DEDUCTION ( reanalysis - inferred ) June 26, 2017
The Inferred class of mineralization
declined in tonnage by approximately 86%,
but increased the grade of nickel by 20%
Excuses for Inferred reduction
nickel as low-concentration solid solution in magnetite or silicates
disseminated microcrystalline inclusions of metal sulphides within silicates
physically achieved recoveries in metallurgical testing, process losses
revised geologic interpretation, establishing boundaries
result is physically less mineral bearing rock that can host mineralization.
Changes to metallurgical recoveries and processing costs
increasing cut-off grades
( Inferred 846,389,000 million tonnes )
( Ni 0.23% grade )
Link
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53294034400_a645049e8f_c.jpg
Junior practiced upper / lower hole geology diffrentation.
Phase 2 MET tests
Junior sent ( whole half cores ) to XPS
upper or lower ?
WHAT HAPPENS IF....?
If one creates new boundary zones = reduces main wellgreen
If one changes geological interpretations
If one groups 4 geologies into one geo domain for eng firm
If geo team applies 0.10% solid solution deduction own wire frames
If extraction pretreats ores with acid in open circuit
If one only uses lower hole or only upper = 1/2 intercept loss
If one sends ores to extraction company who prefers only sulphides
If extraction company rejects, mineralized silicates, solid solution, crystalines
If one uses wrong extraction = can't extract all minerals
If one increases cut off eliminating majority of, silicate, crystaline ores
If majority of ores are in silicates, crystalines
and the above actions taken
= it would reduce the resource by 86%
If 2014 used 0.15% cut off ( Ni Eq ) Pt Eq )
And new management increases cut off,
= it would reduce the resource by 86%
I would say its not at all about previous junior using
too large a boundary.... why ?
That outter pit constraint applied to 37 - 51 yrs of mining
2500m x 2500m x 200m deep ( just upper silicates x 2.7 ore weight )
= 3,375,000,000 billion tonnes
2014 stats included east and west pit zones
2.6 km strike
Let's just use ( from mine to central )
1250m x 500m wide x 500m deep x 2.7 ore weight
= 843,750,000 million tonnes
Pretty darn close to, 846 million tonnes inferred.
Which proves it's feasible to achieve 846 million tonnes
in a small constraint.
Tack on part of quill + central and west zones + backside of mountain
= another - 330 million tonnes
330 million t ( m + i )
846 million t ( inferred )
2014 used 0.15% cut off eq
2017 applied a bump up in, cut offs
which just so happens to apply to silicates ( lower grades )
= eliminates silicates
= eliminates upper holes
What if... junior only sent upper holes to xps ?
Test gabbs + sulphides later date ( press said this )
= silicate extraction poor results
Simple Answer ?
Check the phase 2 drill holes
see which part of whole core was sent.
If i recall....
The largest outter pit constraint = 37 - 56 yrs of mining
this inferred was also reduced by 50%
conservative figure
2500m x 2500m x 100m deep x 2.7
= 1,687,500,000
- 50% conservative figure ( 50 ft deep )
= 843,750,000 million tonnes
look at that....
very close to the 2014 - 846 million t - inferred
How much green silicate is seen on Wellgreen ?
= poluted in green - even way off in distance
Throw a dart.... it's everywhere...
Test the green silicates for....
nickel sulphide salt / nickel chloride salt / nickel metal in silicate
and of course all other minerals
Fusion assay.
2015 - 2017 - 2023
made some really odd moves.
Wellgreen is a beast.
Shareholders should all chip in and pay for a new resource calc.
My hunch ?
Helluva lot larger if one includes both,
Silicate + Sulphide.
2012 Wellgreen Image
Cheers...