FINAL NOTE - ( response to Leaky66 )Once the gold is placed in the extraction circuit it's not lost.
That is... until it's taken out by the miner.
If the original circuit only frinds ores to a 200 mesh for first concentrate float, one then
has to ask how much gold could be lost if - gold might still be harbored in the graphite 200 mesh ?
Such a calculation might ( stress/hypothetical ) involve buffers.
Meaning - true headgrade might be a solid 1g/tonne but junior might run with a .85/g/tonne.
Then, after processing use an allotment of ( .15g ) with an outcome of - .70/g/tonne.
Who knows...
Tech report reveals... the gold imparts at the 400 mesh grind, which i find is great news.
And... could be as easy as inserting the 400 mesh regrind phase at the intial primary grind
eliminating the 200 mesh grind.
Truth be told - will be known in the first clean water concentrate float.
If an agent could be used to hold gold in aqua solution and an agent ( might not need one )
assist with graphitic float to skim off, - could prove positive.
IDEAS -
1) 400 mesh gold could still drop out and graphite easily rises to surface due to hydrophobia
gold - is no longer in graphitics to sink - maybe a simple detergent to assist gold from water
tension. If this could be achieved - and significant graphites are removed - the next
concentreate phase could process and reduce ( solubilize ) the gold into acid solution.
GOLD is now captured - off to to final flotation .
2) Using a reagent that places gold into solution without affecting the graphite in first float.
Is there such a product - whether acid - or gold flock - that could harbor the gold in a
consolofdated manner to ensure no loss during first float.
3) An opposite of # 2 - flocking or coagulating the graphite to group away from the gold.
The answer answers revolves around - how does the graphite or carbon behaves at a 400 mesh.
Does it still retain its abiity to - float on its own or does it need assistence ?
Which is why i wanted to know if the graphite was an organic or inorganic - one is a petro carbon the other is a metalic carbon.
SPA - would have thier anser by simply - performing a test with a 400 mesh...
ascertaining what hasppens to the gold and graphite at the 400 mesh and panning out
the skim off the first float even fire assay to see if any gold escaped with in the floating of
the imparted graphite during first float phase.
The beaut facotr ?
The entire extraction flowsheet remains intact.
A simple swapping of the grind phase is switched up.
Mc Clelland Labs should have performed a 400 mesh grind and applied it to the first phase
whe nthey seen / discovered that the gold suddenly showed up at the 400/ mesh grind.
Such in my opinion - proves that the gold was stil limbedded in the 200 mesh.
Which is most likely why a secondary concentrate sulphur was was introduced.
My hunch says... to cautious for fear of losing gold in the first phase - thus - stick to a 200 mesh
and keep gold in the 200 mesh with graphite and hit the graphite with a dose of sulphur acid to
put it into solution / or further impart - dissolving the graphite / and dependent upon time ore
is kept in this sulphur - dictates the amount of dissolving.
That's al li've got shareholders...
My intent was not ever to offend anyone...
But rather... i saw a potential secondary credit and decided to see if there was a way
to bring it into the picture -
What was my passion driven by ?
LOL - i had just researched graphite for a few weeks.
I didn't even know SPA's ores had graphite. ( kid you not )
I only discovered they did upon reading thier tech reports.
And with the knowledge - i gained from researching graphite - it was a given.
Meant to be ? Who kniows...
But... it was all... and still is, in plight of...
pointing the graphite out - helping the junor to bring more value to the shareholders.
Now... whether the graphite is low grade and not a battery or graphene quality...
I still applied a low bal lvalue to the graphite in which to see what sort of value
it might offer... and still, there could be a value in the graphite.
What's needed to know is... kind of graphite and grade of graphite.
This is imperitive to know the true value.
Now... what kept my adamency going ?
The faxct that the ores ( 3 of them ) are known to harbor graphitics.
Dependent upon which report one reads - the argillite is upto 67%
Which is the figures i crunch the numbders with.
I didn't even facotr the shales nor the siltstons which are also known to harbor graphitcs.
Cheers...