Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

Volt Carbon Technologies Inc V.VCT

Alternate Symbol(s):  TORVF

Volt Carbon Technologies Inc. is a Canada-based carbon science company, with specific interests in energy storage and green energy creation. The Company’s operations are focused on exploring mineral properties and developing its air classifier technology. The Company holds mining claims in the provinces of Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia in Canada. The Company’s wholly owned subsidiary, Solid Ultrabattery Inc., is focused on developing its battery technology. The Company operates through two segments: Research & Development, and Mineral Exploration. The Company holds mineral rights and multiple historic molybdenum properties in British Columbia and a graphite property in Quebec, which include Red Bird Property, Mount Copeland Property, Lochaber Property, Manitouwadge Graphite Property and Abamasagi Lithium Property. The Company operates a battery fabrication facility in Guelph, Ontario, and a carbon research facility in Scarborough, Ontario.


TSXV:VCT - Post by User

Post by petunia1on Oct 15, 2013 2:11pm
166 Views
Post# 21817332

Torch River's graphite testing returns up to 99.1% C

Torch River's graphite testing returns up to 99.1% C

Torch River's graphite testing returns up to 99.1% C

2013-10-15 10:40 PT - News Release
Shares issued 55,792,611
TCR Close 2013-10-11 C$ 0.09

Ms. Laurie McCarney reports

TORCH RIVER ACHIEVES PURITY UPGRADE TO 99.1%C ON WALKER GRAPHITE

Torch River Resources Ltd. has released the results of two test programs on its lump graphite from the company's Walker graphite property in Quebec. The combination of higher reagent concentration and longer retention times in the fifth test provided the 99.1%C best result. This positions the Company's graphite as being fully suited for a wide range of high purity applications.

The test work was carried out at Process Research Ortech in Mississauga, Ontario and lab analysis was done at Activation Laboratories Inc. (Actlabs) in Ancaster, Ontario. The goal of the tests was to assess the potential of the Walker lump graphite to be upgraded to 95-99%C, which is considered to be commercially marketable levels. The first program consisted of a series of grinding and flotation stages, as well as a caustic leaching process. Material used in the testing was assembled during the Company's sampling program announced in July, 2013 which outlined naturally occurring in situ grades of 89.5%C. As the table below indicates, the upgrade process was successful in increasing this to a preliminary upgrade of 97.3%C. This is generally considered to be suitable for a wide range of product applications in the graphite sector. Sample material was also weighed before and after testing to assess yield recoveries. As the table also indicates the tests were successful in producing very favourable yields which will be important in maintaining a low cost base when mineral processing the Walker graphite.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initial Test Protocol: Grind, Rougher Float, First Clean, Second Clean Initial Initial Reagent Sample Grade Conditioning (EKOF Test Date: 13-Aug-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (min) drops) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Grind 237.4 -------------------------------------------- Rougher Phase 89.5% 5 4 ---------------------------------- First Clean 2 3 ---------------------------------- Second Clean 2 2 ---------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Initial Test Protocol: Grind, Rougher Float, First Clean, Ending Second Clean Float Reagent Final Sample Time (EKOF Grade Weight Test Date: 13-Aug-13 (min) drops) (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Grind ------------------------ Rougher Phase 14 2 ------------------------ First Clean 14 3 -------------------------------------------- Second Clean 8.5 96.1% 236.5 -------------- ---------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 99.6% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Second Test Protocol: Third Clean, Fourth Clean Initial Initial Reagent Sample Grade Conditioning (EKOF Test Date: 05-Sep-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (min) drops) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third Cleaner 212.5 96.1% 5 6 -------------------------------------------- Fourth Cleaner 5 6 ------------------------ Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Second Test Protocol: Third Ending Clean, Fourth Clean Float Reagent Final Sample Time (EKOF Grade Weight Test Date: 05-Sep-13 (min) drops) (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third Cleaner 10.5 4 -------------------------------------------- Fourth Cleaner 9 4 96.1% 195.6 -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 92.0% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third Test Protocol: Caustic Soda Leaching Initial Initial Solution Sample Grade Caustic Leach concentrate Test Date: 19-Sep-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (hrs) (%) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 156.5 96.1% 4 30.0% -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Third Test Protocol: Caustic Ending Soda Leaching Caustic Final Sample soda wt. NA Grade Weight Test Date: 19-Sep-13 (gms) (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 1,710 NA 97.3% 155.8 -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 99.6% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Following this initial test phase, the same material was then subjected to three different variations on the caustic leaching process. In the first test, the leaching retention time was increased from four to six hours. In the second, the caustic concentration was increased to 50% and retention time was again six hours. And in the third, the material was subjected to a regrind stage that decreased particle sizes from 47 microns down to 20 microns. Reagent concentration and retention time was 50% and six hours respectively in the third test as well. As the table below indicates, test results also provided by ActLabs indicate that the Company was successful in increasing the grade up to 99%C+ in both the fourth and fifth variations of the simple and cost-effective leaching process. The combination of higher reagent concentration and longer retention times in the fifth test provided the 99.1%C best result. As noted above, this positions the Company's graphite as being fully suited for a wide range of high purity applications.

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fourth Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - retention time increased from 4 to 6 hours. Initial Initial Solution Sample Grade Caustic Leach concentrate Test Date: 03-Oct-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (hrs) (%) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 30% sol'n 33.7 96.1% 6 30.0% -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fourth Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - retention time Ending increased from 4 to 6 hours. Caustic Final Sample soda wt. Grade Weight Test Date: 03-Oct-13 (gms) NA (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 30% sol'n 673.7 NA 99.0% 32.7 -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 97.0% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fifth Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - concentration increased from 30% to 50%. Initial Initial Solution Sample Grade Caustic Leach concentrate Test Date: 03-Oct-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (hrs) (%) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 31.9 96.1% 6 50.0% -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fifth Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - concentration increased Ending from 30% to 50%. Caustic Final Sample soda wt. Grade Weight Test Date: 03-Oct-13 (gms) NA (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 637.7 NA 99.1% 30.8 -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 96.6% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Six Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - additional regrind from 47 microns down to 20 microns. Initial Initial Solution Sample Grade Caustic Leach concentrate Test Date: 03-Oct-13 Wt. (gms) (%C) Time (hrs) (%) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 36.5 96.1% 6 50.0% -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Six Test Protocol: caustic soda leach - additional regrind from Ending 47 microns down to 20 microns. Caustic Final Sample soda wt. Grade Weight Test Date: 03-Oct-13 (gms) NA (%C) (gms) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Caustic Soda leaching: 50% sol'n 729.6 NA 98.7% 34.6 -------------------------------------------- Recovery Yield (final weight / initial weight) 94.8% ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

These positive test results are also consistent with the Company's belief that the Walker Graphite property contains economically upgradeable deposits of lump graphite and should therefore be the focus of a full geologic development program in the months ahead. This program commenced in early October with a preliminary beep mapping survey to examine for conductors, and will be followed by an airborne EM survey shortly thereafter. Results from both of these next stages will form the basis for an initial historical NI 43-101 report on Walker, and the Wallingford and St. Jovite properties, also in Quebec, which the Company previously announced that it had entered into a non-arm's length non- binding agreement to acquire. Upon completion of the preliminary report, the Company will develop and define a comprehensive drill program to properly quantify the size and extent of its lump graphite deposits. The drill results and expanded NI 43-101 will be used to prepare a pre and/or full feasibility study as part of the definitive effort to bring the properties into production as soon as possible. The low-cost production opportunity provided by lump graphite will permit the development of an optimized flow sheet that should similarly result in low capital expenditure requirement to process the lump graphite. Mr. Ogilvie noted "the direct results of a low-cost recovery operation and capital budget are one of the principal guiding reasons for our focus on lump graphite, be it in Quebec or Sri Lanka. On that basis we will be making every conceivable effort to move forward rapidly with our plans to establish economically successful production facilities in both locations."

Graphite continues to be considered a key strategic element in numerous product applications in global markets around the world, and also holds enormous potential in the emerging high-purity applications incorporating graphene. Lump graphite in particular shares virtually all of the same qualities as flake graphite, particularly in terms of the highly ordered crystalline structure in both. This permits product applications that require uniformity in terms of processing behaviours and subsequent application situations. Graphite gaskets for example require a high degree of compressibility, formability and thermal and chemical resistance qualities. The same type of crystalline uniformity is critical in battery applications where it ensures the effective transfer of electrons and lithium ions across battery cells to permit efficient charge and discharge qualities.

As the Torch team approaches a decade of graphite development work, they know how critically important it is for companies entering the graphite business to fully understand the customer mindset when preparing to offer products.

Customers will be concerned with each graphite deposit's unique "chemical signature" which may or may not fit with their existing supply streams. If the graphite contains unacceptable impurities it may not immediately blend with the customer's broader range of graphite supply streams. If that is the case, the customer may have to tailor their own internal production processes. Such decisions are not made lightly so new graphite suppliers can expect to undergo rigorous test protocols not only to assess processing parameters, but also suitability in the end products themselves. Too many parts per million (ppm) of one impurity or another and a graphite product may not perform as required.

The quality control standards are therefore exacting and require companies such as Torch to continually submit product, undergo testing and maintain a robust internal research & development capability as it moves forward to becoming a long- term supplier. On this point Mr. Ogilvie echoes the sentiments of his entire management team when he notes that "a lot of companies vastly underestimate the length of time it will take to succeed in the graphite business. Three to five years to become fully established with a customer in the base graphite business is not uncommon, and that is after you managed to design, build, and commission a new mine and mill. They also underestimate the complexity associated with understanding and working with graphite specs ranging from crystallinity, purity, intercalated internal structures, surface areas, and conductivity and corrosion resistance - At Torch we do not. We have spent extensive time working with customers to understand that product development and adoption cycle and know how rigorous the process can be. As I've already noted, that is also one of the many reasons we focused on lump graphite as it offers us the opportunity to shorten that development cycle, lower our costs, and permit us to more quickly enter the graphite market space. As such we are confident that with consistent execution of our business plans we can rapidly be in production and servicing a wide range of profitable market segments. We feel that with high in-situ purities, low cost production benefits, and near-term production potential, lump graphite stands out clearly from flake, amorphous, and a few of the fringe versions of graphite currently being promoted. Those are powerful differentiators and we continue to make all efforts to raise that awareness with customers that are fully versed in the potential and cost advantages offered by lump graphite. We look forward to keeping our shareholders, investors and the public fully informed on our progress as we develop our Canadian and Sri Lankan projects".

About Lump/Vein Graphite

Lump or Vein graphite is considered to be one of the rarest, commercially valuable, and highest quality types of natural graphite. It occurs in veins along intrusive contacts in solid lumps and is only actively mined in Sri Lanka. As a result of the carbon content typically found with lump/vein graphite recovery operations, costs will normally be lower than flake or amorphous graphite recovery. Lump graphite processing techniques can include everything from hand sorting of large concentrated samples to standard crushing, grinding, froth flotation and milling. Lump/vein graphite is suitable for many of the same applications as flake graphite giving it a distinct competitive edge in terms market prices and product applications.

The Company's geologist, Ms. Isabelle Robillard, P. Geo., (an Associate of Inlandsis Consultants s.e.n.c.) is an Independent Qualified Person under National Instrument 43-101, and has approved the technical information in this news release.

We seek Safe Harbor.


Bullboard Posts