2018 - PEA https://www.pureenergyminerals.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/PureEnergy_ClaytonValleyPEA_Rev1_23March2018.pdf
2 BEST - CV HOLE Li VALUES - CUBIC METER OF BRINE
132 ppm - 579,200 0.06 - cubic meter 10/3
221 ppm - 1,971,000 0.06 - cubic meters 10/3
What irks me most...?
the above two cubic meter - lithiim - brine volumes show the original / volimes
yet...when the PEA was revised they used these cubic meter volumes, and appears
thry only used a fraction of the total volime amoumt of brine, present.
Thus, reducing the overall size of, resource.
If my, ( irk ) assesment is, at all correct...( do chime, in to corect if wrong )
Then, what would the reason be for doing, so ?
Could it be, Nevada limited the amount of brine PE could pump based on aqiifer tables ?
If - so...tuen why didn"t PE fix thier PEA prior to selling...?
Update the PEA to align with a lithium ( brine plant extraction ) which would have
allotted for the redistribution of spent brines back downhole...
Would this not have triggered the repair of original resource values ?
If, at all correct ' could PE not have atrracted more...than 3% royalty...?
Hello.
Excuse the typos...
my tablet screen is cracked.
Helluva, task just to type...
Cheers....
Maybe, someone, should ask PE about this...
If they're applyimg a plant extraction...and if spemt brines are sent bwck downhole,
then...would it not mean all the less brine used, if miner replenished, aquifers ?
Should this not affect the size of resource whereas, original resource could be reinstated ?
Something to think about.