Ann: MTD023 Assays Confirm Discovery of Significant Nickel System, page-369

@CounterVin

As I've posted before, nickel geology is new to me but I presume that the mineralisation is a continuum from 100% Ni in silicate to 100% Ni in sulphide.

Some of the aqua regia, 4-acid tests by WMG show 80-90% recovery by the former, near 100% by the latter so not all sulphides in the mix.

If, as you say, the silicate is unrecoverable then the 0.36% must be sulphide.

If, on the other hand, the silicates and sulphides are inter-mixed then it is quite possible that there are nickel silicates in the Mt Keith sulphide concentrate. The question is does that matter? I don't know.

I would have thought that Ni in silicate when thrown into a smelter below becomes molten nickel and molten silicates. That nickel would be separable from the melt just as the sulphide nickel is separable.


@jeremy8888

The point I'm making is that you should use the right numbers. The recovered grade into concentrate at Mt Keith is higher than any of the average sulphide grades in the upper slab of sulphide ore at WMG. When it comes to the economics of the low grade deposits small percentages matter! As I posted yesterday, scale is what will get this over the line and scale in BFN is more difficult - remote = more capex, more infrastructure = more capex, remote = more opex.

Why am I interested? Thinking about buying in but in the debate first to better understand what's going on.