Firering Strategic Minerals: From explorer to producer. 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.
As I said a few days ago I am currently in contact with a friend's son who is doing a PHd in porphyries to try and unpack the logic behind what seem like high grades used when doing the met work - as reported in the last RNS. Although there have been no 'light bulb' moments I think I'm coming around to the idea that the met results would be consistent for both high and low grade samples but that using high grades give clearer results. Also, as I mentioned previously, maybe the lion's share of the copper will come from the higher grade areas of the pit and therefore it is acceptable to use these for the met work.
If anything new turns up I will let you guys know.
Cygnus.
I've been paying much attention reecenfly, so worrying this has been discovered or discounted.
Imo, for me the metal work used those grades because phase 1 of the pit will concentrate on the highest grades to cover the capex as quickly as possible and bring in a reasonable IRR -20-30%. Phase 2 of the open pit will bring in the lower grades (above .15%l essentially in a cheap way as they just need to cover opex and make profit imo.
Theice,
Yes, that occurred to me also but then the samples were said to have been taken from 3 different RC areas (plus 1 from Ascot) implying that those grades are available in each of those areas. Would be nice to think that those grades exist across the whole of the pit but the assays (generally) say otherwise.
Cygnus - If you look at the drill hole summary that is provided with the latest drill update RNS, you'll see that just about every drill hole in phase 1 & 2 has sections where the grade is 0.33-0.48%. Some sections are substantially higher.
Stevemocal,
Yes, maybe you are right. It is difficult to get a sense of what the average across a large area is when the 'hot' zones are so patchy.
On a slightly different subject, I think the 15+ g/T of gold at Ascot suggests that there is a lot more there. You don't (almost) randomly drill hundreds of metres below the surface and accidentally hit a 2 metre stretch of gold like that.
Hi Cygnus
Do you know by any chance if your Porphyry PHD colleague has attempted to run a technique called kringing on any of the available assays and hole data ?
I feel they have chosen a career / academic path which will be in great future demand !
andmillsy,
I've never heard of kringing but I can ask.
Hi Cygnus yeah it really was either good fortune or the resulting effectiveness that the drone mounted EM surveying overlayed with the IP data. A technique they have been using with seemingly better success in targeting. This hole was an outlying anomaly to the east of Ascot. RNS 10th may hole 33
Just looked up 'kringing'. Very interesting and feeds into my background where I used to use statistics for my work in ballistics - but never hear of it! Now retired....
I had assumed something similar would be used to estimate the grades across the pit. I imaging this is why two extra holes were placed into RC at the end of phase 2. One cannot simply assume that two holes hundreds of metres apart have grades of Cu simply interpolated between the two. This is the difference between an 'inferred' and 'indicate' and 'measured' resources. Hence the two extra holes will not only prove up additional Cu but will give greater confidence to the Cu in the whole surrounding area.
I'm very much a novice on this technique and may have even mis-spelt kriging!
This link is one I harvested from GGP which gives some insight.
I hope your background in ballistics proves helpful when the share price here explodes :)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1wlFXrqKsQz5BZAd7Qqu1g17cP7JM0ndb/view?usp=sharing
Another really good point Cygnus about the resource class. The first pit study was based on the inferred resource so was really just an exercise to show potential. The new study will be based on an upgraded/part upgraded indicated resource that carries a higher degree of geological confidence that carries over to give credibility to the financial study that an inferred resource does not.
Another strong indication toward the decision to mine of which the infill drilling Colin suggested they would do in very early phase 2.
It again is supportive of the intent to proceed with the decision to mine long before it was suggested that they are only considering it to trigger the buy back because of the ‘perceived’ lack of tonnage from RC.
Another piece to the puzzle maybe. Does make sense.
There is an interesting theory, that the declining ore grades should not necessarily be interpreted as a sign of the depletion of existing large mines, nor as an indicator of reduced resource availability or the increasing scarcity of new discoveries. This is because changes in the average ore grades being mined can be attributed to other factors such as innovation and improvements in extractive technologies, extending the life of older mines over finding new ones. Moreover, there is evidence that for most metals, as ore grades decline, the deposit size grows faster than the very decline in ore grade meaning greater amounts of economically recoverable metals.
All swings and roundabouts at this time but we have seen projects mining at an economic cut off of 0.1%-0.15%Cu. With a brand new central extra large capacity, ultra high tech extraction and processing facility that will see close to 90% recovery rates of concentrate. Could it be feasible that the new owners will be mining economically down into sub 0.1%Cu grades?
Long term price for copper will play a large part but will the global demand still far outstrip the technological advancements that will see these older and new mines process the ever lower grades that are more abundant in those resources that will see their ore reserves increase?