@spid81 Of course you are correct. Dyslexic. Otherwise its rage,...

@spid81 Of course you are correct. Dyslexic.
Otherwise its rage, rage, tage at the coming of the night..

Nevertheless, tPreviously you said that progress would be much quicker then the 1m/week required to sink shafts. The shafts needed to be lined and proress you advised in drive would be fster because only meshing was required for safety.

Based on other hard rock miners 1.65m/d seemed reasonable given published info from elsewhere, and your supportive comments.

So...why the hell is mining taking 1.5m/week, 10 inches per day??

We should chip in a couple of bucks through crowd funding and buy the poor buggers a sharpening stone to put some edge on their chisels.

answering @downsyde 's post we know currently only two numbers about the ore body. 1m and 2 x ~30cm veins (1.72 total) all in close proximity to each other, and infinity to the earths core somewhere. We do NOT know the width.

Be assumptive and say the veins are all 50cm wide. and lets say mining is 1.5m/week and density is 2tonnes/m3. Lets be rabidly enthusiastic and sell graphene at $100,000/t. (its my opinion only but while early sales may start here and persist for a number of years, this high price will just encourage many more entrant suppliers - a dibble here, dribble there..) leads me to use WG's ascertion that lowest cost will be the highest marginal cost of the interesection of supply and demand. My guess is a range between $20-50k/tonne))

Annual production is 52 weeks x 1.5m/week x 1.72m x 0.5m x 2t/m3 = 134 tonnes per year

Revenue being $13.4m p.a. Is that FGR's business model?

Someone can explain how 1,000 or 4,000 tpa is achieved. Somewhere there must be a factor of 10 or 40 missing.

Three shifs help (unless that is what they are currently doing - though I doubt it).

The answer 3 -10x more. So need another 3 -10 mines. Three mines seems familiar and used I recall by FGR.
.