Gordon Stein, CFO of CleanTech Lithium, explains why CTL acquired the 23 Laguna Verde licenses. Watch the video here.
I can’t get over that today’s news has been lost on here too quickly, swamped by negative idiots to drown it.
Most people seem to have glazed over with the announcement not really understanding it.
It’s all to do with obtaining the Heritage approvals and work can commence again after 6 or 7 years. That’s when the drill results were issued for Wishbone, Carnegie and Empress.
GH commented that they have found disseminated sulphides , they’re not as good as massive sulphides but indicating there are sulphide intrusions coming up through the basement so the drilling needs to be deeper.
Today’s announcement has highlighted the Banded Iron formation from one end to another that’s 50km yes FIFTY kilometres long of a mineralised structure cut through twice by 2 major fault lines.
Additionally the banded has 2 more Banded iron formations running parallel with the first which could add up to another 30km or so.
This is significant news.
Https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/greatland_gold/news/rns/story/r7l7e7x
I hadn’t twigged till today re reading that announcement why the reserve figure was not included in the last RNS.
The difference between the Jorc reports and the SK1300 that NEM use is a lot stricter with the SK1300. This limits what can be reported.
The PFS does not come up to the SK1300 reporting standards on one point. The contingencies used were 20%, the reporting has a maximum of 15%, so technically NEM can’t accept the PFS. This also affects the reserve reporting, so the reserves were not reported last time.
Ggp have published on that announcement what they would be under SK1300.
What effect has this on the sale price of the 70% NEM own. It should come a lot cheaper 🙂
Shaun said “we have 8.4moz” ( of course that is the equivalent value including the copper) he never mentioned the jv or a partner.
At the time of the PFS mining plan 2mt scheme the starter mine was only 8% of the ore body. The Eastern breccia has grown considerably since and the resource hasn’t grown in % term to keep 8% the same.
The starter mine is a tiny amount compared with the orebody as a whole, so yes there will be a lot of resource updates to come.
Shaun mentioned the copper price increase, I would have liked him to have described how that affects the resource size which would have been beneficial to most shareholders. This copper price is used in the gold equivalent formula to formulate the quantity, so any rise has a positive effect on the 8.4mozeq.
The gold price rise has a direct effect on the valuation of the ore in the ground, so a lower cut off grade can be used making the ore above this grade economically viable and therefore increasing the ore body size, also the internal dilution is reduced.
Thanks Magic that article does sound like EG
“ Banded iron formation-hosted gold deposits are attractive targets thanks to their potential for large, district-scale gold mining.”
Meadows could be 5km long and may stretch to 9km or more.
https://polaris.brighterir.com/public/greatland_gold/news/rns/story/x2vkg6w
The blue lines in a NW-SE trend is the banded iron formation with granotoids following it.
How they describe what’s there is very interesting :-
“Drilling confirmed that gold anomalism is hosted within altered basalts, banded iron formation (BIF) and syenite (Figure 1). The mineralised zone of 8m @ 0.12g/t Au from 316m in EGD006 is associated with thin quartz - carbonate veinlets in silica-sericite-chlorite and albite alteration in the basalt host (Figure 2). Hematite alteration was also observed. The syenite intersected in EGD005 shows gold is associated with disseminated pyrite with silica-sericite, albite and hematite alteration and quartz-carbonate veining.
”
“ The results indicate an encouraging broad, weak (Au-Ag-Cu-Zn) mineralisation. This could be the edge of a larger system. The anomalism is geologically controlled by generally east-dipping vein sets and vein-associated alteration. A correlation was noted between the weak gold-silver mineralised intercepts, geochemically anomalous, low order bismuth (Bi) values and the chlorite-carbonate alteration zones. The peak Cu value of 1,178ppm from 390.2m in EGD006 was in a highly sulphidic altered BIF unit. These associations can be used to better target further drilling.”
All looking very interesting.
Newmont reserves report
https://s24.q4cdn.com/382246808/files/doc_earnings/2023/q4/supplemental-info/Newmont-2023-Reserves-Release.pdf
Page 8
Telfer 27.6m tons of resources left @0.61% giving 600,000oz . There is a recovery factor of 0.81% so when turned into reserves it leaves 486,000oz.
Having Telfer will be a monumental move in Shaun’s strategy, to be in control of how the Havieron ore will be processed. He told me they would extract everything they could from the ore which is economically viable.
Whether there is any more around Telfer I’m sure we will be informed in due course but he wasn’t going to let on when I asked him about rumours of more ore under the airstrip.
I remember chatting to Goldworm in our local and we are both convinced there maybe more to find deep under the Telfer mine.
Costs are the biggest issue at Telfer, knowing Shaun he will soon put his stamp on it.
I haven’t seen anything of a new tungsten source on Telfer land from Newcrests reports. Remember though tungsten is hard to process needs a lot of heat more than is generated at Telfer at the moment.
Having an existing tailings pond is really beneficial to Havieron it will cut enormous costs out, only thing is continued maintenance and monitoring and possible vertical extension.
Object of the mining plan is to not disturb too much more land due to some of the rare habitats and species.
The tailings dam will be 65m high eventually so enormous after extensions.
Hi Iseo
If Telfer production is stopped or runs out then Havieron ore has to cover the cost of Telfer.
If production continues the AISC will be high, I can’t remember off hand but the last quarters results showed it over 2000 ( I will need to look again.
Gaining Telfer will be a huge benefit if they can find more viable ore, it’s also a huge benefit to be in control and have a handle on the costs.
A high gold price will make more ore at Telfer become viable, definitely underground stuff at the moment that’s still viable but not a lot left.
In 2017 they had 7moz of resources, I’m not sure what recovery factor they had but certainly won’t be 86%, so about 2.5 to 3m would have been extracted. There should be at least 1 to 2m left if a 60% recovery factor is used if it’s viable.
This plant won’t be able to do the tungsten as someone mentioned, different scenario.
Shaun and the team must be working hard to make sure that this is going to work, which I’m sure it will.
Hi MF
Didn’t quite get your point on the maintenance.
There are 2 trains at Telfer they both have annual shutdowns for maintenance, I’m not sure if they are both down at the same time.
If there will only be 1 train working for Havieron ore, where will any Telfer Ore go unless he’s going to stop the Telfer production to cut costs.
They can’t do the maintenance off site.
I didn’t hear what he said about that.
Hi Speedie
Yes in Newcrest’s last report for Jun22-Jun23 it was $1633 and costs have risen and revenues falling since.
It needs a smaller entity to make it more efficient.
Havieron still needs that plant and also the tailings for the paste fill.
Keeping 30% there is no Telfer costs but a tolling charge.
Gaining the 100% would gain extra costs on Havieron site and a tolling charge.
Having the lot means paying for the plant and all costs for running Telfer but no tolling charge only transport costs
Hi Speedie
I presume your $2500 bounce is based on keeping 30%
The AISC will increase with 100%
Having Telfer is unpredictable effect on the AISC
The 2 mines together could see well over $2000
I’m interested in seeing the copper price accelerate but short term forecasts see a retrace to $3.80, but with large mines struggling to produce enough for demand the long term forecast is nearer $5.50.
This works out at 0.6% at around $15-20m per month profit.
The gold price needs to remain high if Ggp get Telfer
Hi MH
Well I got through half of it.
Havieron hasn’t got oxide ores, it’s pyrrhotite based.
It has magnets to remove or reduce the pyrites.
Telfer has issues with high sulphur content especially in the West Dome.
Train 2 has been converted or in the process of to accept Havieron ores, the 2 ores will not be mixed which is what I’ve been saying for a long time they’re not compatible.
That also goes for the sulphides and breccia at Havieron, they need to keep the high grades going for as long as possible as there’s more value. 3mt pa is probably a maximum to achieve this.
If you believe that De Grey is a better ore do some research before investing in it.
Hi Spud
Too expensive to drill from surface and the depth is too great for most drill rigs.
There needs to be an exploration drive into the ore body so that the underground rigs are not drilling through waste rock and the cores contain mineralised ore.
These rigs are not capable of drilling 1,000m so it will be a progressive drilling campaign from many exploration drives all the way down.
As I’ve said before the sulphides must have come from the source that could be 3,5,10kms down. 2.5km to 3 km would have to be a limit though and would be many years away.
Hi Leicslad
I have thought about that but the gold price would have the same effect on the ones they are keeping .
Those 2 fatalities on the Cerro negro project that they are keeping might make them change their minds on that one, but that’s just my thoughts. It will have a huge effect on that project for sometime and it’s not a Tier 1 yet.
Telfer though is a huge liability and Newmont need their capex funds elsewhere.
They have a willing buyer in Ggp, I can’t see Newmont keeping it.
The question whether a rising gold price will increase Havieron reserves by 5% per $100 is doubtful on the Starter mine crescent reserves.
However it will have a dramatic effect on the financial instruments used to determine its viability.
The reserves for the 2mt pa mine plan have now been well defined and Ggp issued their own 3mt pa mine plan with increased boundaries to increase the knowledge of the boundaries. The gold price won’t or can’t affect these boundaries.
The last MRE from Ggp did not issue a reserve figure only resources. These resources have set boundaries, the higher gold prices will increase the gold equivalent value depending on which formula is used.
The resource tonnage was shown at 36mt, the gold price won’t effect this tonnage. The only way to increase this tonnage is by underground drilling but the top 750m or so have been defined so the increase can only happen at depth.
The PFS gave IRR assumptions from Newcrest of:-
IRR16% @ $1400 gold price
IRR 33% @ $2000 gold price
Ggp gave an IRR27% @ $2700
These were for a 2mt plan a 3mt plan may be lower rates.
IRR are used to report future annual income rates for projects in many industries .
From the IRR is calculated NPV values.
As far as other ore outside the MRE the rising gold price has a dramatic effect on the inferred and resources where the boundaries are ill defined . The cut off values can be reduced to allow more economically viable ore to be included in the quantities.
Also the gold price affects the NSR cut offs.
At Havieron the NSR cut off for the Starter mine is $80 with a rising price this allows for more ore within those boundaries to become more economically viable.
Bit long but I hope you understood it.
The rising gold price is a huge beneficial assistance to the robust viability of Havieron.