Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
Dustyslay re your enquiry of April 11th regarding my “thoughts on copper and other minerals coming into play” sorry for the belated reply; I don't follow this chat-board daily. There is a great deal I could add in response but it is perhaps best left until drill results justify discussion of the prospect of resources other than the current Titanium targets. What I would add as an indication of the potential for copper, and in addition to what I have previously posted on the subject, is the following:
During the 1960's, 2025ft of diamond drill-core from 6 holes, the precise locations of which are not recorded but which were in the vicinity of the South Arrino/Baxter mines, was obtained from an area which I estimate to be within 2km maximum, NW of the COS TiO2 target area currently being drilled. No assay results were disclosed at the time but subsequent visual inspection of the cores led to the conclusion that 46m thickness of Cu mineralisation occurred along a strike length of 800m within a c100m thick sandstone, probably unconformable on the Mulingarra Gneiss or above a discontinuous conglomerate or thin siltstone horizon. This stratigraphic relationship, and consequent potential mineralisation, probably extends along the 30km+ Mulingarra Gneiss/Yandanooka sequence contact zone on the western margin of the Pitfield licence area and may be a target for future exploratory drilling.
This is however just one of the many Cu anomalies within the Pitfield region.
AGEOS.
FUZZY1014 regarding performance-based payment (ii), the JORC Code 2012 specifications do not allow for Ti, or any other element to be used in equivalence calculations in defining a Mineral Resource, if that element constitutes more than 50% of the stated Mineral Resource as will be the case with the Pitfield TiO2 resource. Thus in the RNS (ii) example, “250Kt Cu metal equivalent” this must include at least 50% Cu with the balance obviously comprised of other metal elements quantified in terms of 'equivalence'. See JORC Code 2012 Clause 50 Reporting of Metal Equivalents relates to polymetallic deposits. Hope that makes sense.
Genghis15 is correct in highlighting those aspects of the JV Agreement with Century, as detailed in the 06.04.2022 RNS, which detail performance-based payments [ as posted by FUZZY1014 as I type] based specifically on Cu and Au prospects at any of the three Projects [ie Pitfield, Walton & Stavely].
I have, successfully I hope, explained that Exploration Licences based on Western Australian Mining legislation allow prospecting for all “minerals” other than the few exceptions I referred to in my 09.04.2024 post [ie limestones, rock, gravel etc], so the JV specific reference to “Copper-Gold Projects” does not imply restrictions on prospecting and exploitation to those elements alone.
The JV performance-based payments [as detailed on page 3 of the 06.04.2022 RNS] are however specific to those two elements [Cu & Au] alone and will remain in force for five years from the date of tenement acquisition. If the JV Agreement does extend such provisions to “other elements and/or minerals” this would have had to be disclosed to the market as being “market sensitive information”. As it has not been so disclosed we can assume that the TiO2 resource discovery is not subject to a similar performance-based payment or an equivalent. I'm sure that Ed Baltis and Steve Hart [Century Minerals Ltd] will not lose any sleep over that.
This opportunity also prompts me to highlight the fact that nine months after the JV Agreement with Century was signed, the Empire-Century JV legal entity [it is important to differentiate this from the two constituent companies] applied for and was granted two Exploration Licences of 426.7 sq km, additional to the two original Licences of 615 sq km at Pitfield. [ref RNS 13.12.2022]. The two additional Licences are, E70/6620 which includes a 20km northward extension of the Darling Fault zone and a portion of the Yilgarn Craton which is adjacent to an area recently surveyed by SR Resources as their Three Springs Nickel-Copper-PGE [Platinum Group Elements] project, and E70/6323 including a 20km southern extension of the Darling Fault zone and part of the Yilgarn Craton bordering Chalice Mining's Barrabarra Nickel-Copper-PGE Exploration Project. Both Licences therefore extend into part of the newly recognised West Yilgarn Ni-Cu-PGE Mineral Province to which Empire will no doubt extend its exploratory interest in time. Perhaps the Empire-Century JV should now be renamed, with regard to Pitfield, the prospective Ti-Cu-Ni-PGE-base-metal Project.
AGEOS..
Unfortunately this 'debate' relating to two 'issues' supposedly arising from the 06.04,2022 RNS announcing the JV with Century Minerals for Pitfield, Walton and Stavely, is as 4kandles posted, a classic example of “a little knowledge being a dangerous thing”. In claiming that, I mean no disrespect to anyone, as knowing the extent of one's own ignorance is always a prelude to understanding.
Century, in reserving the rights to any Mineral Sands resource “on one or more of the Projects” [ie Pitfield, Walton and Stavely], were, where Pitfield was concerned, fully aware of the adjacent heavy-mineral sand deposits of Yandanooka [10km W of Mt Scratch] and Durack [16km W of the TOM Ti-target area, acquired by Image Resources from Sheffield Resources in 2021. These are Eocene-age [c30-50M years] relict coastal dune deposits. [see my 11.02.2024 post for further details]. It is possible that the Eocene coastline could have extended further eastwards into part of the Pitfield Licence area and formed similar Mineral Sand deposits, hence the Century reservation of rights.
With regard to the assertion that the TiO2 resource at Pitfield might be considered to be a Mineral Sand, that claim is fundamentally baseless. Definitions of what constitutes a mineral sand, silica sand, garnet sand etc, all of which are classed as “minerals” if on private land [but excluding “sand”], are specified within Government of Western Australia mining legislation. The definitions are based on a range of geological criteria, not just those of mineralogy, with some relating to mode of deposition and relationship to underlying strata ie unconformability or discontinuity. Age is also a factor. There are no Mineral Sands older than Eocene in western Australia, whereas the Pitfield TiO2 resource rocks are between 1100M and 541M years old and have no Mineral Sand characteristics whatever.
The other query raised by some is the reference in the RNS to the three projects being described as “copper-gold projects”, from which it is surmised that the rights might apply to these two minerals only. Again this is a baseless suggestion arising from a lack of understanding of Mining Legislation and in particular that of Licencing and of special provisions required for prospective gold terrain and for differing rights on Crown Land, Reserves & Commonwealth Land, and Private Land. It is impossible to provide links to all the relevant legislation and regulations without posting reams of information. The RNS refers to Exploration Licencing only and will include all “minerals” as defined in Legislation, ie excluding “limestones, rock, gravel, shale, sand [other than mineral sands etc] and clay [other than kaolin etc]”. Only when an economic “Resource” is defined does licencing progress to the mining phase.
AGEOS
Continuation:
In contrast, the maiden drill programme of early 2023 was targeting a prospective sediment-hosted strata-bound copper deposit [SSC] as strongly indicated by all the then available evidence. Significantly, although it was titanium enrichment which proved to be the predominant find, the prospect for SSC type mineralisation higher in the stratigraphic succession, ie east of the high-grade titanium targets, still remains, as does the prospect of associated silver or cobalt [the two do not occur together]. The extent of the regional copper mineralisation is indicated by the 21 hole maiden drill programme which confirmed an average of 131 ppm copper in 60% of the samples assayed. This equates to a 0.0131% content, which for 60% of the 320sq km minimum area of the Mt Scratch Siltstones east to the Darling Fault, approximates to 2.25M metric tonnes of copper for every 10m of depth. That is a lot of copper from which one or more SSC type deposits could have formed by aqueous leaching and redox-deposition within the 9000m thick Mt Scratch sequence.
Although drill programmes for the immediate future will concentrate on proving up the TiO2 resource of the TOM and COS targets, they will include some further exploratory drilling, so there is the possibility of chance discovery of other potential deposits, most probably either of SSC type or of the more localised structural/metamorphic event type setting.
AGEOS.
The report entitled 'Petrography and Mineralogy Results' which accompanied the March 5th RNS, contained information relating to the hydrothermal and subsequent events which it is thought have determined the mineralogical characteristics of the Yandanooka Basin. With the understandable focus of interest on the TiO2 component of that mineralisation many will be unaware of the wider context of the Yandanooka Basin being a potential 'mineral province' hosting other mineral deposits.
The report confirms two hydrothermal events on a regional scale. The first introducing significant enrichment of the elements Ca [calcium], Ti [titanium], Mg [magnesium], Al [aluminium] and Fe [iron], and secondary 'elevated' amounts of Co [cobalt], Cr [chromium], Cu [copper], Ni [nickel] and Zn [zinc], to which I would add Ag [silver] from evidence of extensive Cu/Ag anomalies reported by CRA in 1993 from near Mt Scratch in the north and over a 7km N-S trend in the south.. Fe-enrichment is stated as the main input from the second hydrothermal event, resulting in conversion of magnetite to hematite and intergrowth with ilmenite to form the hemo-ilmenite end of the hemo-ilmenite/titano-ilmenite sequence. This was a basin-scale event during which hot oxidising fluids were likely to have leached the 'elevated' elements from the Yandanooka sediments and underlying Mullingarra gneiss [proven to be significantly depleted of Cu and other metals by BHP in 1984 from 4 deep diamond drill-cores] and deposited them within the higher sandstone/siltstone sequence upon contact with reductants such as graphite.
What is of particular significance with respect to the elements with 'elevated' values is the recognition of a third and much later phase, not of hydrothermal nature, but designated as a structural-metamorphic event which included carbonate veining. This refers to a time when the rocks were subjected to considerable lateral compression, and probable heating due to friction and much deeper crustal burial, such that, as the geology maps indicate, large sections were displaced horizontally along thrust-faults. Under such conditions pore-fluids in rocks are mobilised, constituent minerals may be destabilised and elements taken into solution. If local conditions are favourable those elements may be redeposited and accumulate to form economic mineral deposits. Suitable local conditions include fault-zones, the axial-planes of folds, soluble rocks such as limestones, and any highly porous/permeable rock-type or sequence. Most if not all of the historical copper mining in the Yandanooka Basin [ie Baxter and Arrino Mines in the west and historical prospecting shafts near Mt Scratch] appear to have been located in such structural/lithological settings and to be the product of this third event.
To be continued
Solstace
Although you quote correctly and this statement appears to contradict the interpretation I have provided, the two are in fact compatible because titanite has a variable and often quite low proportion of TiO2 as a constituent. Thus a sample can contain 20% by weight of titanite but still only constitute 4.08% by weight of TiO2. I could explain this in far greater detail but it would take some time to compile all the technical data, so I hope this will suffice for now.
Oldslow65
The 67% you quote is “67% of the total contained TiO2” not 67% of the ore. So for example, it is 67% of the 6.10% TiO2 assayed from DD23TOM001 from the southern target zone ie the Thomas property. Hence titanite constitutes 4.08% of the total TiO2 and the combined Ti-Fe oxides, ilmenites and rutiles, which constitute the remaining 33% of the total TiO2 constitute 2.02% of that total. At least, that is how I interpret the data in the most recent RNS and technical report.
Continuation:
Relevant examples from Russia include the selective mining of titanite ore from the Khibiny massif Koashva complex apatite-nepheline-titanite deposit which occurs as lens-shaped units up to 50m thick and 5km in length. The ore, which contains 2.4-2.9% titanite CaSiTiO5, is processed without preliminary concentration, in flotation cells, and then dissolved in sulfuric acid to produce titanyl-sulfate for titanosilicate synthesis. This has numerous industrial applications. Other examples, from the Murmansk region, involve hydrochloric acid leaching and calcination, as envisaged in the Pitfield flowsheet, of a titanite-nepheline-fluorapatite-titanomagnetite-fluorspar ore to produce a feedstock for waterproof paint pigment [Patent RU-2177016 registered 2004 from which a vinylacetate paint is produced] and a filler for high-tech glues and sealants used in the aerospace industry. Whilst this constitutes only a tiny portion of the total titanium industry in Russia, titanite being rarely present in commercial quantity anywhere, it illustrates that processes exist for its exploitation and there is no reason why analogous processes cannot be developed for the Pitfield ore.
All reference sources for the above are in Russian and from contact with the Kola Science Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, but some may recall a link posted months ago [for which, thanks to whoever it was] to a 2016 research paper entitled 'Titanite processing by hydrobromic acid leaching and carbochlorination', which although referring to deposits in China, was authored by five Russian metallurgists from the Russian Academy of Sciences at Krasnoyarsk in central Siberia. In this paper they refer to the pre-2009 experimental-industrial scale, 1500t/year, production of titanite concentrate from the Khibiny ore, by the Apatit company and to the processing limitations presented by the calcium content in the concentrate. As I've detailed above, those limitations have not prevented processing of the titanite and its industrial exploitation. For the Chinese ilmenite-titanite ore they propose hydrobromic acid leaching to remove the calcium and carbochlorination to produce titanium tetrachloride [TiCl4] which is an intermediate used in the production of TiO2 [as synthetic rutile], of pigments and titanium sponge, and is of crucial importance as a catalyst in the synthesis and polymerization of polyolefins in the petrochemical industry, To date, ilmenite and rutile ores are the most important source for titanium tetrachloride production.
Whilst at only the initial stage of development of a processing and production plan for the Pitfield titanium resource I have no doubt that a solution will be formulated this year, as per the project development plan [ref March 2024 Presentation, page 13].
AGEOS.
The March 5th RNS and associated technical report relating to Pitfield TiO2 mineralogy and metallurgical studies, whilst being extremely positive in every respect, has it appears been interpreted somewhat negatively by the 'market'. From a market capitalisation of £57m on that day we hit a low of £45m two days ago, way below the Jan 9th peak of £76m. From chat-board comment and the most recent Shard Capital analysts note it appears that the decline in value can be largely attributed to the mistaken belief that there is significant uncertainty in the development of a metallurgical process suitable for conversion of the titanite mineral component of the ore into a synthetic rutile grade [>90% TiO2] product. This uncertainty is based on the correct assertion that the Pitfield mineralogy is unique and consequently there are no comparable commercially operating titanite mines elsewhere in the world. From that it is concluded that the development of such a metallurgical process will be problematic and may prove impossible..
Such a conclusion is fundamentally misguided. Not only are there well tested and functional titanite production and processing operations in the Kola region of Russia, but there is also a huge data-base of analogous titanium metallurgical processes both experimental and operational to draw upon. The latter is evidenced by the fact that there are currently over 460 patent 'families' describing the production of TiO2 from ilmenite-predominant ores alone [ref World Intellectual Property Organization 2022]. These patents cover all the stages in the Preliminary Metallurgical Process Flowsheet detailed on page 5 of the RNS including the 'wet gravity', 'flotation', 'acid leach' and 'calcination' processes, with variations in process related to the mineralogical characteristics of the specific ores. The Pitfield ore, comprised of titanite [67% of total TiO2] and Ti-Fe oxides + titano-hemo-ilmenite + rutile-leucoxene [33% of total TiO2], will likewise require variations in the process stages analogous to those for ilmenite-predominant ores.
To be continued
I see that the LSE 'AI' decided to replace all capital letters with lower case in the second of these posts so hope readers can still make sense of it. You will have to rely on the punctuation to differentiate sentence beginning and ends.
Continuation:
This is not a “highly altered sandstone” as posted by some, and its mineralogy strongly indicates an origin from erosion of the regional Mullingarra Gneiss. Its mineralogy also has affinities with the adjacent HM Sand deposits of Yandanooka and Durack.
The Yandanooka HM Sand deposit is located approximately 10km west of Mount Scratch whilst that of Durack is approx 16m west of the TOM target area. Both are relict coastal dune deposits accumulated during the Eocene c30-50m years ago along a former shoreline and are derived from erosion of the Yandanooka Basin sedimentary rocks of Pitfield and the Mullingarra Gneiss. Although described as “sand deposits” they are weakly cemented sandstones, easily disaggregated by natural weathering or machine processing. Yandanooka has a heavy mineral [HM] content of 2.6% totalling 1.84 million tonnes, comprised of 62% ilmenite, 10% leucoxene, 7% rutile and 11.5% zircon [zirconium silicate]. Importantly, according to a study by Iluka Resources, the ilmenite has a very high TiO2 content of 64.7%, sufficient to indicate suitability as feed for chloride process pigment production or synthetic rutile production. Both deposits were acquired by Image Resources from Sheffield Resources in late 2021.
As the ilmenite [and other HM's] at Yandanooka must in part [at least], or whole, be derived from the Pitfield-Yandanooka Basin deposits it is reasonable to anticipate that the Pitfield high-grade TiO2 targets will be comprised of a similar HM assemblage and most importantly of a high TiO2-ilmenite. Leucoxene [TiO2 65-90%] has also been confirmed in Pitfield samples and interestingly, the Enokkura Sandstone petrographic analysis described above refers to the quartz component of the constituent rock-fragment inclusions as containing “abundant unidentified monominerallic needles” which are most likely to be of rutile [TiO2 c95%] as the rock fragments appear to be of granitoid gneiss derived from the local Mullingarra Gneiss. The impending mineralogical analysis of the DD cores should confirm these and other characteristics.
Anyone with access to professional level stock-market trading data will know that there is evidence of possible orchestrated trading in EEE shares for several months. Inevitably that will have been exacerbated by retail traders following the trading trends and some will have posted with consequential bias. Throughout such times more ethically principled investors need to concentrate on the verifiable factual basis of their investment. Hopefully the above will contribute to that basis. Finally a special thanks to those who, on a different board, expressed appreciation of these efforts. Without that I would probably not have provided this contribution.
AGEOS.
continuation:
on 11.06.23, and several times subsequently, i emphasised the unique nature of the pitfield regional-scale mineralogical province, as the context for what is now accepted by the geoscience community as being “a newly recognised type of strata-based sedimentary rock-hosted titanium deposit”. again, as previously stated, there are no comparable deposits anywhere in the world, and unless and until those who claim there are, can provide published data proving otherwise, that remains the case. an online search for “ titanium in sandstone” will, as posted on a***n tue/wed last week, produce references to the yaregskoye/pizhemskoye ti 'sandstone' of russia, claimed to be the world's largest ti 'resource' [80% of russian reserves], known for 60 years but never exploited and unlikely to be so, due to the complex mineralogy. the ensuing 'debate' has no doubt raised investor scepticism regarding the viability of pitfield, so before the misinformation infects this chat-board these are the most relevant facts.
the pizhemskoye deposit, described as a zircon-ilmenite-leucoxene sandstone [4.27% tio2] is itself unique in that it is a quartzite [a recrystallized sandstone] containing ti in the form of pseudorutile-leucoxene, a complex polymineralic aggregate introduced by hydrothermal-metamorphogenetic processes [ie alteration by mineral bearing high temperature aqueous solutions]. the temperature/pressure was sufficient to melt and recrystallize the quartz [sio2] such that the pseudorutile and leucoxene incorporates up to 40% sio2 and has imposed phased substitution of ti atoms with fe [iron] and v [vanadium] atoms, thereby imposing severe constraints on effective processing of the ore. an associated deposit, the yarega oil-titanium sandstone[10.44% tio2] is a metamorphosed leocoxene 'sandstone' [quartzite] with similar limitations on potential processing. in short neither deposit has any relevance whatever to the potential processing of the pitfield deposit. any suggestion that the pitfield tio2 sandstones present processing challenges similar to those of the russian deposits is a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
returning to pitfield, the high-grade tio2 sandstones of the cos and tom target areas, are feldspathic quartz sandstones which have been subjected to hydrothermal mineralization. analysis of a co**** grained sample from the enokurra sandstone, which is the stratigraphic unit most likely to equate to the “high-grade tio2 sandstones” shows a mineral composition of quartz 67%, microcline & oligoclase feldspar 15% [varies from 10-43%], rock fragments [mainly of quartz + microcline + mica] 14% [varies from 5-15%], and minor accessory minerals, clay and oxides including limonite 4% total [the latter two providing the cement]. significantly, the sample contained 3% by weight of 'heavy minerals' including ilmenite [62% of total hm], garnet [30%], apatite [6%] and zircon [1%].
to be continued
Those who have read and understood my previous posts regarding Pitfield will have anticipated and appreciated the significance of much of what has been disclosed by the RNS releases of recent months, which is why I have not commented since my last contribution, on Dec 20th. That post was primarily concerned with the resource implications of the Dec 19th RNS regarding initial drill assay results, with calculations of the ore tonnage for parts of the TOM and COS target areas. I also commented on the structural and stratigraphic implications of those core-logs in respect of the possible dimensions of the high-grade TiO2 resource. In particular I mentioned that the sandstones within the Beaconsfield Formation of the COS target appeared to have a strike of 9km and that RC hole COS004, 1km to the west, indicated an additional high-grade sandstone which stratigraphically might be within the Enokurra Formation, with implications for a very substantial resource extending up to 18km southwards including the western edge of the TOM target..
The Jan 22nd RNS, providing assay results for the majority of the 40 RC drillhole programme, appears to confirm those conclusions, further evidenced by the Feb 5th RNS announcing an extension of the next drill programme southwards for 7km in both the COS and TOM target areas [Fig 2 of RNS] thus including the Enokurra Sandstone Formation as mapped historically. I have refrained from offering a detailed analysis of the Jan 22nd RNS results in favour of a combined analysis which will be possible after completion of the next drill programme. Results from the latter should allow improvements to my structural model of the targets and enable a JORC compliant ore resource to be estimated. Those who have understood previous resource estimations will at least be aware of most of the relevant criteria, from which the potential resource from both TOM and COS will already be apparent.
Aside from the resource data, the other important development arising from recent RNS releases has been that relating to ore mineralogy and processing, including the appointment of a specialist team to manage the metallurgical test work and formulate the processes through to product development. Although I have made frequent reference to aspects of the mineralogy [eg 16.07.23], including the possible metallogenesis [see detailed 01.10.23 post], and various options relating to processing [ 11.06.23 ], these have largely been ignored by contributors here. Understandably, now that investor scepticism regarding the magnitude and grade of the TiO2 resource has effectively been nullified, attention has turned to the ore mineralogy, metallurgy and processing.
to be continued
Continuation:
The previously reported DD23COS001, drilled at 60 degrees to the W and intersecting the host sandstones dipping at c60 degrees to the E, confirms a true thickness [the dimension at 90 degrees to the stratification] of c140m for the high grade [ie average 5.76%] TiO2 mineralised sequence. Importantly however, although the average grade below 191m downhole is less than 5% the core-log shows a succession of TiO2 grades in the 6-8% range alternating with others in the 2-4% range down to 300m continuing at 2-3% to bottom-hole at 400m. All of this sequence is described as being within the Beaconsfield Conglomerate Formation. With reference to the high grade sequence alone, with a true thickness of c140m and proven down-dip depth of at least c170m, based on 100m of strike a JORC compliant ore resource of 6.4M tonnes at 2.7 sp gr can be calculated for this single hole. The Beaconsfield has a strike of 9km within this central area so if the high grade thickness of 140m is contiguous with the sandstone lithology an ore resource of c64M tonnes per km is feasible.
What the most recent assays add, in RC hole COS004, is an additional high grade sandstone source 1km west of the DD hole detailed above, which is either a repeat of the Beaconsfield sequence, that to the east having been overthrust in that direction, or is a stratigraphically different sandstone sequence beneath and therefore probably older than the Beaconsfield. If the latter, older deposit, the c200m thick Enokurra Sandstone is most likely as suggested in previous posts. Confirmation of preferential high grade TiO2 mineralisation of the Enokurra would open the possibility of a very substantial ore resource along an 18km strike length southward. The other two RC holes in the central region, COS002 and COS003 confirm c4% grade into the Mount Scratch Siltstone Formation and therefore continuation of TiO2 mineralisation for 4km+ E-W. This is a highly encouraging initial investigation of the central target area.
The remaining two RC holes ie KAD001 and KAD002 both drilled to full depth of 148m assayed at 3.40% and 3.28% respectively, from surface to BH, appear to have been collared in the Mount Scratch Siltstone [low magnetic; low/variable conductive sequence] at the northern limit of the SW target area and 5-6km north of the TOM001 DD hole and subject of the c30M tonne ore resource mentioned earlier. Further RC drill assays are anticipated to expand that high grade resource considerably.
Whilst the above will no doubt be largely incomprehensible to those who have no understanding of the structure and stratigraphy of Pitfield, I hope those who do will be reassured of the continuing positive results from the ongoing drill program.
AGEOS.
The most recent RNS confirms an increase in the potential high-grade TiO2 resource at the central target at Pitfield and announces a significant research alliance with CSIRO, which together with mineralogical test work by AXT Ltd will lead to an indication of the ore processing options and economic assessment of the asset. I have referred briefly to the potential involvement of CSIRO, in several previous posts [eg 11.06.2023 re the TiRO and Tivan+ Processes] , as indicative of the national government's stated policy of “encouraging industry to develop enhanced metallurgical extraction processes for Titanium”. This alone should alert investors to the probability of the Pitfield TiO2 resource being a potential strategic national asset. I need add no more in that regard.
The RNS reference to “a new shallow zone of bedded higher grade TiO2 mineralisation” does however perhaps require further explanation as there is no discussion of the resource consequences arising from this statement on this or any other chat-board, and recent share price movement suggests a lack of understanding of the implications. On 03.12.2023, I posted details of a resource estimate for the diamond drill [DD] hole [TOM001] in the 3 sq km SW target area, of c30M tonnes of ore per 100m of strike length and 420m down-dip, and added that “a comparable calculation can be made for [the DD hole in] the 6sq km target area 12km to the north”. Such a calculation has now been significantly enhanced by these latest assays.
Three of the RC holes reported are within this central area, that of RC23COS004 with 154m @ 5.51% TiO2 from surface and collared c1km west of DD23COS001which intersected 173.3m @ 5.76% TiO2 from 18.6m, being the most instructive. The other two RC holes ie COS002 and COS003 were collared c2.5 – 3km further east and intersected 90m @ 4.02% and 60m @ 3.97% respectively, both from near-surface to bottom-hole, terminated due to unfavourable drilling conditions.
To be continued
Andii, a JORC compliant ore resource for the DD23TOM001 hole of c30M tonnes is derived from 420m [the proven down-dip depth] x 260m [the true thickness of high-grade mineralisation ie at 90 degrees to the stratification] x 100m ['strike' ie the direction at 90 degrees to the maximum dip, and the maximum permitted for JORC calculation, which is 50m each side of the drill plane] x 2.7 [average specific gravity of a mineralised sandstone]; so 420 x 260 x 100 [which gives the total volume in cu.m.] x 2.7 = 29,484,000 tonnes. That c30M tonnes is for 100m along 'strike' so if the mineralisation proves to be continuous and the thickness and down-dip depth is maintained, the resource tonnage increases at the rate of c30M tonnes for every 100m of 'strike'. Apologies for the technical jargon but it is essential for clarification, so hope you can make sense of it.
Thanks for your interest.
Manlord: almost envious of your location and viewpoint for the imminent Empire sunrise.
Continuation:
The assay results from the current RC drills are therefore awaited with considerable interest as they could reveal an even higher grade TiO2 resource than that already identified. That would then presumably be a significant target for the second RC drill program scheduled for Q1 next year and as stated under “Future Work” in this latest RNS, initiate “the beginning of a mineral resource development phase”.
AGEOS
For those who have acquired some understanding of the 3D structure of Pitfield the recent 29.11.23 RNS provides further insight into the likely form of the two high-grade TiO2 targets currently under investigation. This builds on the structural interpretations previously posted.
SB in his comments on page 1 of the RNS states “The easterly dipping sedimentary beds that carry the higher grades come to surface to the west of our DD collars” thus confirming that the two DD holes have the same orientation as the Mnt Scratch DD hole, which from the depth data can be calculated as being at approximately 60 degrees and at azimuth 270 degrees ie due west. This also implies that the stratification of the sandstone host rocks is approximately at 60 degrees inclination at azimuth 90 degrees, ie due east, which conforms with a 58 degree due east field record from 1979 by the W Australia Geol Survey.
From the above data it is possible to calculate that the true thickness [ie the metric at 90 degrees to the stratification] in the SW DD hole [DD23TOM001], of the “297m @ 6.10% TiO2 from 111m downhole” is approximately 260m, and if proven by current RC drilling to continue to surface and subsequently proven to extend in depth beyond the 420m down-dip metric established by this DD core, provides the basis for estimating ore tonnage once a strike length is determined within the 3sqkm target area. An indication of the anticipated tonnage can however be calculated even at this early stage, on the assumption that JORC compliance could be based on a 100m wire-frame 3D model which assumes continuity of mineralisation for 50m along strike each side of the drill-plane. For the SW DD hole, that produces an ore tonnage of c30M on the basis of 2.7 sp gr, That tonnage would be repeated for every additional 100m of mineralisation along strike assuming the other metrics remain constant. A comparable calculation can be made for the central 6 sq km target area 12km to the north, on the basis of the DD23COS001 core log.
Whilst the above begins to provide some indication of the potential resource in the two target areas it should be borne in mind that the host sandstones within the Beaconsfield Conglomerate Formation will be deltaic or estuarine in origin and therefore likely to vary in thickness along strike and may be discontinuous. It should also be noted that the TiO2% in both DD cores was remarkably consistent and uniform thus indicating that the mineralisation is strongly controlled, presumably by the permeability of the sandstone. Since only 3 assay samples from the two cores exceeded 10% [10.31, 10.38 & 10.54] it is also highly likely that the ongoing RC drill program will intercept other sandstone horizons from which the numerous 10 -20% TiO2 rock-chip samples reported in the 12.11.23 RNS originated. In a 13.11.23 post I suggested that the stratigraphically adjacent c200m thick Enokurra Sandstone might host such an ultra high grade resource.
To be