Ann: Board Restructure, page-49

So its 6bn tonnes at 3.6% grade for 216mT of "rare earths".

But has only 2.6% HREO.
IXR has around 27% HREO as a percentage of its basket. (in ground %) i.e. before processing.

There's a reason that deposit has been known about since the early 2010's but nothing happened, because it's fairly well worthless and uneconomical to extract atleast for purpose of supplying the HREO lathanides.

BTW it's a carbonatite deposit - these on average are 9% HREE so it's mud HREO grade even for a Carbonatite.
Average HREO for ionic clays is around 26%. IXR right on that with around 27-28% in its head grade. moves to 50% plus post processing.

Hard rock rare earths plays are linearly processes, meaning whatever the HREO content before, almost always the same afterwards unless they "crack" the product. See 500m USD capex.




however moves to 50% in the concentrate




IMO there's a reason the NK deposit has been known about and nothing done. because it's not economic.



highlighted is where IXR sits should it realise its 500mT exploration target, which places it firmly has a global leader ionic clay project



Even this paper didn't know about Makuutu but mentions north korea.

Thanks for citing the link, i have a few papers which discuss Jongju i think it's uneconomic in terms of lathanide extraction especially for HREO and CREO.

SF2TH