Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
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.
GFD, anyone suggesting you are in the pay of kodal is just winding you up to elicit another of your epistles.An inability to accept any criticism of your conjecture has never been anything but a distraction for me and I am sure many others.It does not reflect in the SP or I dare say change opinions only to harder them.If you are only willing to look at one side of a painting you will only ever get one side of the picture.
This will probably send you off on one again, but maybe their are others reading that will understand declaring a view point as life or death does not make it more accurate.
Now time for my afternoon tea.
For years now I been consistent on one thing the belief that we have a very large and high level of lithium. This has always been my default position and that given the right assistance to action all the requirements to mine/process it it will be profitable.
Constant confusion has been allowed to flourish due to some reckless behaviour by the Board.Their use of words like, soon,fast tracking,and on they go indicating that all is virtually imminent when it is far from it.They should have been more direct when targets were and are missed and given accurate answers rather than sugar coating or ignoring them all together.
They in my opinion just about stay on this side of the line of accuracy .The drilling results which really matter are 100 % and everything else can be read with two meanings or cause the rise of fair questioning.
I am not being negative but the initial 5,000 tonne sample to be sent to SR is the clearest example of a continuous moving target.Greater accuracy to allay concerns, a proof reader and dealing with questions of concern rather than evasion would have kept this BB united.
Can anyone justify why a simple statement giving an indication when the Esia result maybe expected has not been issued.These things matter and could be so easily attended to rather than allowing festering.
I am still staying clear of well walked grounds here, but doing a Nelson will not be tolerated for ever.
Indeed, let’s get this show on the road Bernie my son.....
Very well explained ARahim, that's certainly how I read it.
There are some who will continue to try and seek negatives wherever they may exist. This RNS puts paid to the talk that DMS only is not possible, ESIA next please Bernie.... Let's get this show on the road.
they used (30:70) because Ngoualana has larger granes ore but the others have fine grane ore and Ngoualana represent 30% of the ore identified so far.
bb, the are saying:
DMS test work on the Ngoualana Prospect mineralisation returned primary concentrate grades of 6.0% Li2O at recoveries of up to 70%. That is because it has the large mineral grains.
· A master composite comprising 70% Sogola-Baoulé and 30% Ngoualana tested initially with the DMS circuit was followed by downstream flotation test work which improved overall recovery to 75%, producing a 6.0% grade Li2O concentrate.
so they are testing two option, as to up to 70%, that is because they used different cashing grades, one of them produced the 70%, not necessarily the finest one, as this will create fine dust which will need flotation.
so we have two paths start using the first option, it is cheap and produce 70% or mix the lot (30:70) and use the more sophisticated process and produce 75%.
If they adopt the first process, we will have 3 years production then we will need to upgrade to flotation. If we use the second process then we have to upgrade now.
so there is no cumulative process that will produce 55% as you are trying to infer.
So, the coarse grained Ngoualana mineralisation, has savings on the crasher, as it does not to be very fine and it has savings on the floating as it does not need floating. but as the recovery rate is 70% the rest of 30% will be stored till we have the more sophisticated process to use more grinding and added flotation to produce 75% return.
It is good as we will have enough time to make some profit and upgrade the process form the income generated. This as well may suggest that extending the other mines will be relaxed for a while as we will have enough time and resources to do so. this may as well suggest that funding will be from sc as there no pressure on upgrading the jorc before funding.
what they are saying is:
the coarse grained Ngoualana mineralisation does not need floating to generate good results '70% recovery rate at 6% concentrate', hence they cost of the initial plant 'without floating process' will be cheaper.
so they are likely to build the first cheap plant and generate revenue for few years before they need to upgrade to using floating.
the residue from the first process of Ngoualana will be used later to enrich the floating process that might be needed to process the other deposits. hence the mix 30% residue + 70% from the finer grains of the other mines.
In general we are talking about a cheap process that may last a few years before upgrading the process to use flotation and finer grains inputs.
Things now becoming clearer...
The drilling planned for October was with intention to upgrade some resource to reserve status (according to BA during a podcast back in February), I wonder how the lack of funding from the last placing will affect that plan? I assumed we need to upgrade our resource to feed into the feasibility study?
Joeman,all good with me and you as always.We shall enjoy the day for what it is , but I expect i will return to my good old negative self before long.
7% rise not to be sniffed.
Cheers.
You're ok Roo.... I don't think you have used the term here before...
I was referring to the fact that funding gets discussed at least weekly albeit with differing opinions, so its not really an elephant in the room. It was a glib comment because you quite often talk about funding (and quite rightly too.... the mine wont be developed on a air of goodwill alone).
Never used " elephant in the room" before on the BB as far as I am aware.It wasn`t my intent to cast doubt in my post the opposite in fact as I repeat I do not have the knowledge to say that this RNS is very good or otherwise.I am quite happy that the general concensus of opinion is favourable by those that do have knowledge and indeed celebrate it.
I will say no more which should avoid being misquoted.
I3lip, it’s great news to be fair.
I few doubters said you couldn’t get a 6% spod using a DMS, seems we can to start off with.
Ngoualana is key, I wonder in time if they can go deeper in those pits, seems like an abundance of resource is available the deeper they go.
To be clear this means we can mine the Ngoualana (3.1Mt) resource using only DMS. However the other deposits WILL require the addition of a flotation circuit. IMO this is not great, but not terrible. It means we get ~3 years of mining out of Ngoualana (assuming some of the inferred becomes indicated and we use a 1.5Mtpa plant) for the £70m DMS. All the while I suspect we will continue to explore while we look to fund and build the flotation circuit. The take away from this of course is that the project will be able to provide the 6%Li0 required to be viable but we can't do away with the flotation entirely. This shouldn't really come as a surprise but it's good to have the numbers at last.
In my opinion THIS RNS is nothing but good news..... only problem is we are all waiting with baited breath for the ESIA, which needs to come soon. I like the podcasts too SorB but i'd prefer him to do one after the ESIA comes out.
GFD, I think you have to accept that Roo has this concern about funding (not sure you can call it an elephant Roo since you mention it in so many of your posts.... definition is that its a big issue that nobody ever talks about).
This RNS must reduce the scale of the funding concern though.... surely.... If the £70million CAPEX requirement is now FAR more likely than the £200million flotation circuit option and the achievable concentration is 6%, then this project should on paper be attractive even with a $600-700 spod price. .... am I missing something?
They still need to get their fingers out on delivering their other near terms goals though..... a single swallow does not a summer make.....
Not that I like the podcasts BA does but I’m interested in the one that should turn up later.
What makes me laugh is we’re all screaming for news and when we get it we’re all scratching our heads as we can’t tell if it’s good or bad.
Next up is assays and ESIA submission, I’m thinking this could drop before the weekend.
I don`t understand this RNS due to ignorance, but I am prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt that mining and those knowledgeable in such matters find it totally acceptable.
My little concern regarding ESIA i will put to one side for the present,that still leaves the issue of where the funding for the future of this venture is coming.The last fund raising attempt and share issue was far from successful coming up £200k light.
I am pleased this "MET" report is viewed positively but the elephant in the room has far from gone away.
GLA.