INFERRED - 2012 ( 446 million tonnes ) ( they had to known something )
- 2015 (
846 million tonnes ) 700+ holes ( relogging, reassaying, more drilling, digitizing )
Dividing the drill intercepts. Upper hole
VS Lower Hole.
Separating geologies.
Next up.... March 1, 2017 - Practical Entitlement. https://www.nickelcreekplatinum.com/investors/news-releases/press-release-details/2017/Wellgreen-Platinum-Announces-Results-of-Metallurgical-Testwork/default.aspx
Rears it's head.
Up to 95% loss ( dependent on recoveries )
4 months later... June 26, 2017 https://www.nickelcreekplatinum.com/investors/news-releases/press-release-details/2017/Wellgreen-Platinum-Announces-Updated-Resource-Estimate/default.aspx 86% of inferred resource is lost.
Real reason ?
Was it market conditions = That wouldn't affect tonnage in the ground.
Was it operating costs = That doesn't affect tonnage in ground.
Could it be = additional metallurgical testwork YES. Which is highly likely,
A 2012 inferred resource of, 446 million tonnes increasing to,
846 million tonnes ( with all the work reassayinh, relogging, lots more drilling )
Is still there.
Could it be ? Course Grind was the causative of the reduction of inferred resources
from 846 million tonnes down to lil over 100 million tonnes ?
Extraction chosen... Was bias with,
silicates, solid solution, carbonates, crystalines ?
Only preferring sulphides ?
You decide.
Could the 846 million tonnes only be assigned to - East going West ?
Versus.... This new northern deposit that comes down into main mine ?
Could the northern zone coming into mine area ( 2015 )
Host all the more resources ?
That would depend on which junior presents which - pit zone.
There's several pit zones.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many of Wellgreen assays saw - partial digestion.
Other nickel juniors perform - full digestion.
Yes.... there's a difference.
Just as there is with...
Using different acid methods.
2012 assaying used FUSION ( strong acid )
This method provides superb results.
Which brings this subject round to, Sulphide metallic - Solid Solution - Carbonate
2012 assay tests reveals 2 nickel categories.
2 diff grades.
One is clearly marked -
Sulphide metallic ( easy mineral to extract )
Other is most likely ( solid solution, carbonate )
This needs further findings.
Hudson report reveals very high grade minerals, in carbonates.
Note - all metals including plats are also known to come in, carbonates.
2 Nickels... Sheds more light on former year class assaying grades
that were 0.60% vs the 0.26% present grades.
Besdies the 2 different nickel charts in,
yellow. Please say you noticed the
dark orange box ? Which brings the subject round to, Titanium, in the Peridotites. Other Titanium grades revealed in 2012 Tech run
as high as, 0.80+% CNC, has as Chromium credit.
After finished concentrate is produced.
The chromiun grade is only 3%
Wellgreen's Titanium in Peridotites has a mean average of,
0.29% better than our present nickel grades.
Titanium = $6 per Kg = $13.20 lb
Better than current nickel prices
Hypothetical Inferred
Though 846 million tonnes was once pressed.
I'll use 2012 stats = 486 million tonnes
Top chart ( 2015 PEA )
https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53294034400_a645049e8f_c.jpg 486,000,000 million tonnes
x 0.29% Ti
=
1,409,400 titanium tonnes
x 1000 kg conversion
= 1,409,400,000 kg's x $ 6 kg
= $8,456,400,000 billion usd 
Our special X extraction, certainly has the X factor going on.
Can't handle, solid solution, silicates, crystalines.
There's still the carbonate mineral factor.
Two kinds of, minerals.
What form is Titanium ?
Titanium is nonmagnetic
Titanium is a crystaline
We have Titanium in the silicates whereas, extraction can't handle, crystalines.
lol Niether can this special X extraction handle the minerals in magnetites ( press )
Did they not perform a half a/s/s bench test that determined upto
40% of the PGM's tagged along with magnetites ?
lol
SUM ? - 846 million tonnes inferred
- 86% reduction in inferred ( strongly points to wrong extraction )
- Course grind in extraction - former studies used fine grind - good results.
- 2 nickels ( maybe only sulphide is accounted for... ( upper / lower intercepts )
- Carbonate minerals ( talc and carbon limes discarded first )
- Much of our assaying saw 1/2 digestion ( carb vs sulphide metallic comes to mind )
- Titanium should be in the mix - cnc has their chromium
- Silicate mineral once fine ground and acid introduced = mineral bonds with acid
not seeing this in met studies - it's like they're running raw ore extractions
even not dealing with the irons and magnetite ( firstly, or roasting ) such would
alter recoveries
- Magnetite + Iron should be in the mix - other juniors include it. ( adds billions )
- Mega river near West deposit could provide endless power
- Power to run furnaces that refine the metal = command big bucks per tonne
- Based on, 2012, 2015, 2023 - i'm seeing several deposits.
Upper, Lower, east to west, coming from north.
Ore geology has also segragated the ores into diff deposits.
It's how i'm reading the Wellgreen.
2012 Tech
https://secure.kaiserresearch.com/i/jk/tr16/TRNKL20120801.pdf
One of my favorite, posts.
Wellgreen is worth a mint.
Own opinion...
Not investment advice.
I seek stocks that are ripe for buyouts.
I'm bias... seeking Large player monies, not small investors.
I figure... Wellgreen is a superb project
Just not assembled, measured, assayed, met studied properly.
Other metals are there, but are not recognized.
Cheers...