Thermal Coal Statements by Raven Yeesh, what a mess that last post was. My apologies please ignore that post lets do this again. (I hate forums that have no edit functionality!) I'm on a better system now that can copy/paste properly.
I was being sarcastic about the fish farming. Yes fish farming is aquaculture. The controversy though and the major problems are coming specifically from open net Atlantic salmon farms, not shellfish farms of native species that have been there for 60 years like the ones that may be put in jeopardy by this mine in Baynes Sound. I
And about the thermal coal prospects. Sorry it came from the Raven Coal press release which was published in May 2011 before the PAH Wood McKenzie study was released the next month in June. You can search for the press release easily. It's on the news wire.
COMPLIANCE ENERGY CORPORATION - POSITIVE FEASIBILITY RESULTS RECEIVED FOR THE RAVEN COAL PROJECT
https://www.newswire.ca/en/story/748713/compliance-energy-corporation-positive-feasibility-results-received-for-the-raven-coal-project
Here's the important quote... thermal part is bolded:
Raven coal can be processed to a final product specification of 10 percent ash (dry basis) and approximately 1.2 percent sulphur and is suitable for the metallurgical coal market. Alternatively, all of the Raven washed product could be marketed as a high-quality thermal coal with average product specifications of 7,000 kcal/kg and 15 percent ash on a dry basis. Given this, the process plant has been designed with the flexibility to produce metallurgical coal, with a thermal middlings coal by-product or alternatively a high-quality thermal coal. There are markets for metallurgical coal, thermal (or "steam") coal, and industrial coal (higher than 15 per cent ash on a dry basis) available for the Raven Project.
........
From that press release and with the supporting June 2011 PAH/Wood McKenzie analysis it is abundantly clear that Raven is keeping its options open so it can run the plant to produce 60/40 metallurgical plus thermal middlings products... OR full on straight thermal coal.
The other big negative about this mine, and I would think this would be just as much a negative on the production/cost side as it is from an environmental side, is that there just isn't that much yield of coal. Now perhaps this is normal for a coal mne but here's the statement from the PAH report:
"The theoretical yield of the metallurgical coal is 43.3 percent. The practical yield after allowing for dilution and process plant efficiency is reduced to 38.5 percent. Higher ash coal is planned to be recovered as a thermal coal by- product at an average ash of 15 percent. This increases the total theoretical yield to 49.2 percent and the practical yield to 43.8 percent."
In other words no matter what they're actually selling, at best 51% of what they actually dig out of the ground will be waste rock. That's stunning to me as a layman.