, these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “may”, “will”, “outlook”, “anticipate”, “project”, “target”, “believe”, “estimate”, “expect”, “intend”, “should” and similar expressions.

Atlatsa believes that such forward-looking statements are based on material factors and reasonable assumptions, including the following assumptions: the Bokoni Mine will increase or continue to achieve production levels similar to previous years; the Ga-Phasha, Boikgantsho, Kwanda and Platreef Projects exploration results will continue to be positive; contracted parties provide goods and/or services on the agreed timeframes; equipment necessary for construction and development is available as scheduled and does not incur unforeseen breakdowns; no material labour slowdowns or strikes are incurred; plant and equipment functions as specified; geological or financial parameters do not necessitate future mine plan changes; and no geological or technical problems occur.

Forward-looking statements are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the Company’s actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. These include but are not limited to:

• uncertainties related to the completion of the Bokoni Group restructure and refinancing;
• uncertainties and costs related to the Company’s exploration and development activities, such as those associated with determining whether mineral resources or reserves exist on a property;
• uncertainties related to feasibility studies that provide estimates of expected or anticipated costs, expenditures and economic returns from a mining project;
• uncertainties related to expected production rates, timing of production and the cash and total costs of production and milling;
• uncertainties related to the ability to obtain necessary licenses, permits, electricity, surface rights and title for development projects;
• operating and technical difficulties in connection with mining development activities;
• uncertainties related to the accuracy of our mineral reserve and mineral resource estimates and our estimates of future production and future cash and total costs of production, and the geotechnical or hydrogeological nature of ore deposits, and diminishing quantities or grades of mineral reserves;
• uncertainties related to unexpected judicial or regulatory proceedings;
• changes in, and the effects of, the laws, regulations and government policies affecting our mining operations, particularly laws, regulations and policies relating to:
• mine expansions, environmental protection and associated compliance costs arising from exploration, mine development, mine operations and mine closures;
• expected effective future tax rates in jurisdictions in which our operations are located;
• the protection of the health and safety of mine workers; and
• mineral rights ownership in countries where our mineral deposits are located, including the effect of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (South Africa);
• changes in general economic conditions, the financial markets and in the demand and market price for gold, copper and other minerals and commodities, such as diesel fuel, coal, petroleum coke, steel, concrete, electricity and other forms of energy, mining equipment, and fluctuations in exchange rates, particularly with respect to the value of the U.S. dollar, Canadian dollar and South African rand;
• unusual or unexpected formation, cave-ins, flooding, pressures, and precious metals losses (and the risk of inadequate insurance or inability to obtain insurance to cover these risks);
• changes in accounting policies and methods we use to report our financial condition, including uncertainties associated with critical accounting assumptions and estimates; environmental issues and liabilities associated with mining including processing and stock piling ore;
• geopolitical uncertainty and political and economic instability in countries which we operate; and
• labour strikes, work stoppages, or other interruptions to, or difficulties in, the employment of labour in markets in which we operate mines, or environmental hazards, industrial accidents or other events or occurrences, including third party interference that interrupt the production of minerals in our mines.

For further information on Atlatsa, investors should review the Company’s Annual Report disclosed in the Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2011 filed on SEDAR at www.sedar.com and with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission www.sec.gov and other disclosure documents that are available on SEDAR at www.sedar.com.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release. The NYSE Amex has neither approved nor disapproved the contents of this press release.

 

 

SOURCE Atlatsa Resources Corporation