Stardust Power is positioning itself as a domestic builder of battery-grade lithium processing capacity in the United States, with a central project designed to produce battery-grade lithium carbonate in Muskogee, Oklahoma. The company presents a refinery-led approach to strengthen North American supply chains for electric vehicle batteries and stationary storage, targeting a planned annual capacity of 50,000 tonnes delivered over two phases. Financially and operationally, the company remains in an early-stage, capital-intensive phase: share trading shows elevated volumes but persistent losses and a small market capitalization relative to established peers. Regulatory and capital markets events have shaped the company’s near-term outlook, including a recent Nasdaq compliance notice and an underwritten offering to raise additional liquidity. Investors and industry stakeholders evaluate Stardust Power alongside legacy producers and battery-materials innovators — from Albemarle and Livent to advanced recycling and cell-tech players such as Redwood Materials and QuantumScape — while also considering potential offtake and customer links to OEMs and cell manufacturers like Tesla, Panasonic and CATL. This profile compiles structured company data, project specifics, financial signals, partnerships and risk factors to facilitate direct comparison with peers and to assist decision-makers assessing North American lithium-processing capacity.
Stardust Power — Company profile & key corporate data (Stardust Power company information)
This section presents a table-first, fact-focused snapshot of corporate attributes relevant to lithium market participants, investors and analysts. The goal is to place core corporate identifiers and resource/processing metrics in a single reference layout for quick comparison with peers. The table below consolidates publicly available facts, corporate filings and press disclosures into standardized fields used across industry directories.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Company Name | Stardust Power Inc. |
| Ticker(s) & Exchange(s) | SDST / NASDAQ (subject to listing qualifications) |
| Country | United States / Incorporated in Delaware |
| Headquarters | Greenwich, Connecticut |
| Founded | 2022 |
| CEO | Company filings list executive leadership; refer to investor relations |
| Employees | Small corporate and project development staff; growing as construction advances |
| Sector | Mining / Processing / Batteries (Lithium processing & battery materials) |
| Sub-Sector | Lithium refining (battery-grade lithium carbonate production) |
| Market Cap (USD) | Approximately $27M (public market snapshot; fluctuates with trading) |
| Revenue (USD) | Minimal operating revenue; development-stage expenditures dominate |
| Net Income (USD) | Consistent operating losses reported in filings |
| Lithium Production (tonnes LCE/year) | Planned initial capacity: 50,000 t/year battery-grade Li2CO3 (phased delivery) |
| Main Mines / Projects | Muskogee, Oklahoma lithium refinery (processing-focused; sourcing feedstock from domestic brines) |
| Project Locations | Muskogee, Oklahoma (primary); sourcing network: U.S. brine producers and potential domestic suppliers |
| Proven & Probable Reserves | Not applicable — refinery developer (depends on feedstock purchase agreements rather than own reserves) |
| Processing Facilities | Planned refinery in Muskogee (two-phase build to 50,000 tpa Li2CO3) |
| Exploration Stage (If junior) | Not an exploration company; project development / construction stage |
| Key Partnerships / Clients | Planned sourcing from U.S. brine projects; potential offtake discussions with battery makers and OEM supply chains |
| Stock Index Membership | NASDAQ-listed (subject to continued compliance); not a member of major indices |
| ESG / Sustainability Initiatives | Claims focus on U.S. supply security and sustainable processing; details in filings and project disclosures |
| Website | https://stardust-power.com/ |
Key comparators in the market are firms such as Albemarle, Livent, and Piedmont Lithium for upstream and refining scope, and companies like Redwood Materials for circularity efforts. Corporate disclosures and investor resources are available through the investor relations portal: investor site and official news pages at company news releases and third-party coverage such as the June 2025 public offering.
- Core business model: refining and producing battery-grade Li2CO3 for EV and stationary storage supply chains.
- Market position: early-stage domestic processor targeting U.S. demand and supply-security goals.
- Key near-term metric: successful execution of project finance and regulatory milestones for Muskogee facility.
The profile table above functions as a single-point reference for comparing Stardust Power with peers and assessing whether the firm is a major producer, a mid-tier processor, or an emerging project developer. For direct stock-data snapshots and market commentary see third-party profiles such as StockAnalysis and Bloomberg. Final insight: Stardust Power is a project-focused developer whose market value and perceived risk hinge on project delivery and feedstock agreements.
Technical design and project execution plan for the Muskogee lithium refinery (lithium refinery Muskogee capacity & timeline)
The Muskogee project is the company’s focal asset. This section examines tangible engineering, staging, sourcing and commissioning plans, and contrasts them to industry design principles commonly employed by larger refiners and chemical processors. The detailed discussion covers phase sequencing, feedstock chemistry considerations, processing steps to battery-grade carbonate, and implications for customers such as cell manufacturers and OEMs.
| Project Component | Stardust Power Plan |
|---|---|
| Location | Muskogee, Oklahoma |
| Design Capacity | 50,000 tpa Li2CO3 (two-phase: initial ramp then full capacity) |
| Feedstock | U.S. brine sources and domestic lithium concentrates via purchase agreements |
| Primary Processes | Pre-treatment, lithium extraction chemistry (brine to lithium intermediates), purification to battery-grade carbonate |
| Commissioning Target | Phased commissioning following permitting and equipment delivery |
Engineering considerations include the chemical pathway chosen for brine conversion, the solvent and reagent inventory, water and effluent management, and quality control suitable for OEM battery requirements. Some refiners prefer a direct lithium carbonate route, while others use intermediate lithium hydroxide production for certain cathode chemistries. Stardust Power’s public materials emphasize carbonate production, which aligns with demand from many battery manufacturers.
- Processing steps: brine sourcing → pre-treatment → lithium extraction → purification → crystallization of Li2CO3.
- Quality control: analytics to meet battery-grade specifications, typically >99.5% purity and tight impurity specs for iron, calcium and sulfate.
- Environmental controls: effluent handling, reagent recycling, and energy-use optimization to reduce carbon intensity.
Examples and comparisons underline the engineering path. For instance, established processors in South America and Australia deploy large evaporation ponds or direct extraction technologies, while U.S.-based developers emphasize contained chemical processing to reduce land use and permit complexity. If Stardust Power secures feedstock via long-term contracts, the refinery’s utilization profile could approach typical chemical plant baselines of 70–90% once stabilized.
| Risk | Mitigant |
|---|---|
| Feedstock availability | Lock-in of supply contracts and diversified supplier network |
| Construction schedule slippage | Phased procurement, contingency in schedule, fixed-price contracts where feasible |
| Quality variance | Robust QC systems and fallback processing pathways |
Potential customers include cell and cathode manufacturers and OEMs seeking U.S.-sourced lithium. Conversations in the market frequently reference firms such as Tesla, Panasonic and CATL as strategic offtake targets for North American supply, though formal agreements are not publicly disclosed at scale. The strategic insight: project execution and secured feedstock contracts define whether the Muskogee plant will transition from a planned capacity to predictable, marketable supply.
Financial position, capital markets activity and listing status (Stardust Power market cap, offering and Nasdaq notice)
Financial dynamics are central to project developers. This segment outlines recent capital markets events, liquidity actions, analyst perspectives and the specific regulatory notification related to Nasdaq listing standards. It evaluates the firm’s fundraising steps, public-market indicators, and the implications of a compliance process for shareholders and creditors.
| Metric | Reported / Public |
|---|---|
| Recent offering | Underwritten public offering with gross proceeds of approximately $4.3M (June 2025) |
| Market cap (snapshot) | ~$27M (subject to trading volatility) |
| Trading volume | Average trading volume noted in public summaries: ~963,000 shares |
| Analyst sentiment | Mixed: recent Buy target of $11.00 from one analyst; AI models indicate Underperform signals |
| Listing status | Received Nasdaq notice for failure to meet minimum market value of listed securities requirement; company plans to request hearing |
Key public filings show a June 2025 underwritten offering that generated gross proceeds near $4.3 million; details are in the GlobeNewswire release and in the company’s filings. Links to the offering announcement and investor materials provide primary-source context: offering release and the broader news hub at investor news.
- Capital sufficiency: current proceeds are modest relative to projected construction CAPEX; further equity or project finance will be required.
- Listing risk: Nasdaq notice raises the possibility of transfer to another tier or a hearing to present a compliance plan; see coverage at Investing.com and commentary at TipRanks.
- Analyst landscape: divergent assessments — some forecasts are constructive while quantitative signals flag operational and liquidity risks.
Market participants should weigh the following operational-financial interplay: the refinery project’s capital intensity means that construction delays or cost overruns could require dilutive financings. A specific tool to aid peer comparison of capital structure and market metrics is included below.
Comparateur : Stardust Power vs Concurrents
Comparez Stardust Power avec Albemarle, Livent et Piedmont Lithium selon la capitalisation, capacité de production, la liquidité et le CAPEX projet. Les valeurs sont éditables et un score global est calculable en ajustant les poids.
| Entreprise | Capitalisation ($M) | Capacité (t/an) | Liquidité (M$ 30j) | CAPEX projet ($M) | Score |
|---|
Informations API (optionnel)
URL : https://query1.finance.yahoo.com/v7/finance/quote?symbols=ALB;LTHM;PLL
Exemple de réponse : voir en haut du bloc.
David Miller is a financial writer and analyst who has spent more than ten years studying how natural resources shape the global economy. His work often gravitates toward lithium and other battery metals, not just because of their financial weight, but because of their role in the world’s energy transition and the shift toward cleaner technologies.
Having followed the rise of electric vehicles and renewable energy from both an investment and environmental perspective, David believes that telling the story of each company matters. Behind every market cap or production figure, there are people, communities, and long-term projects that define how the lithium supply chain evolves.
In this directory, his goal is to provide profiles that are accurate, comparable, and accessible, but also written with an awareness of the bigger picture: how each company contributes to the future of energy, mobility, and sustainability.