"I'm sure you're aware that the only trench that has tested flows near over 1/3rd of the lake disappointment trenchable area was trench 6 which had some of the lowest flows (at least it didn't completely dewater like 4 other trenches!). I'd rather a representative sample over the whole area first, thanks."
You might want to go back and look at the RWD December 16 quarterly. I think you will find that trench PT07A is within the future trench zone and recorded a steady state of 360 cubes/hr/km and PT04, again in the trench zone, 164 cubes/hr/km. I admit the trenches were not uniform size. The RWD average across all trenches was 159.
The Mackay result of 1.4 cubes/day/m translates to 58 cubes/hr/km. The current RWD trenches, using AMN units of flow have thus far pumped 0.69 cubes/day/m.
As for grade, 13.4kg/cube versus 8kg/cube means AMN has to pump 1.6 times the volume into ponds 1.6 times larger. Grade does matter.
LD Trench 6 that you refer to, had flows of 47 cubes/hr/km. Using the known grades above, even this trench would yield more K than this new MacKay trench that you guys are excited about.
Do you think AMN deliberately use different units of flow to avoid easy direct comparisons?
It will be interesting to see how the next batch of results shape up. Good luck.
Add to My Watchlist
What is My Watchlist?
