London South East | The UK's favourite investor portal.

Why would a high iron content hamper concentrating tungsten though? IIRC its in the form of hematite and its reduced to magnetite and then removed with a high intensity magnet in the current process flowsheet. I guess too much of it could overwhelm the capacity of that part of the circuit?

But that doesn't sound like an insurmountable problem. The specific gravity of the Killas (hornfelsed slates) being so high seems like a far bigger issue, and one where you would need to fundamentally redesign the processing method from scratch removing all of the gravity processing (which is the whole basis of the flowsheet), hence downgrading the killas hosted resource.

I dunno what you're getting so excited about, must be sheer desperation.

All these numbers and the generic descriptions of mining methods were in the Scoping Study that was reported on July 24th 2017 - over a year ago! Since then what has happened??

Absolutely nothing - other than they've finally admitted they can't proceed directly from a Scoping Study to a Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS), so they might do a Pre-Feasibility Study (PFS) in the interim. No timetable on this even, after promising a DFS in H1 2018 a year ago...

The company seem to be banking on the complete ignorance of their shareholders of the basics of how mining finance works. And given some of the ridiculous comments on this message board about "imminent digging" over the years, that does seem to hold true.

I can guarantee right now this mine is a long long way from being financed. They need to a lot of technical work and further studies, as well as metallurgical testwork and likely further drilling, before this is going anywhere. People on here seem to groan when they hear that, as if further studies are wasting money? Well, without further studies this project is going absolutely nowhere.

If you look back through my posts, http://www.lse.co.uk/member-info.asp?nick=southwesterner&page=2 - you'll see I predicted the need for a PFS, and explained again and again the "project needs more technical work in a number of areas before it can be seriously considered for production readiness" - and that work would include metallurgical testing. Lo and behold, a year later, the company decide that might be a good idea. This is all too slow though. AYM will have run out of money, before they make any real progress with this project.

To be perfectly honest, this whole company is an embarrassment. The only thing that has changed in the past year is metal prices have gone up and then back down again to below where they were in the Scoping Study.

AYM had an opportunity to raise funding to commence a PFS, but they did absolutely nothing. They have repeatedly under-promised and then failed to deliver even their very weak goals on schedule. They are taking the p*ss out of shareholders to be frank.

I hope in the absence of Goldhanger/Daytrader/Bulent we can have some reasonable discussions and rid this chat of a lot of the mind-numbing insults and general ignorance. Hopefully this time their departure will be permanent.

On the subject of ore sorting though, and the general geology of the Hemerdon deposit, I think it prudent to remind ourselves of the colossal "Killas" hosted tungsten (ex-)resources at the deposit. See Appendix 1, 2 - of the 2010 ore resource statement here; http://www.wolfminerals.com.au/irm/PDF/1091_0/MajorResourceUpgrade

The Killas hosted tungsten is enormous, and absolutely dwarfs the granite hosted tungsten veins in volume. However, they were removed from the resource in 2015, following a review, see; http://www.wolfminerals.com.au/IRM/Company/ShowPage.aspx/PDFs/1572-10000000/34PercentIncreaseinOreReservesatHemerdonPr

And I quote:

"The reduction in resources is related to the “prospect for eventual economic extraction”. The historic metallurgical testwork indicated that recovery of tungsten within the Killas (the meta-sedimentary rocks surrounding
the granite body) was possible. However, no further testwork has been completed at this time. Accordingly, Wolf currently considers it prudent to exclude the Killas hosted mineralisation from the resources, to be revisited in the future.

Once the mine is operational Wolf will look at the metallurgical opportunities available with the Killas, such that it may be available to be included in future Mineral Resource Estimates"

Presumably this is the "mineralised waste" that Wolf are trialing ore sorting with and have managed to upgrade it to 1% WO3, which is pretty significant. This is being mined and stockpiled, so it comes with zero mining cost.

I'd be interested hearing the views of anyone with processing knowledge or experience, on why the Killas is so hard to process. I suspect it is because it has such a high density (specific gravity) - and the whole processing methodology at Hemerdon relies on gravity separation from the DMS right through to spirals/tables. By feeding in material with 1% WO3 instead of 0.15% WO3 however, maybe this could make a difference because it only needs to be upgraded 60x rather than 360x

Could be a red herring, and maybe the ore sorting could also be applied to lower grade granite hosted tungsten mineralisation. Regardless, they need to do something to increase Recovery before they go bankrupt, and Ore Sorting has had a lot of success in tungsten in the past and technology has improved a lot over the past few years too, which means it could be a game changer if applied at Hemerdon. Time is running out though.

Difficult to speculate whether the mineralisation in the core is wolframite or cassiterite from the photo of 540-550m in CRD021. I really wouldn't like to guess, only someone with experience from this deposit would stand any chance of telling the difference from such a picture. Of course, it could be neither, or both, but the bit which the Geo is looking closely at seems to have some kind of matrix of quartz and coarse crystals. Time will tell when the assays come back and get reported for CRD021.

More generally though, people keep talking about this as a tin project, but the reality is that the value of the tungsten in the deposit is at least double that of the tin at current metal prices. It should really be called a tungsten-tin(-copper) deposit. But I guess its a PR thing, with tin being seen as an Tech/EV metal, whereas tungsten is more an speciality/industrial metal.

Nonetheless, it becomes particularly relevant when you think about the deepest hole CRD019 which has been used as the main justification for the deep drilling program. Neither of the high grade intersections in it contained a significant quantity of tin, both were <0.03% Sn. The value was all in the tungsten which was well over 1%. So to convert it to a tin equivalent is a bit strange. See p10, http://nae.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/Redmoor-Phase-2-Results.pdf - for the core log assays.

Additionally, the slide on p10 of the new NAE presentation from last week, with the Redmoor long section, which has been reproduced a few times previously now, shows 3 intersections in CRD019, when if you look at the drilling core logs above you will see the 2nd intersection is from within the 1st one; http://nae.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/20180726-NAE-EGM-Presentation-Final.pdf - so it shouldn't be illustrated like that.

Anyway, thats all by the by, but to go to Cornishknockers point regarding "470m below surface, that should be well into the high grade tin zone" - sounds good, but all the indications in this deposit point towards the tin concentration decreasing in closer proximity to the granite.

If you look on p16 of the 2018 Mineral Resource Update, it says "Zonation occurs within these both laterally and vertically, with tungsten (wolframite) proximal to granite, varying into tin (cassiterite) mineralisation more distal from what appears to be the granitic source. Copper (chalcopyrite) mineralisation occurs as a broad zone in proximity to cross courses" - http://nae.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/20180320-Redmoor-2018-Mineral-Resource-Update1.pdf

Now clearly this is different to the standard Camborne-Redruth district zonation which is what the tin at depth theory is based on, but why shouldn't it be. We're at depths greater than what the mines in this area were typically worked to. Maybe the tin will start to increase again within the granite at even deeper depths, but the tungsten will dominate near the contact, who knows, we will see I guess...

Nonetheless the total value of copper, zinc, etc is not going to be particularly great as they occur in quantities where they were not even assayed from the original drilling, and weren't included in the original resource. There are also recorded presences of bismuth and antimony in the report I linked in my post below, but I don't see much commercial value, and they are likely difficult to recover. The next thing I would consider is lithium mica. Someone mentioned Spodumene above - that would be amazing, but I would consider that extremely unlikely, the only other spodumene occurence in the UK is the Meldon aplite which is a LCT-type pegmatite, so a completely different mineral deposit to Hemerdon. Just because its also on Dartmoor, its apples and oranges in geology terms. But there are extensive documented occurrences of lithium micas within tin-tungsten granite deposits, particularly in "greisen" type deposits." For examples, there are two projects that come to mind. Firstly, look at the Cinovec deposit (LSE:EMH) https://www.europeanmet.com/cinovec-lithium-tin-project/ Secondly, the San Jose deposit (ASX:PLH) https://www.infinitylithium.com/san-jose-project These are both examples of lithium mica deposits that are accompanied by tin-tungsten mineralisation. If you want to see more evidence of this, see p103 of the "independent experts report" 2016.... http://www.wolfminerals.com.au/irm/PDF/1948_0/NoticeofGeneralMeetingandIndependentExpert39sReport "The greisenisation of the granite on vein contacts has resulted in the replacement of the original feldspars with fine grained quartz and a lithium rich muscovite. " Lithium rich muscovite. That is basically a low grade lithium mica, very similar to the type of lithium mica at the San Jose project. If this could be concentrated cheaply to 2.0%+ Li2O, it could be exported to China where they commercially process such lithium micas to make lithium carbonate. Demand for lithium micas is increasing significantly over the past year or so, as new Chinese "lepidolite" (lithium mica) processors have come on-stream. eg. http://desertlionenergy.com/desert-lion-energy-announces-offtake-agreement-chinese-lepidolite-converter/ The profitability of such arrangements is very difficult to calculate with the sparse information available and very early stage of development of this material globally. Of course it could potentially be converted to lithium on site but we'd be talking substantive $50m+ capital costs, so there'd need to be more evidence of the ability to recover the lithium micas before that could be justified.

Clearly this is going to remain primarily a tungsten mine, and the fate of the remaining value of investors shareholdings lies fundamentally in the tungsten recovery rates and throughput of the Mill over the coming 3-4 quarters, specifically in stopping the cash hemorrhaging and turning a profit before the accumulated debt becomes unserviceable. The development of these other "saleable materials" are at a fairly preliminary stage or we'd have heard more specific details of it in the Presentation. Also there is a timeline arrow at the bottom of the Slide (p9) which says "2019 onwards". But nonetheless, it would seem appropriate now to speculate regarding potential other "saleable materials". To understand what potential saleable materials there are, one needs to consider the geology. The key thing is that Wolf are mining deeper, out of the oxidised kaolinised near surface zones (c25-40m depths). Hopefully this is going to help increase tungsten recovery because the mineralisation should become more coarse and less friable. But what we will definitely see is a changing mineralisation profile. The most obvious thing would be selling granite aggregate. This will increase in quality as the kaolinisation reduces. Of course, granite isn't worth very much, but equally it will cost Wolf nothing to produce as they would otherwise tip it in the waste dump, and its already crushed down to sub 9mm for the DMS circuit. It would just need a screening circuit, very easy. But equally, its not worth much and would require a planning permission modification to sell over 150kt/year. Below the oxidised zone, the mineralisation will contain significant quantities of sulphides. In fact sometimes there is an enriched zone of even higher grade sulphides immediately below the oxidised zone, called the supergene zone - whether this occurs at Hemerdon I don't know. But anyway, these sulphide minerals can potentially be recovered with a flotation circuit. This report; http://www.wolfminerals.com.au/IRM/Company/ShowPage.aspx?CategoryId=190&CPID=1488&EID=75758304 Outlines that "The main tungsten mineralisation of the Hemerdon granite is a dyke that hosts a stockwork of quartz veins, bearing wolframite and cassiterite, with minor arsenopyrite and other sulphide minerals". Arsenic is more or less worthless, and moreover is a penalty element in most other concentrates, so that is just a nuisance. I remember someone once suggested that the "rabbit in the hat" was selling Scorodite minerals to collectors, which was hilariously stupid. What we could likely see recovered though from this zone is copper and zinc sulphides, with associated minerals like indium, silver, etc. Due to density these would be picked up by the DMS circuit and end up with the tin and tungsten mineralisation so could be removed with a flotation circuit, and potentially sold.

"Commendable... take your findings to the experts at Wolfe rather than post your Negative ideologies on here ! " Give them some credit. The experts at Wolf don't need my "findings" to work out they can't make the business pay based on selling crystals to mineral collectors. Anyone with half an ounce of business acumen can work out its totally irrelevant. "You indirectly say the mine is hemeraging money and is not sustainable..." The mine is hemorrhaging money, that's a verifiable fact which you can find out by reading their quarterly financial accounts. Around �10m a quarter - or �40m per annum. Obviously that is only sustainable so long as Resource Capital Funds keep increasing their loans and don't attempt to recall those loans - clearly the longer this goes on, the less return current shareholders will get. At a certain point if the total debt load becomes unserviceable, and the operation requires refinancing - shareholders may end up with nothing, though the mine may still ultimately become viable. "I myself may not be a engineer but I have a multi million � international business and employ 100 people in uk alone and I can tell you that Rome wasn�t built in a day. So give the mine a chance and stop ****ging it off and we will all see it bear it�s fruits " A mine isn't a tree, it doesn't bear fruit. We know what is down there, and the mine will work (or not) on the basis of cold hard facts, not sentiment. Throughput in tonnes of ore. Recovery rates in concentration. $ of revenue based on commodity pricing. Perhaps your business doesn't work like that, but I can assure you that is how mining works. Time won't solve this. Magic crystals won't solve it. Only increasing the recovery rate of tungsten in the concentrator, which is currently massively under-performing, will make this project viable. "Sorry Southwesterner but when money is involved EVERYONE has an ajenda.. you included. Have a good weekend" You can choose to believe whatever you want regarding my "ajenda", even though I've shown proof of my interest in the project going back over 9 years. Meanwhile you don't even seem to know what day of the week it is.

Clearly Bill is applying modern mining techniques because the mine is planned with a ramp in the Scoping Study. I am sure whatever consultants he uses for the Feasibility Study (probably Micon again given he is their ex-Managing Director) will ensure that remains the case. I was just questioning why the Scoping Study mentions recommissioning (and especially deepening) the shaft at all, because I can't see how that is economically justified at depths of sub 600m with production rates of 1000tpd, and I am pretty confident when they do further research into the full costs of this in the Feasibility Study, they will scrap that part of the plan entirely, because its simply not justifiable. According to Brentharg though, Bill was also talking about mining the Engine Zone from the shaft at the AGM, before mining the White Rock Zone. To me, given there are only 500kt of indicated resources in the Engine Zone, most the good stuff is below the shaft bottom, and the average grade is not much better than the upper part of the White Rock Zone - the idea is a complete non-starter. There is one final possibility... which isn't as crazy as using the shaft for production, but is still pretty out there. That is dewatering the shaft and rehabilitating it with temporary winching equipment solely to conduct a diamond drilling campaign from the 280m level targeting conversion of the deeper inferred resources to indicated. That could be justified, but I think you'd be looking at costs into the several million £, and you'd have to weigh that up against just drilling the extra distance from surface. I know when Western Metals were looking to buy the project in 2008, they were planning a surface & underground drilling program though; "Following the completion of the purchase of Parys Mountain, the company intends to immediately commence a full feasibility study into the potential development of the Project. The scope of the study is to achieve a bankable outcome as soon as possible, with the initial project schedule indicating that this can be achieved within two years and at an overall estimated cost of AUD$12- $15m." "Immediately upon completion of the acquisition the Company aims to commence a 15,000m surface drilling program to be followed by 10,000m of underground based drilling. This will be complimented by a re-commissioning of the shaft and underground workings to gain early access for additional development necessary for further drilling." from; https://hotcopper.com.au/threads/acquire-advanced-uk-copper-zinc-development-op.648187/#.WcFy9iCnGUl But yeah an underground drilling program would be immensely expensive and Anglesey Mining simply don't have that kind of financial backing, so they might as well stick with the current plan of a top down approach, forget the shaft, and concentrate on the zinc rich near surface zones.

"I didn't get an impression from Bill's presentation a clear sense of a phased approach, but as you have alluded to, I think, it would not be necessary to raise entire $53 million capital prior to developing the mine to the point of first production. Taking a staged approach in the journey towards full production and beyond, raising funds as required, is surely more viable than raising the full capitol prior to starting any construction. Bill may have said this, but if he did, I clearly missed it." No, you misunderstand me, it absolutely would be necessary to raise and spend the full $53 million before commencing production. If you read the Scoping Study, the $53 million is "pre-production capital costs". That is to say there would also be some working capital required in addition to this, so the project would need say $55-60 million total available initial capital. The only details the Study gives regarding the breakdown of Capital costs is: - Mine development: $13 million (including the decline and stope development) - Concentrator (including DMS): $29.5 million - Contigency: $4 million The leaves $6.5 million remaining, which is presumably made up of tailings management costs, surface buildings, electrical infrastructure, etc. My point was merely that the cost of the decline to get to a pre-production position is not a big chunk of the overall capital costs of the project, its definitely less than 20% - and it is absolutely necessary to have ramp access for modern mining machinery, in order to mine the orebody efficiently. " Bill was indeed fixated on the development of the Morris shaft but there was also major focus on the 2.5km ramp; it didn't make a great deal of sense to me why the development of both were required, and I was really just questioning the economics and efficiencies of Bill's intended plan" The costs of the shaft deepening and recommissioning for hoisting, are not part of the pre-production capital costs, and it is not specified anywhere what exactly they would be - as it would be hidden in the later sustaining capital costs which affect the NPV of the project, but weren't specified in the Scoping Study write-up. My point was merely that once you accept that ramp access to the orebody is essential for modern efficient mining to take place, it follows that you are set up for trucking ore out of the ramp/decline - starting with say one or two 50 tonne trucks. To then continue that at deeper levels at production rates of 1000tpd, from 500m, which is the lowest ore level with indicated resources, you would need perhaps three such trucks. The point is its a lot cheaper to buy an extra truck or two, than even equip the existing shaft and build a crushing station - never mind deepening it. The operating cost difference will never pay for the investment. http://www.aulasecia.com/anexos/136/1687/Selecting_Shaft_or_Decline.pdf This is stuff from the 90s, and since then ram

Latest Share Chat

Member Info for southwesterner

Followers

Following

Posts (Last 30 Days)

Posts (All Time)

Last Post

Member Since

Share Chat Post Distribution (Last 30 Days)

Activity Log (Last 30 Days)