Rush Rare Metals Corp C.RSH

I Got More Information From Peter!

[javaman12]

 I sent him another e-mail today again! Here's what I said to him:

Peter:
 
Thanks for the insight about the insitu leaching of uranium from a ground deposit (typical of what might be done at a project like Copper Mountain). 

[However, there are 'many other variables' at play in evaluating a uranium mining prospect. One of these would be whether such process (ISL) might prove amenable at Copper Mountain would depend upon the geology of the underground structures!]

[His exact words about some of these considerations were (I don't think he would mind me sharing this info since it is all open source material. I just didn't do that research!):

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" Deposit overall size - the larger the size, the lower the grade required for profitability.  There is a massive uranium mine in Africa which mines grades averaging just 100 ppm due to sheer size and resulting economies of scale (with low cost of labour also playing a factor there).  Copper Mountain, similarly, certainly appears to be on the larger/scalable side! 

• Metallurgy - efficiencies in milling and achieving high levels of recovery can be dramatically affected by the surrounding and host rock - even with high grades, if it costs a fortune to mill/separate out the U, it might not be economic.  Conversely, if metallurgy is favourable, lower grades can suddenly become very economic.  At Copper Mountain, Jim Davis, who advises Myriad, and actually worked at the Arrowhead Mine that operated there in the 50's and 60's (he's now in his 90's)... Essentially, cheap easy separation and high recoveries can mean profits even where overall grades might be lower.
• Cost of labour, taxation, government support - of course all play a big role - more government support, lower tax, reliable cheap labour equals lower grades required for profit.
• Amenability to ISR - this can be a huge factor.  ISR/ISL mining methods are not always possible - it very much depends on the surrounding geology, and whether you can effectively "compartmentalize" and direct the flow of liquids using pressure underground.  However, when ISR is possible, it reduces mining costs massively.  So, a deposit averaging 250ppm U ("generally" considered too low, even at surface), could suddenly be highly profitable if ISR methods can be employed.     
• Isolation/weather - The closer the deposit is to industry and infrastructure, and the more accessible it is generally, the cheaper mining it will be.  For example, higher grades are needed in remote Northern Saskatchewan than in Wyoming for profitability.  Copper Mountain is just off a logging road with a power line, 30 minutes to an interstate highway, and maybe 60 minutes from Riverton (15,000 people).   

 
We could go on and on listing external factors to consider, but hopefully these examples all help illustrate the general point...  Start with the 1% for underground / 500ppm for open-pit rule, but then remember to look to a whole bunch of additional factors and adjust the prospect accordingly.  Is it remote?  Accessible all year?  Roads/power nearby?  Deposit overall size potential?  Etc. etc.  One of the reasons I really believe in Copper Mountain is that it scores favourably on almost all these external factors (size, accessibility, metallurgy, ISR potential, gov support, low tax, and the list goes on). ]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  I did some research on Wikipedia and found out that it (ISL)had already been done in the past in the state of Wyoming using sulfuric acid which is pretty brutal stuff and not too environmentally friendly!

But today's method uses a solution of sodium carbonate to dissolve out the uranium. Then the liquid is filtered through resin beads using an ion exchange process (perhaps this beads are electrically charged somehow) and the uranium is transferred into the resin which is then shipped easily to a processing plant. I believe that there may be one in the US, maybe Texas?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_situ_leach#Minerals 

"...n-situ leach for uranium has expanded rapidly since the 1990s, and is now the predominant method for mining uranium, accounting for 45 percent of the uranium mined worldwide in 2012.^[2]
Solutions used to dissolve uranium ore are either acid (sulfuric acid or less commonly nitric acid) or carbonate (sodium bicarbonate, ammonium carbonate, or dissolved carbon dioxide). Dissolved oxygen is sometimes added to the water to mobilize the uranium.^[3] ISL of uranium ores started in the United States and the Soviet Union in the early 1960s. The first uranium ISL in the US was in the Shirley Basin in the state of Wyoming, which operated from 1961-1970 using sulfuric acid. Since 1970, all commercial-scale ISL mines in the US have used carbonate solutions.^[4][3] ISL mining in Australia uses acid solutions.^[5]

Ion exchange resin beads

In-situ recovery involves the extraction of uranium-bearing water (grading as low as 0.05 %, or 500 ppm, U₃O₈). The extracted uranium solution is then filtered through resin beads.^[3] Through an ion exchange process, the resin beads attract uranium from the solution. Uranium loaded resins are then transported to a processing plant, where U₃O₈ is separated from the resin beads and yellowcake is produced. The resin beads can then be returned to the ion exchange facility where they are reused..."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So 500 ppm is an amount of 0.05% according to this source (wikipedia). How deep does the oxide layer at the Copper Mountain property run? I saw a video made by a guy ( I think it was Myriad's CEO), who said the plan is to drill through the old intercepts on an incline but much deeper in the hope that the drill bit might intercept some higher grade ore body. Presumably this kind of rock structure would no longer be oxide in nature but might consist of some harder rock which might make some leaching process using sulfuric acid more amenable to that kind of uranium extraction. What is your understanding of the process used to extract such deep rock if a higher grade find is made? Or would this be oxide material deeper down as well?


 
You know, this kind of information could be posted on your webpage to help explain to investors the value offered by each separate deposit (Copper Mountain and Boxi). It sounds to me that it could  be a relatively cheap process to extract the uranium at Copper Mountain. In fact, if the cash could be borrowed cheaply then some processing could occur at almost any time once some confirmation drilling has been done and the proper equipment purchased or leased to begin the operations. Then exploration could continue as needed to keep the operation running along in a smoother way!
 
It's just an idea (of mine) that may not be a practical one?
 
Boxi is a different matter entirely. However now I better understand that some of the lower grades found there near surface might be more significant after all! Blend the higher grade material with a larger bulk of cheaper stuff and 'voila', we have a mineable project! So if 1000 ppm is a 0.1 % grade, maybe this could work? There were plenty of lower grade intercepts that ran greater than that if I recollect properly. But of course the metallurgy is the critical matter as well as the cost of crushing the ore and how finely it must be done! Separation of the mineralization from the crush is not something that I have researched yet. But you probably already have a pretty good handle on this!
 
So the next logical step at Boxi might the matter of getting a bulk sample out of the ground at surface (perhaps 2 samples at least: one high grade and one some lower grade; using some reasonable low grade and high cut-off values) and getting the metallurgy figured out, right away!
 
It probably makes little sense in continuing to explore along the dyke, until this is done, if the most the company expects to find at surface is just more pockets of the high grade ore at random locations.
 
On the other hand if your expectations are greater for some unknown reason to me, then follow through, and discover that 'mother lode' at surface! It's still early Summer, a perfect time to explore! Maybe you can perform both type of operations? Can the company afford the cost?
 
If the company is really serious about exploring a mining possibility at Boxi, then perhaps you had better get at it!
 
Time waits for no one!  Our share price is still stuck today at 8 cents! That's pretty sad to me! But it can be turned around sooner than later!
 
After the metallurgy is done and has proven successful, then the company would likely have to carry out the massive undertaking of sampling the entire dyke at perhaps 5 m intervals?
 
What step out and infill sampling do you think, might be needed to be done? Some different interval? Normally, a fully measured result requires it to be done at 25 meter intervals, I do believe!
 
That could prove to be an expensive proposition and involve a lot of time. But again perhaps some mining could begin before the entire dyke has been all properly explored? And as you have mentioned, there may also be other dykes or off-shoots, that would need a similar kind of exploration pattern!
 
I look forward to hearing from you again tomorrow or later if you have the time!
 
Thanks for your feedback!"

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                   This still looks like a good investment to me!

                                                                  Java


 

[javaman12]

Sorry but I don't have it quite right yet. And I have been doing a lot of wilder speculating here about what the company should do! But I am an outsider (shareholder) looking in on the workings of the management mind.  But it's really worth the effort to try to understand as much as we can! Pete got right back to me about trying to understand the terminology regarding ppm