INDUSTRY REPORT

EQUITY  RESEARCH

12 Nov 09 VANADIUM: THE SUPERCHARGER

Limited Supply
• Vanadium is a metal that strengthens and hardens alloys like
steel, but that we believe has a bright future in energy storage.
Both lithium ion batteries to be used in the automotive industry
and redox batteries to be used in grid-level electricity storage
benefit greatly from the use of vanadium, and this use is cost-
effective.
• Vanadium is produced in limited quantity as a by-product of other
processes.
• In 2007, only about 59,100 tonnes of contained vanadium was
produced globally, with this coming largely from South Africa,
China and Russia.
• There is a threat that Chinese supply may be declared strategic
and export curtailed, further constraining global supply.
Rapidly Rising Demand
• Ferrovanadium is used to strengthen steel. Both China and Japan
are mandating stronger rebar in construction, likely increasing
vanadium demand.
• We also foresee at least three new demand channels for
vanadium in the alternative energy and clean technology arenas.
At least two of these could result in significant vanadium
shortages.
Stable Prices are the Catalyst
• A major issue in the past has been vanadium price volatility.
Prices have oscillated between levels of $11 per kg. for the metal
to as high as $50 per kg.
• While there are some opportunities for substitution in steel
production, the same is not true for other markets, including our
projected new markets.
• In order to make end prices of products predictable, the price of
vanadium must stabilize. This provides pull for new producers of
vanadium to enter the market.
There Just Isn’t Enough
• Without doubt, vanadium is growing into one of the most
important metals about which no one has ever heard. Soon,
Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA everyone is likely to become a lot more knowledgeable about
Clean Technologies & Materials
vanadium, and investors can benefit by staying ahead of the
curve and owning companies that can benefit from rapidly
647.426.1656 increasing vanadium demand.
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Arun Thomas, MBA

Associate
athomas@byroncapitalmarkets.com
Please see back page for disclaimers
Please see back page for disclaimers.
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Summary
Vanadium (chemical symbol V) is a relatively rare metal that has one predominant use - a
strengthening additive in steel and some forms of iron. According to the US Geological Survey
(USGS) (2007), of the approximate 59,100 tonnes of vanadium produced in 2007, about 85% of this
metal is used as a steel additive (Moskalyk and Alfantazi, Minerals Engineering, v16, 2003). In their
2008 update, the USGS notes that 93% of US consumption of V is metallurgical, including steel, iron
and titanium alloys.
Of the balance of material, the remainder is largely used in catalysts (in the form of vanadium
pentoxide, V2O5, in the manufacture of sulfuric acid, or as an oxidizer in the manufacture of maleic
anhydride), and ceramics (V2O5 is a widely used material in ceramic production). There are also a
horde of minor uses, as one would typically find for any metal.
Both China and Japan have upgraded their requirements for building materials, including the
strength of rebar. In China, the requirement was phased-in commencing 2007, and in Japan various
enhancements to the requirements for building materials has been adding to vanadium demand for
years, and will continue to do so.
It is worth noting that for many different types of steels, ferroniobium can be substituted for
Vanadium demand ferrovanadium. However, the substitution is only economic at very high vanadium prices. It should
is growing because also be noted that the amount of V used in steels is small, therefore the price of V must increase
of steel. We will
substantially to allow for substitution. For example, typical high-carbon steel containing vanadium
add battery
demand, both
as a hardener would have no more than 0.25% V content by weight, while ultra-hard tool steels like
small and large those used in high-speed machining would contain no more than 5% V by weight, and typically much
scale. less (down to perhaps 1%).
Vanadium is used in other alloys, as well, including the aerospace industry, where there are no other
metallic substitutes. For example, a common titanium alloy in use in aerospace is Ti 6Al 4V,
denoting titanium alloyed with 6% pure aluminum and 4% pure V. V has a peculiar ability to allow
titanium to perform better and at higher temperatures, with no other options available. However,
this use is, again, not a high volume driver of V demand.
We do believe there are several drivers that could have a significant impact on V demand in coming
years. One is the use of lithium vanadium phosphate or fluorophosphate cathodes and lithium
vanadium oxide anodes in rechargeable lithium batteries. These batteries exhibit much improved
safety compared to the more generic lithium cobalt oxide-type cathodes seen in cellular telephone
or laptop batteries, which have higher operating voltages and higher rates of energy storage.
Another is the use of vanadium in large-scale rechargeable batteries, called vanadium redox cells.
The last is the use of vanadium as an anti-corrosion agent in some rare-earth magnets, enabling use
of a new set of materials for use in strong magnets.
Due to relatively low levels of annual production, we believe that the vanadium market can only
follow two possible paths. One is the boom-to-bust price gyrations of the past, assuming new
suppliers do not enter the market, and the other is a much more stable pricing curve assuming new
suppliers do enter the market, helping to stabilize the spread between supply and demand.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

2
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Vanadium:
Vanadium: Supercharging Steel and Energy
Vanadium (V) is annually produced at levels of approximately 60,000 tonnes (according to the US
Geological Survey’s 2007 survey). Production is primarily a by-product of the iron and steel industry.
Iron ores containing amounts of V on the order of 1.0%-1.5% are processed in a furnace, creating
slags that may contain as much as 25% (the rough amount of V in South African slag) vanadium
pentoxide. These slags are then treated using a roasting/leaching process, with the slags first
roasted in combination with sodium compounds to make water-soluble sodium vanadates. The
sodium vanadate is washed out using water, and the sodium compounds are then converted to
ammonium vanadate through the addition of acid and ammonia. The ammonium vanadates are
then carefully roasted to produce the desired vanadium oxides.
Currently, approximately 85% of produced vanadium is used in making steel alloys. By adding small
59,100 tonnes of V
produced in 2007,
amounts of V, no more than 0.25% by weight to high-carbon steel or less than 5% by weight to steel
85% of it used to intended for use in high-speed tools, the hardness and strength of the steel is significantly
strengthen steels. enhanced. While there is a substitute available for the ferrovanadium (FeV, an alloy of iron and
vanadium that is priced by vanadium content) usually used, in the form of ferroniobium (FeNb), the
substitution of niobium is uneconomic until V prices reach high levels, and the use of FeNb is not as
effective as the use of FeV.
Certain V is also used in speciality alloys, especially alloys of titanium, utilized in the aerospace
industry. However, the bulk of the remaining 15% of V produced annually that is not used in steel is
used in catalysts for the production of sulphuric acid or maleic anhydride.
While growth in the use of V as a catalyst is linked to GDP growth, growth in the use of V as a
hardening/strengthening agent is expected to accelerate beyond GDP growth as governments such
as Japan and China mandate the use of stronger construction materials, including rebar.
We believe that there are two large-scale demands for V that will arise in the next few years, putting
additional strain on demand and potential strain on pricing. They are to allow V to be used in the
compound making up the cathodes of lithium-ion rechargeable batteries, and in the form of
vanadium pentoxide (V2O5) to be used as the energy storage medium in battery known as a
vanadium redox flow battery. Finally, V also acts to increase the effectiveness of rare-earth
magnets, including making the magnets much more resistant to corrosion across a broader range of
temperature and humidity. We will make projections regarding V demand for each one of these
new applications.
The use of V in electrical energy storage, particularly in the redox battery, is driven by V having four
oxidation states: V2+, V3+, V4+ and V5+. The ability to take on a variety of oxidation states leads to one
of the most striking properties of vanadium compounds, the wide range of bright colours the
compounds can assume (lilac, green, blue, and yellow as oxidation state moves from 2+ to 5+).

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

3
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Exhibit 1 – Colors of Vanadium Compounds in Solution

Source: Ian Geldard (2008)

While we firmly believe that V demand will significantly increase over the coming years, we are less
Demand will
grow due to steel
able to confidently predict that supply can maintain pace. There are an increasing number of
and battery use. companies exploring projects that could supply a substantial amount of V in years to come, but
Supply growth many of these projects are at early stages of development and some are located in politically
without price troublesome parts of the world. We believe that supply will increase, given time, but we cannot rule
fluctuations are out significant price movements during this period.
harder to predict.
Vanadium Sources – By-
By-products and More By-
By-products
On a national basis, the production of V is as follows:

Exhibit 2 – Production of Contained V by Country (tonnes)

Country 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Australia 160 150 100 0 0
China 13,200 16,000 17,000 17,500 19,000
Kazakhstan 1,000 1000 1,000 1,000 1,000
Russia 5,800 10,900 15,100 15,100 14,500
South Africa 27,172 23,302 22,601 23,780 24,000
Japan 560 560 560 560 560
Total 47,900 51,900 56,400 57,900 59,100
Source: US Geological Survey, 2007 Minerals Yearbook

Vanadium is present in over 65 different minerals, but as with many uncommon metals its
production is less a matter of discovery and much more a matter of finding them in economically
viable concentrations. Vanadium is also a common contaminant in some fossil fuel deposits,
especially oil shales, but rarely anything approaching a useful concentration.
The vast majority of V comes from processing of iron ores or uranium. Magnetite ores of the right
type can contain a high percentage of V in their slag. Similarly, there are ores containing uranium,
such as carnotite (K2(UO2)2(VO4)2 3H2O) that provide V, post the removal of the primary target of
mining. V is largely produced as a by-product, and at best, a co-product of other metal production.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

4
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Vanadium Pricing – Not Necessarily an Afterthought

We should note that V is not necessarily a by-product when considering the revenue it can drive.
This is due to highly unstable V pricing, resulting from a relatively small supply and quickly changing
demand. Note that pricing of V can be expressed in the form of price of V2O5, the price of FeV, or
the price of the contained metal itself. We will attempt to be as explicit as possible regarding the
form of pricing we are using, and note that while global production of contained V metal is
approximately 60,000 tonnes, which is the equivalent of 214,200 tonnes of V2O5, or 61,000 tonnes
of FeV containing 80% V.
Historical pricing of V has been compiled by a number of sources, including the US Geological Survey
.

Exhibit 3 – Historical V Price (per tonne metal, in USD)

V metal has
traded between
$20 and $85 per
kg in just the last
two years.

Source: InfoMine.com

With prices of the metal spanning a range of $19,000 to $85,000 per tonne over periods as short as
two years, there is an obvious need to stabilize prices, so that both users of V as well as their
customers can set prices and cost expectations accordingly.

Vanadium Demand – Moving Up and to the Right

There is little doubt that V demand will increase with time; the real question is by how much. The
US Geological Survey has provided a snapshot of V end-use for 2007, its latest such analysis.
However, their report excludes its use in various segments, allowing companies to keep sensitive
information confidential.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

5
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Exhibit 4 – US End-
End-Use of V (in tonnes)
Use 2006 2007
Steel 3,650 4,570
Cast Iron n/a n/a
Superalloy 39.5 43.7
Alloys (excl. above) n/a n/a
Chemical Use n/a n/a
Miscellaneous 335 356
Total Reported 4,030 4,970
Source: US Geological Survey Minerals Yearbook (2008)

The 2009 USGS Mineral Commodity Summary for V states that approximately 92% of V in the US
was used in metallurgical processes. This implies that of total global consumption, assuming the
rest of the world uses its V much as the US does, 92% will be growing above global GDP.
Chemical use of V, including use as catalysts for the production of sulphuric acid and maleic
anhydride, should grow at roughly GDP levels, as we assume the balance of conventional V use
would. Thus, the remaining 8% of current global V demand will grow at a slightly slower rate than
metallurgical use.
Based on recent releases by the World Bank, among others, and as per our industry report on
lithium (4-Sep-09), we scale demand for non-metallurgical V based on GDP growth of 2% in 2010
and 4% thereafter. Our level for metallurgical use of V is, however, much higher. The World Steel
Association released figures for steel growth in mid-October 2009, and noted that while steel
production fell 8.6% from 2008 to 2009, they are forecasting demand will ramp by 9.2% in 2010, and
we believe that Macquarie Bank’s prediction of at least 6% per year thereafter likely still holds. This
Current V
demand should
is consistent with predictions for V demand from groups such as Precious Metals Australia, for
grow at rates of example. It is also consistent with growth rates in V demand in the recent past.
at least 6%
Using this rate of expansion, we can see that basic V demand scales to 2014 as shown in Exhibit 5
CAGR in the
future.
below.

Exhibit 5 – Annual Conventional V Demand (tonnes)

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
59.1 60.8 56.1 60.6 64.0 67.7 71.6 75.7
Source: USGS, Byron Capital Markets

The demand for V from electric cars, due to the use of lithium vanadium phosphate (Li3V2(PO4)3)
cathode material in place of the conventional LiCoO2 used in cellular telephone or laptop computer
batteries, is an open question. At least two companies, BYD in China and Valence in the US, are
researching and/or constructing batteries based on either Li3V2 (PO4)3 or a combination of Li3V2(PO4)3
and lithium iron phosphate LiFePO4.
The rationale behind using lithium vanadium phosphate rather than other compounds for lithium-
ion battery cathodes is that this phosphate produces the highest voltages measured. Li3V2(PO4)3
produces a battery of 4.8 volts, much higher than the 3.7 volts from conventional LiCoO2. Power
scales as the square of voltage, so, in theory at least, batteries made with lithium vanadium
phosphate should be more powerful. In addition, work by a number of researchers has indicated
that batteries made with Li3V2(PO4)3 should also be capable of storing the most energy of any
lithium-ion rechargeable cell.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

6
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Exhibit 6 – Lithium-
Lithium-Ion Battery Characteristics with Different Cathodes
Cathode Voltage (V) Capacity (mAh/g) Energy (kWh/kg)
LiCoO2 3.7 140 0.518
LiMn2O4 4.0 100 0.400
LiFePO4 3.3 150 0.495
Li2FePO4F 3.6 115 0.414
Li3V2(PO4)3 4.8 130 0.624
LiVPO4F 4.1 120 0.492
Source: Byron Capital Markets, Hsing (MIT B.Sc. Thesis), Barker et al., Zhu et al.

The vanadium phosphate cathode material can support 20% more energy storage than conventional
cobalt oxide, but as much as 26% more than iron phosphate and 56% more than manganese oxide.
However, in order to be useful, the cost of the battery cannot be higher, on some scale, than the
cost of alternatives.
We believe that the correct criterion is for the cost of the battery to be calculated on the basis of
kWh of stored energy. For most practical applications, the battery has a maximum size defined by
the device it is powering. If more kWh of stored energy can be included in a battery of different
cathode chemistry, at a cost per kWh of no more than the alternatives, then the designer has the
option of either reducing the size/weight and cost of their cell or taking advantage of the added
energy and reduction in size compared to the alternate chemistry.
The basic rule with cathode materials is that, all other things being about equal, we need to include
the same number of lithium atoms in the cathode, no matter the materials used. What varies are
the other materials in the compound. We can scale the costs using bulk costs for each of the
materials involved, and assume purification and processing carries similar costs, across the board.
Note that there isn’t any cost for oxygen; we believe oxidation is essentially free.
Our estimated costs for the materials are below. Note that we show conventional cost per kg of
each material, but also the cost per mole, and the cost per a standard number of atoms of each
material.

Exhibit 7 – Costs of Elements in Cathode Materials ($/kg and $/mol)

Element Cost ($/kg) Cost ($/mole)
Li 5.00 34.70
Mn 2.75 19.83
Fe 0.54 30.16
PO4 0.10 9.50
V 33.00 1,681.02
F 9.50 180.50
Co 40.00 2,357.20
Source: InfoMine, Reuters, Byron Capital Markets

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

7
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009
If we then calculate the cost of each of the various compounds to be used, arriving at a standard
number of lithium ions (one mole of lithium ions in the final compound), we find:

Exhibit 8 –Relative Costs of Cathode Compounds, One Mole of Li

Compound Cost Per Li Mole ($) Cost Per kWh (relative $)
LiCoO2 2,391.90 1.00
LiMn2O4 74.36 0.04
LiFePO4 74.36 0.03
Li2FePO4F 144.78 0.08
Li3V2(PO4)3 1,164.88 0.40
LiVPO4F 1,905.72 0.84
Source: Byron Capital Markets

These costs should not be considered final, by any means. Given that we have not included
processing costs, etc., the results are, at best, relative and directional. Yet, the above does provide a
compelling argument as to why certain companies are doing what they do. For example, we know
that A123 (AONE:NASDAQ) is developing and marketing lithium iron phosphate batteries. Clearly,
batteries made with the LiFePO4 cathode are the least expensive cells that can be made, per amount
of stored energy or per cell. However, these cells cannot store the same amount of energy as can
be stored by a given weight of battery containing Li3V2(PO4)3 cathode, and at the end of the day, the
battery using Li3V2(PO4)3 stores a given amount of energy for less money than any cathode materials
except LiFePO4 and LiMn2O4, yet can store far more energy in a given package size/weight.
What is truly important are the crossover points on the economics of each material. Again, we
make no representation that we have covered off all costs, but we can at least directionally present
the level at which prices for each of Co, Mn, Fe and V would need to be, to become the most
economic battery on an energy storage basis.

Exhibit 9 – Metals Costs for Equivalent Storage Price with Cobalt

$400.00
Other Price for Equivalency ($/kg)

$350.00
$300.00
$250.00
$200.00 Equiv Mn
$150.00 Equiv Fe
$100.00 Equiv V
$50.00
$-
20 40 60 80 100 120
Cobalt Price ($/kg)

Source: Byron Capital Markets

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

8
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009
Exhibit 9 above shows the levels for Mn, Fe and V prices in order for LiMn2O4, LiFePO4 and
Li3V2(PO4)3 batteries to have equivalent costs for energy storage. We have graphed the range of 3-
year pricing for Co, from $30/kg up to $120/kg. What we find is that LiFePO4 batteries remain less
expensive regardless of what Co price does; Fe prices must rise to at least $30/kg to cause concern,
which simply cannot happen. In the last three years, Mn has traded between $1.40 and $4.75,
according to InfoMine, but Mn needs to rise to over $94 to make it uneconomical compared to Co.
Vanadium has traded between $20/kg and $85/kg, and is economical across most of this range at
present Co pricing levels (V price would need to be above $84/kg for its batteries to become
uncompetitive with Co at current prices, for example).
This tells us that lithium vanadium phosphate batteries are likely to prove better (higher voltage and
higher energy) and cheaper than lithium cobalt oxide batteries in the future. It also reveals that
lithium vanadium phosphate cannot compete with lithium iron phosphate on cost, but by storing as
much as 26% more energy for the same battery weight, they can likely be sold on a performance
basis. Do not forget that our “cost” above is pure raw materials cost, and adding purification of
materials and processing, which should be close to fixed regardless of cathode compounds, allows
raw material discrepancy to diminish.
Note that there are strong indications that lithium vanadium phosphate batteries are making, or are
about to make, significant inroads into the automotive battery market. BYD Company Ltd.
(1211:SEHK) of Shenzhen, China is now in the process of constructing a plant in the vanadium
producing region of China, with the intention of producing lithium ferrous vanadium phosphate
batteries (a combination of vanadium and iron phosphates) to the automotive market as quickly as
possible. Their publicly stated rationale for producing anything other than lithium vanadium
phosphate is the variability of vanadium cost.
Subaru has unveiled a prototype of its G4e electric car, powered by lithium vanadium phosphate
batteries. The talking point for this concept car is the range provided by a relatively small vanadium
phosphate battery pack, roughly 200 km and double what their earlier R1e concept car could
achieve. The G4e has been the best argument for the use of lithium vanadium phosphate batteries,
to date.

Exhibit 10 – Subaru G4e, with Lithium Vanadium Phosphate Cells

Source: Subaru Motors

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

9
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009
Thus, there is a significant market for lithium vanadium phosphate batteries building in the near- to
medium-term. We have already made predictions on electric vehicle adoption in our recent lithium
industry report. While there is a wide disparity between other predictions on vehicle adoption, we
would suggest that adoption may proceed more quickly than most expect; the combination of the
novelty of fully electric/primarily electric vehicles combined with the cachet of driving a non-
polluting automobile is likely to work well when offsetting any perceived price differential between
what a buyer gets for their hard-earned dollar when buying an electric vehicle versus a gasoline-
powered car.
Nissan has published the most extensive information available for any next-generation electric
vehicle, to date. The Leaf is powered by a 24 kWh lithium-ion battery pack using lithium manganese
oxide as the cathode material. The battery pack uses 192 cylindrical cells, manufactured by a joint
venture between NEC and Nissan. NEC has been quoted as saying that the battery pack in the Leaf
will use roughly 4 kg of lithium metal equivalent, or about 21 kg of lithium carbonate equivalent.
NEC has also produced material safety data sheets for its new batteries that outline lithium use.
These batteries use 37% lithium compounds by weight, including lithium hexaflurophosphate in the
electrolyte along with lithium manganese oxide and lithium nickel oxide in the electrodes.

Exhibit 11
11 – Portions of MSDS for Aluminum Laminated Lithium-
Lithium-Ion Battery
Battery
Material % CAS Number
Aluminum 15 7429-90-5
Carbon, amorphous powder 1 7440-44-0
Copper foil 10 7440-50-8
Diethyl carbonate 5 105-58-8
Ethylene carbonate 5 96-49-1
Methyl ethyl carbonate 5 623-53-0
Lithium hexaflurophosphate 2 21324-40-3
Graphite powder 15 7782-42-5
Lithium manganese oxide 28 12057-17-9
Lithium nickel oxide 10 12031-65-1
Poly vinylidene fluoride 1 24937-79-9
Nickel and inert polymer 3 n/a
Source: NEC TOKIN Tochigi

Automotive use On the basis of the figures in the MSDS, we can ascertain that the proportion of lithium, by number
of vanadium in of atoms, used in the cathode, is 95%. The usage rate of lithium carbonate equivalent has been
batteries could shown to be higher than what we had previously assumed in our lithium industry report, roughly
add as much as
600 grams per kWh. The usage rate now stands at 880 grams per kWh of battery storage.
26% to current
demand by
2014.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

10
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Exhibit 12 – Electric Vehicle Adoption and Potential V Demand

Vehicle: 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Prius-like - 300,000 400,000 500,000 600,000 700,000
Volt-like - - 150,000 200,000 300,000 400,000
Leaf-like - - 200,000 350,000 500,000 700,000

V Required:
Prius-like - 236 314 393 472 550
Volt-like - - 1,572 2,096 3,144 4,192
Leaf-like - - 2,751 4,814 6,877 9,628
Auto Totals - 236 4,637 7,303 10,492 14,369
Source: Byron Capital Markets

Finally, we have one other potential large-scale use of V metal - the grid-level storage allowed by
vanadium reduction-oxidation batteries, usually referred to by the acronym VRB. A VRB is a large-
sized battery, with the ability to have its output power and its energy storage levels scaled
independently; if one builds a battery out of fixed cells, such as lead-acid car batteries, then one is
limited to adding them in discrete chunks, and adding additional storage still requires one to pay the
premium for additional power. A VRB can be designed to produce exactly the desired power for
exactly the desired time, no more than required.

Exhibit 13 – A Representative VRB

Source: Dept. of Chemistry, Washington University in St. Louis

Although many discuss the ability of VRBs, or other large-scale storage systems, to allow greater
levels of penetration of alternative energy, such as wind or solar, we believe the true use of VRBs by
utilities may be far more pedestrian. This use would be the augmentation of the existing grid, to put
off major capital expenditures. For example, one of the first uses of a VRB in North America was to
augment a local substation that was being strained by faster-than-anticipated community
development. Essentially, a remote community had grown faster than the utility serving it had
expected; the utility was left with the choice of spending millions of dollars to upgrade the
substation and pull additional feeder cables, to meet an electricity supply shortfall that lasted hours
each day, or add a VRB for less money and put off the upgrade for years. Given that in North
Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com
11
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009
America, utility rates are generally set by pricing boards their costs of capital are such that putting
off such capital expenditures results in a very high IRR for the utility.
We believe there is significant latent demand for such a product. As an aside, while we were
covering a company working on grid-scale storage, we were receiving phone calls from major North
American utilities interested in learning more about the product from an unbiased source. This is
the first and only time such a thing has happened in our experience.
There are several companies working on grid-level storage using VRBs. Prudent Energy of Beijing,
China purchased the assets of VRB Power of Vancouver, and is working to develop and sell large-
scale VRBs worldwide. Cellstrom of Austria and Cellenium of Thailand are also working in similar
capacities. All have the potential to sell relatively large batteries to utilities and others, with Prudent
likely having the commercial lead in this regard.
All VRBs aim to put V ions into solution, as it is the ability of the V ion to assume any one of four
oxidation states that allows the battery to store energy. The V can come in the form of any one of a
number of compounds, including vanadium sulphate or vanadium pentoxide, all dissolved in
relatively dilute sulphuric acid. Our past work with VRB Power allowed us to carry out some basic
VRBs can add calculations regarding V requirements. For a VRB, storage was 20 Wh/liter of electrolyte. According
perhaps as to the inventors of the technology at the University of New South Wales, the concentration of the
much as 11% to
electrolyte is 2M V2(SO4)3 in 2.5M H2SO4 (lots of vanadium sulphate that was electrolytically
current demand,
dissolved in a sulphuric acid solution).
by 2014.
For every MWh of energy storage required, 50,000 liters of electrolyte are needed. That 50,000
liters holds 100,000 mol of V2(SO4)3. 100,000 mol of V2(SO4)3 has a mass of just slightly over 39
tonnes. Of that 39 tonnes of mass, 26.1% of it is V, or 10.1 tonnes. Thus, at present prices of about
$33/kg of V metal, this is worth approximately $335,000. A price of $335,000/MWh of electricity
storage, for the raw materials required, is not at all excessive. One also needs to add in the cost of
the reaction cells that actually allow the ion exchange to drive electric current, and the amount is
not inconsequential, but the cost of the final battery, in many circumstances, is manageable.
However, what should be noted is that VRBs are generally built to provide outputs of MW power for
many hours. A 3-4 MW VRB, good for eight hours, would be of a size that could provide output
levelling for a wind farm, for example. This is at least 24 MWh of storage, requiring 242 tonnes of V
metal. On an annual production level of less than 60,000 tonnes, a few such batteries can begin to
make an appreciable contribution to demand.
For purposes of projecting V demand, we make the following predictions as to VRB demand in
Exhibit 14.

Exhibit 14 – VRB Demand, Resultant V Demand (tonnes)

Demand for V 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
could rise as MWh Demand 0 0 0 30 70 150 300 600
much as 61% V Required 0 0 0 303 707 1,515 3,030 6,060
over 2007 levels, Source: Byron Capital Markets
a CAGR of 11%
from current If we add these three areas, conventional, battery and grid-storage demands, the need for V
demand, by appears to have the potential to be more than robust.
2014.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

12
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Exhibit 15 – Overall V Demand Potential (tonnes)

Demand 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Conventional 59,100 60,784 56,063 60,590 64,046 67,703 71,571 75,664
Automotive 0 0 0 236 4,637 7,303 10,492 14,369
Grid 0 0 0 303 707 1,515 3,030 6,060
Total 59,100 60,784 56,063 61,128 69,390 76,520 85,093 96,094
Source: USGS, Byron Capital Markets

While we are unwilling, without the assurance of new producers entering the market and allowing
prices to stabilize, to definitively predict that V demand can scale this way, the potential is there. It
is possible to see a possible 61% increase in demand over that reported by the USGS for 2007 by
2014, a CAGR of 11.4% compared to 2009 demand levels and well above any estimates for global
GDP growth.

Vanadium Supply – Keeping Pace with GDP, Just Not with Growth Potential
We have little desire to produce a report on the vanadium industry on par with that from a company
such as CPM Group. However, we recognize that one of the critical questions for investors
contemplating buying junior vanadium companies is whether there is room for other players in the
space.
The historical high in demand for V likely came in 2008, with production estimates from mining and
slag processing of 60,000 tonnes from the USGS. Add to this an amount of V from reprocessing of
catalysts, and one comes to roughly the level we have determined for 2008. Demand likely dropped
with steel production in 2009, but it appears ready to rebound. Clearly, the industry can support
our projections for demand through to at least 2011 on the basis of historical production rates.
Beyond this level, we believe it will be difficult for slag-based producers to expand their output
much past 10% additional output, due to production constraints and supply of raw materials. Slag-
based V production is 56% of the overall market. With this increase we arrive at levels of
approximately 64,400 tonnes of metal, however, that does not cover off even 2011 levels of
demand.
Evraz Group (EVR:LSE) of Russia maintain that they supply approximately 34% of the world’s V.
Between operations in the US, South Africa, Russia, the Czech Republic and Switzerland, the
Company produces and markets 26,700 tonnes of V metal equivalent per year, approximately 50%
of current demand. At present, Evraz has no publicly stated plans to increase capacity.
The second-largest world producer of V today is Panzhihua New Steel and Vanadium (000629:SZSE),
a subsidiary of state-owned Panzhihua Iron and Steel Group, or Pangang, of Panzhihua, China, in the
Sichuan province. However, while the Company produces perhaps 9,000 tonnes per year, it does so
solely as a by-product from steel operations. V output can scale with increased steel production if
the processing plant is also scaled up, but the Company has no publicly-announced plans to do so.
Xstrata’s (XTA:LSE) Rhovan operation in South Africa is currently producing roughly 10,000 tonnes of
V2O5 per annum, along with 6,000 tonnes of ferrovanadium. In 2004/2005 Xstrata decided to ramp
production at Rhovan, and plans to increase production by an additional 4,100 tonnes per year of
V2O5, or the equivalent of about 2,300 tonnes of V metal, less than 4% of current annual production.
This expansion is not yet complete, but is still slated to be complete in 2011, helping to offset what
could become a shortfall in supply.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

13
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009
Vantech Vanadium Products (private) purchased some of the assets of Highveld Steel and
Vanadium, including the Highveld Vanchem plant. This plant was producing at what amounts to
capacity for the project, roughly 8,000 tonnes per year of V2O5, or 4,500 tonnes per year of metal
equivalent. We have found no stated plans to increase production.
There are a large number of junior vanadium projects scattered around the world, belonging to both
private and public firms. These juniors have various levels of managerial, financial and political risk
attached to them. However, we will assume that the projections made by the various companies
can be met, that production can commence at the levels and at the times specified by these firms.
We would assume such projections are optimistic, but we will include them as demonstrated in
Exhibit 16.

Exhibit 16 – Potential V Supply Assuming All Projects Reach Market

Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Max. Initial Supply (tonnes) 61,000 61,000 61,000 61,000 61,000
Increased Supply, Majors (tonnes) 3,400 5,700 5,700 5,700 5,700
Increased Supply, Juniors (tonnes) 2,800 17,000 38,500 50,500 50,500
Total Potential Supply (tonnes) 67,200 83,700 105,200 117,200 117,200
Total Potential Demand (tonnes) 61,128 69,390 76,520 85,093 96,094
Source: Byron Capital Markets

Supply can keep The above assumes every one of the projects we have enumerated comes to market in a timely
pace with fashion, having convinced investors that each project is economically viable in order to become fully
demand, if all
funded. Obviously, this is not likely to occur. We have selected one large prospective project by
junior projects
one junior and dropped it out of our supply projections, but delays and production issues at the
reach market
and none are majors could serve the same purpose. The supply picture becomes:
delayed.
Exhibit 17 – Potential V Supply, Less One Large Junior
Year 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Max. Initial Supply (tonnes) 61,000 61,000 61,000 61,000 61,000
Increased Supply, Majors (tonnes) 3,400 5,700 5,700 5,700 5,700
Increased Supply, Juniors (tonnes) 0 5,800 9,300 21,300 21,300
Total Potential Supply (tonnes) 67,200 72,500 76,000 89,000 89,000
Total Potential Demand (tonnes) 61,128 69,390 76,520 85,093 96,094
Source: Byron Capital Markets

Minus one larger project, the V supply and demand picture is very tight. If other projects are
delayed or disrupted, or steel demand ramps faster than we have anticipated, it is entirely possible
for the supply/demand picture to fall completely out of sync.

Conclusion – More Potential Shortages

We have no precise idea how quickly electric cars will ramp in terms of consumer demand, and the
adoption rate of lithium vanadium phosphate batteries into the market is an admittedly open
question. Similarly, we admit to having little ability to predict the future in terms of the adoption
rate for large-scale vanadium redox batteries. Even something as relatively simple as a prediction
for V use in steel making in the future is dubious. One should take the above figures with respect to
potential supply and potential demand of V with a very large grain of salt.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

14
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

The world needs However, we are certain of the following. Lithium-ion batteries containing lithium vanadium
more V, for steel phosphate cathodes are the rechargeable lithium-ion batteries with the greatest ability to store
and metals alone. electricity. Ultimately, these cells should prove to be of lower cost than the conventional lithium
Batteries of all cobalt oxide cathode-equipped cells, commonly used in cell phones and laptops. Certainly, the
sizes may add automotive market should gravitate not to the cheapest rechargeable battery available (otherwise
substantially to why not use nickel metal hydride throughout) but to the battery with the highest energy content in
that demand.
the given space, giving the car the ability to travel as far as possible. We have not included the
laptop battery market in our projections, but this is an area where operating time per charge is
valued highly as well, therefore should be a ready market for lithium vanadium phosphate.
There is really only one competitive technology for grid-level electricity storage, as far as we are
concerned, and that is vanadium redox batteries. The VRB may not find much use as a backup
system for the individual home, but there is no shortage of use at the substation level.
Finally, barring catastrophic price increases in V, we also know that the use of V as a
hardening/strengthening agent in steel will dramatically increase over the next few years. Demand
from China and developing nations will see to that, alone.
Overall, we know that the need for stronger and more steel is driving V demand up. We believe
there may be significant V demand building from areas such as lithium-ion battery use and redox
battery deployment. All in all, this is more than enough reason for investors to look at investments
involving another uncommon metal, vanadium.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

15
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Disclosures
Information contained in this Industry report has been drawn from sources believed to be reliable but its accuracy or completeness is not
guaranteed, nor in providing it does Byron Capital Markets (a division of Byron Securities Limited) assume any responsibility or liability. From time to
time, Byron Capital Markets and its directors, officers and other employees may maintain positions in the securities that are directly or indirectly
involved in this Industry. The contents of this report cannot be reproduced in whole or in part without the expressed permission of Byron Capital
Markets. This information is intended for use by accredited investors only, and is not intended for use by any U.S. investor.

Byron Capital Markets Policies and Procedures Regarding the Dissemination of Research
General policy is to make available a research report to its clients for an exclusive period of up to 30 days. Following that period, the research report
will appear on the Byron Capital Markets website at www.byroncapitalmarkets.com.

Analyst Certification
I, Jon Hykawy, certify the views expressed in this report were formed by my review of relevant company data and industry investigation, and
accurately reflect my opinion about the investment merits of the securities mentioned in the report. I also certify that my compensation is not
related to specific recommendations or views expressed in this report.

Byron Capital Markets publishes research and investment recommendations for the use of its clients. Information regarding our categories of
recommendations, quarterly summaries of the percentage of our recommendations that fall into each category and our policies regarding the
release of our research reports is available at www.byroncapitalmarkets.com, or may be requested by contacting the analyst.

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

16
Equity Research Industry Report 12 November 2009

Byron Capital Markets Contacts

Department Desk Email

Executive
Campbell Becher 647-426-1657 campbell@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Research
Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., Clean Technologies & Materials Analyst 647-426-1656 jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Guy Gordon, Oil & energy Analyst 647-426-1672 guy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Drew Clark, Mining Analyst 647-426-1673 dclark@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Arun Thomas, Associate 647-426-1674 athomas@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Sales and Trading

Main Trading Line 647-426-1670

Cyrus Osena, Head – Institutional Sales 647-426-1675 cosena@byroncapitalmarkets.com

David Kemp, Head – Institutional Trading 647-426-1666 dkemp@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Tom Chudnovsky, Institutional Sales 647-426-1665 tom@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Kariv Oretsky, Institutional Sales 647-426-1658 koretsky@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Nick Stajduhar, Institutional Sales 647-426-1664 nick@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Jonathan Samahin, Institutional Trading 647-426-1670 jsamahin@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Nick Perkell, Institutional Trading 647-426-1671 nperkell@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Gabriela Casasnovas 647-426-1660 gcasasnovas@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Corporate Finance
Robert Orviss 647-426-1668 rorviss@byroncapitalmarkets.com

John Rak 647-426-1663 jrak@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Operations
Derrick Chiu (Syndication) 647-426-1662 derrick@byroncapitalmarkets.com

Jon Hykawy, Ph.D., MBA
647.426.1656
jhykawy@byroncapitalmarkets.com

17