London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
NM spent 100m SEK then sold to a state miner. hmm.........
For anyone whose interested in what you can do with the stuff when you've dug it out....nickel makes stainless steel easier to weld, chromium is the anti rust ingredient.
I think Archelon is state owned.
From memory about the NM case, the nickel makes Sweden self-sufficient in an important component of stainless steel and that gave its ANI unshakeable status. Let's hope the economic benefit to Jokkmokk, the Inlandesban and the Port does it for us
bearing in mind the Nickle Mountain case it is difficult to see how any No can be justified - in that case the reindeer were actually grazing on the land and there was incontrovertible proof that the Sami would be affected badly by it. I don't think it was even an area designated for mining (like us). In our case the reindeer only have to cross a road twice a year. We know there are plenty of bridge/tunnel designs to get round this. Much of this comes down to the value of the iron ore - we have a huge amount of very high quality. The Gov't know full well that any No would be overturned on appeal. The only issue here is how long people want to keep waiting. The Gov't gave an early indication to Copperstone last year that they would be successful - the SP shot up. This is why you can't hang around waiting for news - anything positive, with a limited number of shares available, will mean you cannot buy until the SP has peaked. If Lbjj is serious about an investment here in the future he should bear that in mind. It's been a long wait but even the most cynical of us expect a Yes decision this year. And we're not a one trick pony as today's rns shows - who knows how much Finland could be worth?
Don't agree with that Mwilliams... that is can't be a No at this stage but it can in the next stage... .I think it can be a No at this stage but unlikely to be a No at the Environmental Court Stage because that is a process which can be worked out whereas this is the actual decision to grant a 25 year licence to exploit the resource. In other words this is the sharp end. And perhaps you could explain at which point in the process so far was the Rubicon crossed that means it can't be a No? If I were to venture a guess, I'd say it was when the MI referred it to the government with their recommendation that it fulfilled all the requirements necessary for a concession. Arguing with myself here, I think but it's easy to lose the plot in this dark thicket.
50p Q2, 1p Q3 following a Russian invasion of Scandinavia, 7p Q4 following the human sacrifice of Boris Johnson and the quid pro quo withdrawal of Russian troops
Exactly........Progress with patience...It's too far down the line for a NO and legally it can't be a no at this stag. It may be a no for BEM when they legally need to assess the environmental impacts, but not a No at this stage. 25p Q2
well, I say recent..... interesting comparison though; R�nnb�cken is a planned mining project in the north of Sweden in the V�sterbotten County. It is regarded as one of the largest nickel reserves in Sweden having estimated reserves of 340 million tonnes of ore grading 0.18% nickel.[1] The 340 million tonnes of ore contains 0.61 million tonnes of nickel metal.[1] The project has been developed by the Nickel Mountain Group.[2] By 2015-12-31 the exploitation permits were sold to the Swedish company Archelon AB,[3] since Nickel Mountain switched to debt collection business(!). The licence was successful in 2014; Exploitation Concessions to NMG 31 Oct 2014 The exploitation concessions granted to Nickel Mountain Group by the Swedish Chief Mine Inspector have been a heavily debated issue over time. Vapsten reindeer husbandry co-operative conducts its reindeer husbandry in the area of the Ronnbacken nickel project. Vapsten has tried to stop or delay the project IMth reference to its concerns that the project will negatively influence the reindeer husbandry around the area of the future nickel mine. NMG respects Vapsten's position, although NMG considers that the mining activities and the reindeer herding can co-exist. Vapsten appealed the Chief Mine Inspector's decisions to grant three exploitation concessions for the Ronnbacken nickel project. In 2013 Vapsten applied to the SAC ( Sw.� H�gsta F�rvaltningsdomstolen) for a judicial review of the SIMldish Government's decision to dismiss the appeals. A hearing took place in Stockholm in June this year. The SAC (Swedish Supreme Administrative Court) has now published its ruling dated October 29, according to which the Government's decision is upheld. The SAC finds that Government's decision is not in conflict with any rule of law. The ruling by the SAC is not a decision that assesses the detailed environmental issues relating to the possible future mining activities. These issues will be assessed by the Land and Environment Court in the coming process for a permit under the Environmental Code. For NMG this SAC ruling is important since the pending process has created a lot of uncertainty for the project. NMG can now move forward with the initiated pre-feasibility study (PFS) and later on submit its application for an environmental permit.
There's no date on that summary and I'm presuming this is about Nickel Mountain's project at Ronnbacken, which received it's exploitation concession in June 2010 and which was opposed by the Sami village of Vapsten but they were not given leave to appeal. A judicial review followed in accordance with Sweden's obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights and I don't know what was the result of that.maybe it's still ongoing!
Tintin, thanks for that court ruling info. Very interesting.
from avanza; The Berg State granted BK as a cohabitant appealed to the government. The government rejected the appeal. Samebyn then appealed to the government's decision to the Supreme Administrative Court. Samebyn stated that the planned mining was within a very important reindeer husbandry area in a joint year-round land. It was not about an area that the riders would only pass but about a very important grazing area during April-June and also during August-September. According to the cohabitation, only a quarter of the reindeer could be retained and five of the cohabiting seven reindeer husbandry companies would have to be shut down. As the remaining companies would not be able to guard and move alone, the consequence would be that the reindeer husbandry completely ceased in cohabitation. The company pointed out that the deposit was very large, would create many jobs and that significant social benefits would not be achieved if the mine was not allowed. The government stated that it was estimated that the mining and mining operations could not coexist within the concession areas during the time the mining operation will last. The government assessed that the national interest in mineral deposits would be given priority in the area in question. The Government also pointed out that, at its forthcoming permit review, the Land and Environmental Court could regulate how mining operations could be carried out so that the disturbances from the business affected the activities of Samebyn as little as possible. The Supreme Administrative Court stated that if the run is to be given priority, it would have meant that a very large nickel authority could not be processed. The Court also found that mining would lead to significant adverse effects on reindeer husbandry even on land surrounding the concession areas themselves, especially in close proximity to these areas. According to the Court, however, it was not possible to assess the extent to which the mining operation would be carried out It's not hard to see the parallel to Beowulf's application for what is said to be "one of Europe's largest known unbroken iron ore deposits". As I see it, the odds were a worse one for the mine that the matter was about. The fact that the Supreme Administrative Court nevertheless said yes means that at this moment, I can not see any alternative but Beowulf gets yes by the government. How could they motivate a no
MACARTHUR MINERALS LIMITED (TSXV.MMS) Market Cap: 11.73 MCAD, (approximately 74.76 MSEK) https://macarthurminerals.com/The Highest Administrative Court found that if the run/Sami is to be given priority, it would have meant that a very large nickel mine could not be processed. The court also found that the mining operation would have significant adverse effects on reindeer husbandry even on land surrounding the concession area itself So, even where the reindeer business would have "significant adverse effects" the court said the value of the mine justified a licence. Kind of difficult to say no now isn't it?