COOKIE CUTTER MINING Every mining project differs from another.
Each mining project must be thought of in this way.
Some projects are in close prox to populated areas - great for CO2 concept.
Yet... other projects are remote.
CO2 scheme forces a cookie cutter modelling.
Yet... if CO2 policy removed
it allows the remote miners to utilize the magnesium
as a mineral credit to assist in, economics. ( offset transportation costs )
Remote projects need this buffer to assist advancement.
Otherwise it acts the obsticle - only recieving $75/t seq.
Versus, $350/t
Throw politics in the mix ?
Remote projects have lessor odds.
Any coincidence Alaska is with some resistence with, ore ports ?
If anyone read the article ( Hainse Borough ) that type of language
" Don't want Yukon's dirty ore " ?
That's hardcore activism. Not your every day - small town talk.
Let's ask the question....
Is USA vested in Canadian Critical minerals ?
Indeed.
Skag + Haines ?
What happens when key US ore ports are with resistence ?
It keeps several Canadian projects tame. ( extremely low valuations )
All the while, US is invested in, Canadian Critical Metals.
= Games.
One would never know,
how valuble critical metals are looking at several juniors valuations,
completely opposite to what it should be.
Stews #1 goal ?
Revising 2023 PFS.
- add iron credit ( sep ) magnetite and...convert hematite to magnetites
- add magnesium credit
- account for orher minerals in, bulk con.
- account for exotics.
- pull as much plat group out
= Instant fix
Begin by back tracking to, 2014
Use 2014's MET results
Revise cut off ( revert back to 0.15% cutoff )
Run a plat group Eq forcing peridotite inclusion
Restore 846 million tonne inferred
No more waste
Use blended ore processing
Entertain Road Trains
= Instant fix
If not, how ever would ncp shareholders recieve max value ?
A $0.015 cent stock rising to dollar land would look really odd.
As odd as, Power Nickel ( PNPN ) $0.90 cent flow through shares
while trading @ $0.22 cents.
What's the give away of more tonnage ?
2023 PFS reports ( 1.5 - 1.6 ) billion tonnes
Yet 437 million tonnes mineralized
2014 pdf in former post - accounted for deeper intercepts.
What's so screw bally ?
2017 press said they'd test gabbs + sulphides at later date.
Eluding to, they'd run with peridoties etc...
Yet... xps met tests had unusual excess sulphur in their report.
My first thought was.... testing sulphides.
Again, there's an apparent theme of, preferring just sulphides
with in each report. Throw in West zone drilling veering from promised
East zone drilling - review current West zone intercepts = sulphide preferrence.
YET - lots of evidence proving ( peridotites are just aswell mineralized )
xps + sgs's initial met tests ( 2012 + 2014 ) were ideal for wellgreen.
yet.... late 2015 forward... things drastically changed.
Ironically, xps had no issues with other peer ores containing,
dunite, peridotite, olivines.
NORONT ( comparable ores )
https://stockhouse.com/companies/bullboard/t.ncp/nickel-creek-platinum-corp?postid=35799331
Sulphide midset ( constant theme throughtout exploration years )
2023 has more waste ores than, ever.
2014 year class blended the peridotites.
Factor 2023 pfs shallow pits vs deep drill intercepts
= Points to, only 1/2 hole of intercept accounted for.
Subtract 437 million tonnes from 1.7 billion tonnes
= Peridotite / Dunite domains ( highly likely considered waste )
= But was once stock piled processed later.
2015 middle chart speaks volumes
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53294034400_a645049e8f_c.jpg
2030 timeline, with many games in play.
Which take from investors.
Cheers....
Far easier to revise the 2023 PFS,
than continue this present course of, another collecting cheap shares.