What are the issues? The environmental campaigners are the least of them. The outcomes of the due diligence will be interesting!!!
Have a look at the grades and thicknesses of the CCZ drilling and tell me how they get the the current INFERRED resource.
Average true width of all intercepts is 1.6 metres. Block model sub-cells are 5m N-S, 3 x the average true width! When a vein-type deposit is modelled, a wireframe is designed which closely follows the vein boundaries as determined by sampling. In this case the wireframes were designed simply using a 0.1% copper cut-off which is not appropriate.
Only 8 intercepts out of 49 have a grade higher than the grade of the in-situ resource. The length-weighted average copper grade is only 1.6% Cu.
At a true width of 1.6 metres and density of 3 tonnes / cubic metre the long-sectional area of the in-situ resource would be 900,000 square metres. The total long-sectional area below excluding sky is about 500,000 square metres. So at the true width, the diagram is way too small to accommodate the resource. The latest resource contains no information that I could find on in-situ densities. All of the light blue holes are duds. The old, deeper drilling (CRAE etc.) found nothing worthwhile. That drilling is not shown on this long section.
As for being close to Cadia...completely different geology.
IMI Price at posting:
4.3¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Not Held
