RE: cononish30 Jan 2021 16:21
Baz, you have previously been given abuse because you have criticized and then extrapolated that into conjecture presented as fact, also a habit of a another former poster.
That the 'gold pour' and the yesterday's update RNS were bad is undeniable, but to then speculate that "or was the gold extraction so poor that they did not want to tell us?" I would suggest is erroneous as from the public information, the plant has spent so little time operating that any reliable assessment of % recovery is impossible.
Similarly, to call the BPT a 'shambles' is a throw away generalization, as you are aware that it achieved it's principle goals of proving that the gold and concentrates could be extracted by gravity methods and leave sufficiently inert tailings that could meet environmental standards to enable dry-stacking, save up-front capital and attract investment. Also, I took the trouble to twice go and see it in action, while you did not.
The detail of ore sticking in chutes is quite unrelated to the BPT, but that said, it is embarrassing that slabbing of the ore should be blamed and simply that material sticking in 'pinch-points' requires chute or pipe modifications would have sufficed.
I can't comment upon the engineering issues, particularly pumps, raised by Samson, but the suggestion (not by Samson) that employees did not make good choices may not be appropriate as we do not know who made them, either at SG, contractor or plant supplier. That someone at SG had the good sense to try a pump successfully used on the BPT shows that front-line staff at SG were on the ball it seems.
No-one has mentioned the filter-press problem, but such kit is old, tried and tested technology that even I and fellow students and technicians used in the 1960s. Then it was controlled on visual gauges, manual valves and very messy man-handling, so it is the up-dated use of 'complex, automated cycles' wherein the problem lies and should be fixable.
BP is right in that this project, like other mining ones I have known, is massively frustrating and that the company PR has often not helped. That said, it is easy to be 'arm-chair' geos, engineers, investors and key-board warriors and the company has indeed suffered many frustrations it could have done without.
After all that and may years of DYOR and following SG, my view that this is a very prospective and deserving project is unchanged. Achieving this year phase 1 production and becoming cash positive will do for this year, so I will hold and may add.
Regards to all, R.
Sign In
Follow the stocks
