Member Info for KeithOz

Some of you may be familiar with the 'Geology for Investors' website. This is mostly behind a paywall, but articles are available to be viewed for free for a short time, although you may need to register.
They have just released this article on diagenetic sedimentary-hosted copper - as in the KCB, which gets a mention towards the end.
https://www.geologyforinvestors.com/sediment-hosted-stratiform-copper-deposits-the-future-of-copper-and-cobalt-mining/

Christ Dai, give us a chance! Unlike some on here, I prefer to think at the same time as I type :-)

PART 2.
Next we have the engineering - NB I am not a drilling expert, others with more knowledge please jump in here!
1. Deep reservoirs. It has been demonstrated that we need a different drill. The deeper you go, the more forces are applied to the drill string. The worst of these is where the pipes start to wiggle away from the centre of rotation, a process called nutation, which results in enlarging of the borehole and stress on the drill pipes. This leads to washouts and breaking of the drill string due to metal fatigue, both of which we got in Tai1. The slower you drill, the more drilling mud sloshes around the borehole, worsening then washouts.
The solution is to start with a larger diameter bore, case more frequently (remember you have to decrease the diameter every time you case), and if possible drill a bit faster. Now we know the stratigraphy better, faster drilling should be practicable. For this you need a powerful drill - we tried to do things on the cheap with a mineral rig, we now need to get in an Oil & Gas rig. I don't know the availability or cost of O&G rigs and crews in Tanzania, but I think it is unlikely that we would get one operating this year. Even if one was available cheap now, getting it in place (wherever that may be) before the rainy season would be challenging - the problem with African rain is that the roads become impassable, especially for an articulated low loader carrying a multi-ton O&G rig. The other issue is that this will cost a lot more per hole, so you have to be pretty damn sure you are in the right place. It would seem eminently sensible to shoot some 3D seismic first, which of course will take time to do and to interpret. So, for the highly prospective reservoirs with greatest chance of commerciality, I think we will need to wait until next year.

Shallow reservoirs.
I am a little confused by what DM has said. Firstly because of the likely limited size, and low commercial value, and secondly by the identification methodology. He mentioned ground penetrating radar - under ideal conditions in fairly uniform dry rock, you can maybe go as deep as 25m, but for the sort of mixed stratigraphy seen in the Lake Bed Formations, especially with clay beds, I would imagine only a fraction of this depth would be practicable. I think they need to have a good think about what techniques are likely to best identify sandstone reservoirs in these mixed lithologies, then see if they can locate any big enough to warrant drilling. In summary, a 3 stage process -(a) identify methodologies and obtain suitable equipment (b) try them out and see what works best (c) trial drill some identified reservoirs. Shallow drilling can be done with a much smaller drill, maybe even a man-portable drill. Even so, I think it is unlikely that this can all be sorted in the remaining 4 months of this year.

PART 1.
Since this thread has some of the more sensible posters in the title, and replies are mostly devoid of rampers/derampers, may I add to it?
Geologically, I am very happy that the HE1 story is correct, that there is a vast amount of Helium here. From an engineering perspective, I am not so happy, since it is proving difficult to extract. I think I will need to split this into two separate posts.
So, geology first. Basically, we have two very different lithologies that can provide reservoirs:
1. Deep down are the Karoo sandstones. These were formed in a steadily deepening basin where large quantities of coarse grained material was being deposited as turbidites - this in simple terms is the build up of huge underwater sand dunes on the margins of the sea, which periodically collapsed and spread out as thick, fairly uniform layers across the deeper part of the sea. These widespread, thick and coarse grained layers have a porosity of 15-20%, and are thus ideal gas reservoirs. HE! has confirmed that these potential reservoirs are overlain by 130m of impervious mudstones at Tai, thus providing a super vertical seal to a potentially super reservoir. A previous borehole also showed a bentonite layer over the Karoo sandstones - this is a weathered volcanic ash which will also make a great impervious vertical seal. Because these reservoirs are deep, the resultant pressure will mean there is a lot of gas for a given volume. Folding or faulting will provide a lateral seal, complementing the overhead (vertical) seal of the impervious layer
2. Up top are the Lake Bed Formations. No marks are awarded for guessing where these formed. In a lake bed, you will get widely deposited fine-grained layers - muds & shales, because fine grains will be carried further sideways in the water. Coarse grains which form sandstones will not travel so far from their sources - river mouths depositing storm water into the lake. Obviously the sandstones are potential reservoirs, muds & shales the potential seals. However, the sandstone reservoirs are likely to be relatively thin, and of limited lateral extent. Since they are near surface, there is less pressure so less gas. Once these factors are put together, you can see that these shallow reservoirs may not be very exciting, however as seen at Tai2, the mudstones can provide both vertical and lateral seals, without the need for traps produced by folding or faulting.

Thirteen pages of nonsense in the last 24 hours. 95% derampers & rampers. Nothing factual, nothing useful, no insights from posters with real knowledge & understanding. I'm out, sticking to RNs & Twitter KAV/BT, no time nor interest for nonsense. Bye, Keith BSc, MIMM, MCIM.

OK, having listened to BT on Stockbox, I understand the casing issue. The BOTTOM of the conductor was at 370m, so they had cased the whole of it, hence no useful DHEM. From the RNS, I read it that the TOP of the conductor was at 370m, so I couldn't understand why they were not getting a reading from the lower levels. From previous info, it appeared that the conductor was between 400-500m, whereas in fact it appears to be a lot shallower at the point where this borehole has intersected it.

1. I really don't understand why steel casing in the upper part of the hole should interfere with readings taken from lower down, where there is no casing. EM readings go up a cable, not radioed. 2. Only mention of two bits of gabbro being connected, nothing about mineralisation. 3. No mention of splitting cores, visuals or XRF. 4. Extra licences are all very well, but are they of any value? Can't tell from what we have been told so far.

ndn - if you stopped and cased every 5m, you would need to reduce drill size each time, so you wouldn't get very far down!

Looking once again at the TDEM results for A2, the highest conductivity was to the East, which is where A2-1 was placed. However, the deepest part of the keel is to the West, which is where they are sticking A2-2. Maybe TDEM does not go deep enough to give an accurate picture of what is at 600-800m, so in fact the most conductive part of the orebody does not show on the results that have been presented. I recall somewhere (ref, anyone?) Spectral recommending that two holes should be drilled in A2, but don't recall any reasons being given.

OK, I've had breakfast, so will try to answer this one which cropped up during my night time. The day of the announcement of A2 results, I posted that I was surprised at just the use of 'visible sulphides', when I was expecting for example "visible massive sulphides from 430m to 570m". It seemed to me at the time that there were two possible reasons - 1. That's all there was, so might have missed the main part of the conductor (unlikely), so were drilling the same target in a different place, or 2, didn't want to let on exactly what they had hit, because they didn't want to reveal their hand in possible negotiations, and were putting in a 2nd A2 hole to show the full extent of the orebody. Matty has now suggested an intermediate possibility, that they have seen sulphide globules, which indicate they are very close to massive sulphides.
"Globules" is a new term to me, but seems appropriate - we have always called them 'blebs', but maybe globules refers to large blebs! I've had a look through the paper Ella has so kindly linked, and the bit about globules/blebs being very close to massive sulphides is the same as KAV's thinking. I you look at Slide 8 of the KAV Q3 2021 presentation:
https://www.kavangoresources.com/investor-relations/presentations/download?path=Kavango%2B-%2BQ3%2B2021%2BDeck%2BvF.pdf
you will see a photo of a thin section of gabbro from hole CKP-8A, showing just such a bleb, next to some magnetite. The caption includes "the presence of these Cu-rich sulphides indicates that the system successfully reached sulphide saturation and larger accumulations are possibly located deeper within the intrusive body".
So yes, there is a possibility that the sulphides seen are globules/blebs, and that the 2nd A2 hole (which is going to be 200m deeper than the first) is going after that possible deeper orebody. You will also recall that from a number of other presentations, orebodies are actually shown below the gabbro, rather than just at the bottom, but still within the gabbroic keel. I had also earlier said that to my mind the main risk we faced was that the conductors revealed by TDEM may be sulphides, but not CuNi rich sulphides - so the relatively low Siemens reading could be down to a combination of disseminated sulphides and magnetite. This is the material that from the historic drilling appeared to be at A1, maybe with A2 we still need to go a bit deeper.
This is of course only speculation, I would like to see the DHEM results and XRF (which may not be revealed) and of course, the proper assays.

In yesterdays interview PJ said they were just waiting for environmental approval, then were going to drill straight away. Of course, straight away could mean after approval tomorrow, or after approval next year. He didn't say anything about what drill rig they were intending to use.

Just what we needed. Authoritative, calm, reassuring and optimistic. Spot on message.

Some people are suggesting that if things look good at for example 500m, they will continue to the previous TD of 1200m. Unfortunately, drilling doesn't work like that. You plan the depth, and at what levels you will case. Each time casing is inserted, the bore is narrowed and a smaller drill is required. The idea is that you get to TD with the smallest bit that still enables you to do what you want to do - DST etc. Continuing for another 700m, unable to case, is asking for trouble (again).

Agricore/Del. I'm pleased that you have read that article, which is a good summary of how the sort of deposits we are looking for in the KSZ are formed. It is a pretty good rule only to invest in companies you understand. As with all investments, there is a need to assess the balance between risk and reward. IAG & RR are mentioned - clearly the risk/reward is around resumption of air travel. For KAV it hinges on whether the anomalies identified in the KSZ are indeed NiCuPGE orebodies. There are plenty of threads on this board that assess the potential reward, most are just guesswork, so I started these two to drop in some more objective numbers:
25th July: 'Some simple arithmetic'
10th August: 'If the KSZ Proof of Concept RNS is positive, will you....?'
and to evaluate risk, you might want to consider:
Wed 11th August: 'You have to make a choice'

Hope this gives you some food for thought - K.

In case it's not obvious my own assessment (and of course you should be confident in your own assessment) is that KAV offers a remarkable opportunity in risk/reward profile, even more so at today's reduced price.

Here's a thought. Today POW announced some very encouraging survey results from the Tati Ni/Au project, which is of course in Botswana. Between the two companies, there are a lot of interesting exploration stage projects, all requiring the same equipment and technical skills, all located in the same country. It would make commercial sense to have all those projects under a single management overview, with the appropriate technical teams moved around the country as required, rather than the hassle and cost of duplicating everything as at present. One large organisation would be in a stronger position to negotiate sales of 'ripe' projects, as well as the purchase of interesting unexplored projects.
BT & PJ are both deal-makers, so I'm sure the potential of a larger venture has occurred to both of them.

No Mr Knackers, it's fundamentally the same, which is exactly why they're drilling there. Last time was a geological success, but an engineering failure. This time they know exactly what they are going to be drilling through, so the bore will not collapse, they can flow He to surface (which from the previous bore they know is there) and so claim a formal discovery.

Yes Perrins, all those short-term traders thought it was a dud, because they had no understanding of what this company is trying to do. Boreholes don't work out properly all the time - but that is an engineering issue, not a problem with the geology. It was clear that nice fat reservoirs had been found below a very thick sedimentary trap, it was just that we couldn't claim a discovery because we couldn't get a gas sample to surface. Mitchell Drilling, who really know their stuff, will be making all the appropriate adjustments to drill speed, mud weight, etc . They now know the stratigraphy in detail - the new hole is only 20m from the old one, so will be able to fine tune as they enter the zones that have caused problems previously. The chances of this being a success, bot from an engineering and geological perspective, are vastly improved.

Just for QuantumStar: You said yesterday -

"No QUESTION about it!
This will be sub 10 pence before this Friday coming (20th Aug)"

Since you have no question that you are right, I will hold you to that, and am happy to buy all your shares at 10p flat before market open today. OK with that?

Doesn't say anything about the size of the drill bore. I HOPE that they are going for full appraisal size - that way we have a much greater chance both of avoiding washouts and getting the wireline string in and out again, plus of course the all-important DSTs

I'm aware of Sandfire's ambitions - I was previously a shareholder in MTR and MOD when they sold to SFR, and more recently GLR, so have had my eye on the KCB for several years. I think that SFR will continue to try to make purchases to infill & consolidate their holdings, have no idea on the Botswana government take on that. However, I agree that the area covered by Kanye is a very big bite. Perhaps longer term SFR might consider a farmout with a major in order to get the necessary funding and expertise. Whatever happens, it is apparent that Cu is the new gold, and the KCB is the new goldrush.