THE MAG EFFECT... everyone awake ? ( tease )
Dajin's tech report - suggests an approx 7% magnesium.
Two notible Nevada peers - 1.25% ( icm ) and 2% ( cyp )
Obivously Dajin is not using thier power card.
= Magnesium.
Perhaps Dajin should pull forward cyp's PFS report
Such is a good guage ot use for cost to mine metrics
Do one thing and only one thing....
Swap out the lithium and replace thier power card magnesium in the speadsheet
By swaping mineral credits and applying it to....Teels basin
Magnesium suddenly refreshes the bottom line figures....
Peers = 1000 ppm lithium ( average )
Dajin - 500 ppm ( lithium hypothetical ) average
Dajins tech report points to 3x more magnesium
and as mentioned in last post - this sort of credit can tip the scales in favor
of making a project more minable than another.
If we use the 184 tonne example in last post
to make the comparison - it soon becomes evident how magnesium credits
can turn a low grade lithium project into something superior than a nearby
peer with higher lithium grades - - - its about taking a power card mineral credit
and placing it as lead over lithium to see how it compares with peers....
183 TONNE -2 - MINERAL COMPARISON
Dajin Peer
Lithium Lithium
500 ppm ( hypo ) 1000 ppm
184 tonnes 184 tonnes
500 kg LCE 1000 kg LCE
= $4,250 = $8,500
Magnesium Magnesium
7% 2%
183 tonnes 183 tonnes
154 lbs Mg/ per/t 44 lbs/ per t
= 12.8 tonnes Mg = 3.7 tonnes Mg
x $5500 x $5500
= $70.400 = $20,350
GRAND TOTAL
$74,650 = $28,850
Now... i gave Dajin a hypothetical average value of 500 ppm
But you get the idea....
How a Magnesium power mineral can make the bottom line figures
= tip the scales in favor of - using magnesium as a lead credit to front a project
Thing is... Dajin also has thr boron card.
And... significant potaqssium and aluminum.
I've compared a few nevada lithium juniors and thier mineral credit grades.
Dajin seem to come out on top with several minerals that have higher grades than peers..
Credits other than lithium.....
When a project is scoped properly...
its about all mineral credits....
Its also about choosing your best mineral credits
And... runninga flow sheet that favors extracting these minerals for a quick recovery
Some minerals are too painful to recover or the cost ot recover doesn't justify the
extra equipt needed to pull them out.... hence, such minerals are cast aside...
Using another peers PFS speadsheet
Allows another junior to place thier credits in and see what thier minerals
could look like - to compare if thier project has any key advantages...
Again... Dajin would need topolish up thier current constraint
Prove up the minerals to a confidence value
= more push cores....
Again... if iit were me - i'd aim for 5,000m x 5,000m x 31m
Dajins surveys in tech report and also other reports reveal almost xray views of teels
upper strata - very tight lenses might suggest the upper portion is entirely different than the lower strata - hence - richer grades might be with in this range ....The last PDF link in former post also touches on this topic that the - crater - maybe the cause of the minerals in upper strata -
Just playing around with the numbers -
trying to compare what a magnesium credit would look like if placed in the lead
versus
just running witrh a lithium credit trying to compete with other peers
obvioiusly - if a junior has a richer grade other salt credit - richer than than peers - such would be wise to run with - ultimately knocking out othernearby peers - to place your own project in a stance of more minable .... ( stance of financier ) at the end of the day... a finacier wants to see the most profit - and not nessisarily the best grade of lithium - all credits come into play.
Cheers...