Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. I'm Lucas Dow, Managing Director and CEO, and in the room with me today is Andrew Barber, Chief Development and Investor Relations Officer. This is a landmark day. Our first market update is Elevra Lithium Ltd. The merger between Sayona and Piedmont Lithium is complete, and we are now Elevra. Now, a new name is more than a cosmetic change; it's a statement of intent that reflects a stronger balance sheet, a larger operating base, and the clear ambition to lead the North American hard rock lithium sector. Over the next 25 minutes, I'll walk you through what this transformation means for our business, our shareholders, and the broader market we operate in. We'll be moving through a number of slides today, and I'll give you a prompt as we move on to them.
Moving to slide two, here's where we're heading today. First, I'll recap the merger rationale and introduce Elevra as a brand and as a business. Then we'll look at our corporate foundations, governance, leadership, and capital strength. We'll talk synergies and progress since the deal commenced. Then dive into resources, reserves, and operations at NAL. From there, we'll explore our growth projects, outline our strategy for the next 18 months, and finally set out our FY2026 guidance. By the end, you should clearly see how Elevra is positioned as a leading North American hard rock lithium producer with the scale and optionality to grow further. Moving to slide three. Let's start with why we merged and what Elevra stands for. The strategic rationale is laid out in slide four. This merger was about substance, not size for size's sake.
By aligning ownership and offtake at NAL, combining technical capabilities, and strengthening the balance sheet, we created a business that can truly compete on the global stage. The benefits are clear. A unified ownership structure at NAL, which removes inefficiencies and importantly unlocks brownfield expansion potential, the ability to optimize logistics, procurement, and marketing, and a much stronger financial footing to fund growth. Together, these make Elevra the number one pure play hard rock lithium producer in North America. That's not just a title; it's a platform for growth, influence, and long-term value creation. Moving to slide five, why the name Elevra? Principally because it tells our story with its origins being derived from electricity, evoking the power and energy we helped create, ERA, signaling a new chapter in sustainable industry, Elevate, reflecting ambition, upward momentum, and leadership.
This name connects us to the energy transition, but also to a sense of progress and purpose. Elevra is about reliability, innovation, and growth. The qualities we believe that customers, governments, and investors want in strategic lithium partners. Moving now to our core values. A new name sets direction, but values set culture. Our values are integrity, respect, resilience, collaboration, and execution. They guide how we operate, whether it's engaging with First Nations in Quebec, negotiating with global OEMs, or supporting our employees on site. These aren't just words on a slide; they're the foundation of Elevra's identity and will anchor us as we grow. Moving to slide seven, let's take stock of where Elevra stands today. As described on slide eight, post-merger and consolidation, we've got 168 million shares on issue. Our pro forma cash position at June 30 was about $227 million, inclusive of the RCF VIII placement.
That puts us in a unique position and a strong position as an established producer with a diverse and competitive set of development options. Later this month, the name change will be reflected in the market. We'll trade as ELV on the ASX and ELVR on NASDAQ. That dual presence matters. It positions us both within it with Australian and U.S. investors in a way few peers can match. Slide nine. Strong governance underpins strong performance. Our board is chaired by Dawne Hickton, with decades of global leadership experience. I serve as Managing Director and CEO, joined by Allan Buckler, Jeff Armstrong, James Brown, Laurie Lefcourt, Christina Alvord, and Jorge Beristain. It's a diverse and experienced group with deep operational mining experience, financial expertise, and Australian and U.S. capital markets knowledge. The right mix to guide a cross-border lithium company. Now moving to the management team on slide ten.
Behind the board sits a leadership team with the practical know-how to deliver. From sustainability to finance to operations in Quebec to government affairs in the U.S. This is a team that knows the lithium sector and knows how to build and operate. It's not theory for us. We've built mines, run concentrators, and manage permitting in Quebec. That depth matters as Elevra shifts from promise to sustained delivery. Now looking at synergies and progress. Now let's look at what we've done since the merger announcement and where we're heading. Slide 12 sets out a number of milestones. As part of the merger integration planning and execution, we've wasted no time. We've completed a capital raise, giving us further funding capacity. At NAL during 2024, we advanced exploration and drilling, subsequently updating resources and reserves in 2025.
At Moblan, we've grown the resource base dramatically, and across Ewoyaa and Carolina, we've sequenced work to create a structured and disciplined growth pipeline of options. The message here? Discipline. We're building step by step, making sure we advance in a disciplined and considered manner. On slide 13, the synergies are tangible. We're tracking towards more than $15 million in annual savings. That's from cutting duplicate overheads, reducing office footprints, optimizing operations, logistics, and removing marketing inefficiencies. These aren't one-offs. They're recurring benefits that flow mostly from FY2026 onwards, giving us stronger margins and greater resilience through the cycle. Now looking at the resource base in slide 14, let's shift to the foundation of it all, our resource base and operational performance. To slide 15. Now, the updated 2025 JORC estimate shows 95 million tons at a grade of 1.15% and 49 million tons of reserves.
That's a 124% increase in reserves since 2023. For investors, that means a longer mine life and the ability to consider expansion options. For our operations team, it means confidence to plan for growth and expansion. For customers, it means reliable supply. That's the value of resource growth. Moving to slide 16. Since acquiring NAL in 2021, we've grown the resource base by more than one and a half times. Back then, it was a distressed asset. Today, it's one of the largest lithium resources in North America that is operating at or around operating cash flow break-even. That's a remarkable turnaround and positions NAL as a strategic hub in Quebec's growing battery ecosystem. Moving to Moblan on slide 17. Moblan's 2025 estimate is just as exciting. At 121 million tons at 1.19% resource and 48 million tons of reserves.
That's a 30% increase in a single year and 6.5xsix and a half times increase since 2021. Importantly, almost 90% sits in the measured and indicated categories. Not only is the resource larger, it's higher confidence. That gives us a very strong basis to move towards development. Slide 18. Moblan has grown into a Tier 1 deposit. Long life, low cost, expandable, and strategically located in the James Bay region. In the long run, it will complement NAL as a second cornerstone operation, giving Elevra depth and optionality. Moving to slide 19. When we benchmark against peers, two things stand out. Firstly, scale. Our combined resources and reserves put us at the top of the pack in North America. Secondly, capital intensity. We can add tons at a lower cost than many competitors. That's a critical differentiator in a market where capital discipline matters.
Now, taking a moment to look at NAL performance on slide 20. Our operational discipline is showing through at NAL. In financial year 2025, ore mined was up 14%. Mill utilization hit a record 93%. Recoveries averaged over 73%, and concentrate production was up 31% year- on- year. These are not trivial improvements. They prove that NAL is stable, reliable, and prime for further improvement and expansion. It's the performance we want to build upon. Now let's move to our growth pipeline. On to slide 22. Our portfolio is unique. NAL is producing, Carolina in the United States, Ewoyaa in Ghana, and Moblan in Quebec provide development depth. That combination gives us both optionality and sequencing. We don't have to do everything at once. We can advance projects when the market supports them. Slide 23. Sequencing matters. NAL brownfield expansion comes first. Lowest risk, fastest payback.
With some further work, Moblan will move to the permitting and funding stage. Alongside that, we have Carolina and Ewoyaa that give us further options. This keeps capital spend aligned with market cycles, not ahead of them. Moving to slide 24. The expansion scoping study at NAL shows we can add a second concentrator backed by the expanded resource base. Because it's brownfield, we benefit from an experienced workforce, detailed understanding of the geology, existing permits with the current operations, infrastructure, and established logistics chains. That makes this project lower risk and more capital efficient than greenfield builds. Slide 25. The economics speak for themselves. We increase production to 315,000 tons per year, reduce unit costs to $562 per ton U.S. on a C1 basis, and an all-in sustaining cost basis of $680 per ton U.S.
For a capital investment of $270 million, resulting in a post-tax NPV of $950 million, with an IRR above 26%. This is about more tons, lower costs, and stronger margins. The recipe for resilience in any market environment. Slide 26 in the expansion timeline. This roadmap is realistic. The study completed in 2025, evaluation and permitting through 2026 and 2027, construction beginning in 2028, commissioning in 2029, with ramp-up included during 2030. It's disciplined, paced for the market, and allows us to optimize funding along the way. Some opportunity also exists to accelerate aspects of the schedule, and this will be a feature as part of our next phase of study work. In terms of the funding plan on slide 27, the question is how do we pay for it?
We have the balance sheet strength to advance these projects in a meaningful way, and we have the option to bring in partners if it creates value. Our focus near term is non-dilutive pathways, preserving shareholder value while still advancing growth. Now let's step back and talk about the big picture, our strategy for the next 18 months, and the outlook for lithium demand. Moving to slide 29. Three properties define our approach over the next 18 months. Firstly, optimize NAL, continue to improve safety, costs, throughput, recovery, and logistics. We'll be advancing projects off the back of expanded resources, particularly the NAL brownfield expansion, and integrating the sale of our spodumene concentrate into supply chains by the partnerships, especially in Quebec where government and industry support is strong. This strategy is about discipline, execution, and making sure growth is sustainable. Slide 30. Let me underline why discipline matters.
Lithium is cyclical. Prices spike, then soften. The producers who stayed online through downturns, like Greenbushes and Pilbara, captured massive profits when the cycle turned up. For those who shut down, like Wodgina, they missed the window. Our approach is clear. Stay operational, drive our costs down sustainably in order to ride through the cycles and capture maximum value in the upswings. We now look at demand outlook as set out in slide 31. The demand story remains incredibly strong. Benchmark Minerals forecast a 10% compound annual growth rate through 2030. EV adoption is accelerating, governments are mandating local supply, and battery manufacturers are racing to secure feedstocks. North America, in particular, faces a deficit. Elevra, with NAL and Moblan, is one of the very few positioned to meet that demand. On the commercial side, our foundations are solid as set out in slide 32.
We have offtake agreements with LG Chem, 200,000 tons, and Tesla, 125,000 tons. The remainder is sold internationally, often using forward contracts to capture pricing upside where contango exists. Strategically, we're focused on ex-China partnerships, particularly in North America, and partnerships that align with customer demand for secure, sustainable supply. Now let's wrap up with FY2026 guidance as set out on slide 34. For FY2026, production guidance is 195,000 tons- 210,000 tons, with sales weighted deliberately to quarter two and quarter four to capture anticipated better prices. Unit costs will be in the range of A$1,175 to A$1,275 per ton, reflecting continued efficiency gains. CapEx will be around A$40 million, mostly sustaining capital at NAL, which is approximately A$30 million of that. This is a year about discipline, keeping costs tight, striving to have NAL in a cash flow positive position, and positioning ourselves for the expansion.
Thank you, and I'll now hand over to the operator for questions.
Thank you. If you wish to ask a question, please press star one on your telephone and wait for your name to be announced. If you wish to cancel your request, please press star two, and if you're on a speaker phone, please pick up the handset to ask your question. Your first question comes from Reg Spencer from Canaccord. Please go ahead.
Oh, hello. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can, Reg.
Oh, good day, Lucas. Hey, Andrew. Thanks for the call. A lot of information to digest. Can I just wanted to start with the guidance for FY2026. If we go back to your updated reserve from a couple of weeks ago, you outlined in that an updated life of mine plan, which called for cash costs of about $911 from memory. Can you tell me, is that, I presume that's a life of mine average and the cash cost guidance for FY2026 reflects the mine plan and I presume a lower strip ratio?
Oh, Reg, sorry, you're referencing the life of mine costs that were in the resources and reserves?
Correct. Correct. Yeah.
Yeah, so obviously that's over a much longer period, Reg, whereas FY2026 is very much focused on near term and the financial year 2026 guidance. Strip ratio is up a little higher during that period as well. There'll be a few elements that we'll be working through in FY2026, and life of mine strip ratio is sort of running closer to about 7.1, and we're a little higher than that in FY2026, just given where we are in the ore body.
Okay, understand. We can take some other more detailed questions offline. Just on the funding for any expansion, given the, I guess, timeline for permitting, and you've outlined in your Gantt chart in there approximate timelines, you don't need to necessarily make a call on the funding of that immediately, right? This is a longer data thing that you can work on and hopefully the market improves between now and then.
Yeah, that's absolutely right, Reg. There's probably a couple of points to note. As it stands, permitting is the critical path for us for the project, the brownfield expansion. There are some opportunities we're looking at for how we might be able to fast track that, but you're absolutely right in that we don't need to make a decision. We've got funding to be able to drive these projects forward in a meaningful way, and importantly, we'll be able to look at non-dilutive options as well. We've really got the full suite in front of us in terms of how we look to fund a potential brownfield expansion at NAL.
If I could put you on the spot, Lucas, and ask you what kind of permitting timeline could we assume here? You know, is this a three-year lead time before you would theoretically commence construction?
Yeah, Reg, it's probably around that piece. There may be sort of potentially nine months that we can crib from what we published in the scoping study, but there's a little bit of optimization there. I think, you know, that's as we outlined with the comments, we really want to make sure that we've got an appropriate and realistic timeframe, and that's what we put in front. We'll be clearly looking to optimize that, but we also want to make sure that we're able to deliver on our commitments. What you're seeing is reflective of that, but we'll be certainly looking to optimize it. That period that you've described is a pretty reasonable assessment. We've already done the baseline. We've had one summer of baseline environmental work. We need to get another one under our belt, and then in parallel, those permitting processes will be kicked off.
Okay, excellent. I've got a bunch of others, but I'll pass it on, and if no one else joins, I'll jump back in the queue. Thanks, Lucas. Appreciate it.
Thanks, Reg.
Thank you. Once again, if you do wish to ask a question, please press star one. Your next question comes from Austin Yun from Macquarie. Please go ahead.
Morning, Lucas and team. Yeah, a lot of information in this update you did. To the extension, to the follow-up on the strip ratio questions, if I may, could you please provide a high-level color on, you know, from 2026 through to 2030, are there any other additional major cutbacks that could impact your strip ratio, given the cost is quite sensitive to that?
Yeah, thanks, Austin. I think probably a couple of things, Austin. If we just look at sort of FY2026 and probably into FY2027, we're still moving through the remnants of those underground stopes. Just from a strip ratio perspective, when you move through those stopes, obviously the ore and the underground operations are being mined, so that diminishes and also increases your strip ratio just by the fact that the ore's not there. Once we get through those, we'll pick up, particularly through the marvelous pegmatite vein, that additional volume. In short, there's a little bit of an influence there. Importantly, Austin, the resource and reserve expansion that we've seen at NAL is along strike and also at depth. We actually see the strip ratio improve over the life of mine to around 7.1.
You can expect that we'll continue to converge on that whilst it's sitting a little higher than that at present. The next couple of years are probably a couple of the higher strip ratio years in the period, and then we'll effectively be pushing into some of those lower strip ratio areas, particularly as the concentrator at the second line would come online.
Thank you, Lucas. Also, just to look at your growth portfolio, the near-term one is brownfield, but even that would take a couple of years. Would you consider to rationalize or find opportunities to monetize your other growth options, given that I believe they'll be even longer dated with increased uncertainties, which could help you to focus on the current operation? The second part of the question is I noted there was no mention of your Australia exploration target. Any updates on that? Thank you.
I'll just close out on Tabatabba first, cycle back on the first part of your question. We've got an exploration program work for Tabatabba this year. It still remains a highly prospective exploration lease, but in the scheme of things, NAL brownfield expansion like Moblan and Ewoyaa are probably a little in front of it. We'll continue to pursue that, but it won't be an immediate priority. Obviously, in this price environment as well, we're very mindful about where we're putting money to work. Coming to your question about the rest of the portfolio and would we have other options to potentially monetize some of those, I think the short answer is yes, Austin, but we're going to take obviously a considered approach on that. We've got valuable development projects in the portfolio.
We're not going to be able to do them all at once, but there is somewhat of a natural sequencing to some of these as well. We don't have to be pulling the trigger on all of them at once. We think that NAL brownfield expansion is very attractive, and obviously we want to be able to push that forward. We'll continue to assess potential options on those other assets, but clearly it's got to be in the best interest of shareholders, and we've got to be able to extract value if we do decide to transact or do anything differently on those other assets.
Thank you, Lucas. Maybe just a last question on the market. You have two offtake contracts with Tesla and LG Chem, which is, like, you know, defined by total volume over a period of time. Have you noticed any change in purchase behaviors by two customers? Any observations that you could share? Thank you.
Yeah, Austin, nothing material to date. It's been pretty consistent with what we've seen historically. Obviously, as Elevra, we've just newly formed and we've picked up the LG Chem and the Tesla contracts. We're strengthening those relationships, and we certainly appreciate having them as off-takers. Clearly, going forward, what we'll be looking for is ensuring that we get offtake agreements that line up with, you know, commercially competitive in the market, but also, you know, as potential options for funding of the likes of the brownfield expansion or Moblan as well. There's a range of options there, and offtake agreements will certainly be a priority for us as we assess it, but ultimately, it's got to be about getting the right commercial terms.
Any increased interest in purchasing the end of term? Sorry, just probably my question wasn't that.
Sorry, Austin, if you could just repeat that, please.
Yeah, I just wondered if any increased purchase from those two customers in the end of term 0.
Not in terms of volume, but clearly, you know, as these offtake agreements come towards the end of term, there's obviously conversations about extending or renegotiating conditions and so forth in commercial terms.
Yep, that's clear. Thank you, Lucas. I'll pass it on.
Thanks, Austin.
Thank you. Your next question comes from Andrew Harrington from Petra Capital. Please go ahead.
Thank you. Morning, Lucas and Andrew. A question on the downstream. You mentioned a few times in the present your partnership opportunities, but you know, Piedmont, you know, had a fairly solid plan to proceed on a hydroxide plant. I guess part of the logic of the warrior was to feed that plant alongside with NAL material. How do those pieces fit together now and how do you see supplying to North America?
Yeah. Morning, Andrew. Thank you for the questions. I think at the outset, just to make it very clear, Elevra's strength is around identifying, developing, and operating hard rock spodumene concentrate mines. That's where our strength is and that's where we'll focus. Our involvement with downstream is very much about being able to provide secure, reliable sources of spodumene concentrate for downstream producers. Shareholders should not and will not see us stepping into downstream conversion as an operator or an investor. We'll be very much focused on upstream. With that in mind, the Tennessee operation, that lithium hydroxide facility that Piedmont had contemplated, effectively that project will not sit in the portfolio. That was where the warrior tons were from Ghana originally destined. If we move a little bit closer in the U.S. to North Carolina, the Carolina project's contemplated integrated project.
That's a spodumene mine in addition to an integrated lithium hydroxide facility. Clearly, the capital estimate on that will have gone up significantly since Piedmont had undertaken that work. In addition to coming back to my earlier comments, we'd need to be partnering with someone that's got the technical capability and know-how to be able to operate a lithium hydroxide or chemical facility. Today, seeing those developed and operating outside of China has been problematic and typically haven't been a commercial technical success. I think that is very much a sort of longer dated option in that space. Encouragingly, what we are seeing is more interest in Quebec. Obviously, Rio Tinto and Investissement Québec have got their Bécancour facility. We took a drive down there in early February and construction was underway there. We're going to see how that comes along.
There are a number of other players that are also, I think, particularly on the back of some of the tariffs and so forth and trying to build out capacity in the West. We're seeing renewed interest in Quebec. That'd be a great outcome for us with NAL. Obviously, it'll knock a big chunk of logistics costs out. It'll also support the Quebec government's ambition around developing a battery ecosystem. We're certainly focused on being a secure and reliable source of spodumene concentrate, but it'll be principally as a supplier and not as an operator and investor in downstream capacities.
Okay, that's very clear. Does that mean that you can, are these assets with, you know, or development projects that can be sold or contributed to a partnership as part of your capital contribution to something like that?
I think that's one of the real strengths that Elevra's got is that we're unincumbered on the balance sheet. There's no secure debt on the balance sheet. We're sitting with a nice strong capital position, which secures the balance sheet and also gives us the opportunity, particularly unlocking NAL and being able to look at different structures for being able to finance these projects. As you alluded to, for example, Ewoyaa, there might be something there to be done as well. There's a range of options and I'd suggest that nothing's off the table in terms of some of those other longer dated development projects within the portfolio.
Okay, thank you. In terms of supply from NAL into Tesla, is that now officially into Corpus Christi, or how is that timeline proceeding? Is LG a customer in North America, or where is that material going?
Yeah, we've been, Piedmont's been supplying material to Tesla destined for Corpus Christi. That continues on foot. With LG Chem, they've gone to a variety of refiners as well. As everyone's aware on the call, 95% of the world's capacity is sitting in China. Typically, our spot sales have been destined for China. You'd have to sort of be a discussion point for LG Chem in terms of exactly where they're refining their offtake material.
What are the prospects for more of your material to be destined for North America?
I think, as I said, we're watching closely in terms of where Rio Tinto and Investissement Québec get to with the Arcadium or the Bécancour facility with the lithium hydroxide. We've heard that they may be commissioning in the first part of calendar year 2026. That may present an opportunity for us. We've also seen inbound interest around other proponents that are quite keen on Quebec, principally because Quebec's got a low cost of power and it's hydro. Not only is it efficient, but it's environmentally friendly. There are a number of areas there. I think it's a bit of a case of watch this space, but I can certainly assure shareholders that's a focal point for us over the next 18 months around looking at what these partnerships might look like, principally in a capacity of providing a secure and reliable source of spodumene concentrate.
Thank you very much. I don't want to hog the line, but one last question on the possibility of debt to fund the expansions or the additions. How do you see that playing out?
Yeah, again, Andrew, back to early comments, the fact that we haven't got any secure debt on the balance sheet gives us a whole range of options there as well. Interesting enough, we'd spoken about the scoping study. Whilst it's only been released to the market now, we had seen quite a bit of interest around people prepared to provide debt into the facility as well, but that's just one of a range of options that we'll have there, Andrew, to be able to consider how we go about NAL and Moblan and so on.
I'd just add, Andrew, you know, we'll look at everything which includes government grants, offtake repayments, strategic partnerships. The whole range of financing options are on the table, and we've received significant interest across some of those areas.
Okay, excellent. Thanks, guys. I'll pass it on.
Thanks, Andrew.
Thank you. Once again, if you wish to ask a question, please press star one. We'll wait a moment for any final questions to register.
I actually have a couple of questions from online, which I might take at the moment if that's okay.
Thank you. Please go ahead.
Okay, so Lucas, a question about the saying it took an impairment charge for its assets in the latest financials. Can you clarify the rationale for not recognizing a similar impairment charge on the Carolina lithium project?
Yeah, thanks, Andrew.
Just as a follow-on, was the potential for an impairment considered in the due diligence process with the merger?
Thanks. I guess a couple of things. The impairment that Sayona booked in its financial year 2025 was essentially in relation to deterioration in lithium price and also the impact of the Piedmont off-take agreement, which was still in place. Obviously, that now has evaporated with the Elevra merger, but just to give people the background, in short, the Piedmont off-take agreement limited NAL's upside and Sayona's upside on that. Essentially, that's why an impairment was required in the FY2025 accounts. Given that we hadn't merged at that point, the Piedmont assets weren't contemplated in terms of whether any impairments might be required. That will obviously be an assessment that's undertaken in FY2026. As always, impairments are dependent upon a number of factors, depending upon what work might have been advanced in terms of resource and reserves, pricing, and so forth.
We'll pick that up in the normal course of business. Clearly, during due diligence, both Piedmont and Sayona looked at each other's portfolios and stress-tested those cases as well. I think interestingly and importantly, if you look at the results of the scoping study, just by unlocking NAL in and of itself, if you're a Sayona shareholder, the value has certainly been delivered through that, through the potential of that scoping study, which would not have been possible in the event that the Piedmont off-take agreement hadn't stayed in place and we hadn't completed the merger. In summary, FY2026, normal course of business, we'll be testing all the assets for impairment as is required. There was a robust process during the due diligence associated with the merger.
Great, thank you. I just know we've had a few questions on NAL project timelines and permitting. I think that all the information people are looking for in the assets release is in place. We'll move on to corporate strategy. The board's consistently stated its commitment to delivering value to shareholders. Could you be more specific about the go-forward strategy and what are the key actionable initiatives the management team will execute over the next 12 months to drive shareholder value?
Yeah, thanks, Andrew. Really three key aspects for us. First being just continue to drive operational improvement at NAL. It's continuing to strive to drive volumes up, drive our unit costs out, and effectively increase margins in that space. Second component is advancing the projects. Obviously, with the release of the scoping study, we're very excited about the prospect there. Moving that project along again into PFS/DFS study phases will be a key aspect. The third component, as we discussed briefly with both Andrew and I think Reg also touched on it, is the integration of our logistics chain into potential converters within Quebec. That's obviously got some commercial benefits in knocking out the logistics costs. You can expect to see that.
Importantly, just referencing Andrew's sort of final question in relation to thinking about debt for funding the NAL brownfield project, we've got a range of options, and as Andrew Barber described, including government funding, loans, and those sort of things, in addition to the traditional sort of debt and partnering arrangements. There's really quite a high number of non-dilutive options available for us to be able to fund the growth pipeline moving forward. We're very excited about it, and they're really the key areas that people expect us to be head down, bum up over the next 18 months.
All right, thanks, Lucas. Just moving on to the two NAL and Moblan projects, what's the timeframe for moving those, the NAL expansion and Moblan, to definitive feasibility study status?
Thanks, Andrew. An interesting option we've got with NAL is whether we actually move straight to DFS, just given that we understand the geology so well. We understand the metallurgy of the operation. We understand how to mine it. The flotation circuits are running really well. We understand the grindability and so forth. It may well be an option that we move straight to DFS at NAL, which would shorten the delivery timeframe. Having said that, we've got to line that up with the permitting aspects associated with NAL. With Moblan, we've had a DFS in the market. I think what's obviously now changed is the resource base is now over 120 million tons on a 100% basis. That really gives rise to being able to support a much larger production profile than was originally contemplated. We'll be revisiting that.
We're just thinking about how we go about doing that in a meaningful way. In parallel, getting the environmental baseline work underway is imperative because the reality with the greenfield project in Quebec, you're really looking at a minimum five-year permitting horizon. They're the key aspects that are in play. As we said during the presentation, we've endeavored to put out what we consider timelines that we'll be able to deliver upon. There's clearly opportunity to optimize, but we certainly don't want to be putting out targets that really just don't bear any resemblance to what reality is. The permitting horizon, particularly with the greenfield projects, is really five years in Quebec.
Great, thank you. Just moving to Ewoyaa. What are our plans for Ewoyaa now that the proposed Tennessee plant has been merged into the Carolina lithium project?
Thanks. Just falling back onto Andrew Harrington's question, as you said, the Tennessee project, that won't proceed in the portfolio for Elevra. Ewoyaa was destined to feed that plant. We like the Ewoyaa project. It's the JV with Atlantic Lithium. Technically, we like it. One of the elements associated with that is that we hold 22.5% of that JV arrangement. We've got another opportunity to earn in further. That requires us to put in the first $70 million and then fund 50-50 thereafter. Let's say the project's at $185 million. Elevra would be funding the first $70 million and then 50-50 on the remaining $110 million. We'd be funding around two-thirds of the project.
If we contrast that with the opportunity that we've got at NAL, we'd like to think that NAL is probably a much stronger and robust project, and it's in Elevra's best interest to be able to push that project forward. We certainly like Ewoyaa. We've got a great relationship with Atlantic. Importantly, Atlantic have been working with the Ghanaian government around potential resetting of the fiscal regime for that project as well, which would certainly help. As we've said, we're not going to be able to do all the projects at once. It's a question of sequencing, and that's something we're actively engaged with Atlantic on.
Thanks. Just a couple of quick questions of clarification. With the NAL expansion, we advised mine life would be 24 years. Does that mean it will be from 2030 or is it from now?
No, so that's effectively from now. In short, we've got 48 million tons of reserves, and essentially we get up to filling them, feeding the mill at around about 2 million tons a year. The math is pretty straightforward through that period. Yeah, we've got a great resource base ahead of us, and you know, we're very excited about the brownfield expansion possibility.
Thank you. We sort of had a question like this, but just to clarify again, in the NAL resource and reserve statement from a couple of weeks ago, we've quoted long-term prices for that reserve at $1,250, and we've used nearly $1,400 in the scoping study. What's the difference?
Yeah, so these are a sort of a range of things. Typically, we'll pick up when consensus is and so forth across the market, and some of this is just around timing. I think importantly, what the NAL brownfield expansion case demonstrates is it's robust under all price cycles. It's somewhat a little academic, and you will see sort of these variances from time to time between when a resource is issued and then when a scoping study might be complete. Again, robust expansion case, and we're really very excited about being able to deliver upon it. Importantly, given the C1 cost position that that expansion case will occupy, we'll really be bulletproof through the cycles.
Great. For the NAL expansion, you've indicated that it would be four years to build the concentrator. It seems all in time considering the Moblan DFS suggested it could be done in 39 months. What's the difference here?
Yeah, look, I think a couple of things. Clearly, when the Moblan DFS was put out, probably not as much was understood around the permitting regime within Quebec. As I'd mentioned previously, a greenfield project, you're really looking at a minimum of five years horizon to be able to get that project permitted. It suggests the DFS might have been a little aggressive for Moblan. We've got experience in permitting in Quebec. We understand with the brownfield expansion at NAL, it's truncated as compared to the greenfield case. It's not a case that we're delaying this or prolonging it. We've just got to work methodically through the permitting process and then sequence the construction piece thereafter. Physical construction is probably around 18 months- 24 months. It's really just getting the permitting squared away upfront that extends the period for NAL.
As I said, we're looking to optimize that, but we'll be doing that in a considered and risk-based approach.
With the build of that second concentrator, is it likely to interrupt production from the original concentrator?
Short answer is no. The reason for it is that the front end of the plant, effectively, they're disconnected. Essentially, we'll be able to just sort of cut that across. The engineers applied a pretty smart design in how they're approaching it. The short answer is, when I'm talking about cut over, we're probably talking about a week or so. There won't be a significant disruption. It's really down to some engineering sparks about how they're designing the facility and ensuring that there's some redundancy there as we go about cutting it over.
Thanks. That's questions. I just had one comment. We obviously won't go into individual shareholder positions or questions on this forum, but if you do have those sorts of questions, please contact us at the investor relations email, ir@elevralithium.com, and we're more than happy to address those there. How many, that's all the questions I have now unless there's anything more on the teleconference.
Thank you. There are no further phone questions at this time. I'll hand back for any closing remarks.
I just want to say a big thank you. It's obviously a very exciting day for us to be providing the market update as Elevra, and we're really looking forward to what the future holds. We have a great set of opportunities for development, and importantly, we've got a great operating asset at NAL. We're energized and very enthusiastic about what the future holds for us. I just want to say a big thank you for everyone that joined and also for the questions. Have a great day.
That does conclude our conference for today. Thank you for participating. You may now disconnect.