I can't believe you're trying to give out exploration advice when so much of your post regarding lithium is wrong.
"As with today's Li results, early days so I won't get too carried away. However, these 3 main readings below show there is plenty of potential in the area and the next task is to now explore each general area for more Li-bearing pegmatites."
There were 45 rock chip samples, as seen in the table below, and their average Li2O % was 0.0033%. These results are bad, and both the company and you are trying to spin this to deceive other shareholders.
"The frustrating thing is more assay wait times because XRF hand readings can only pick up pathfinder minerals and not the Li directly."
This is correct, pXRF can't detect lithium, however a LIBS handheld detector can. And the LIBS detector would likely pick all these samples as below detectable levels.
"However, considering that RDT have now proven a Li resource nearby, we have plenty of potential and should be optimistic. I will explain below"
- Li2O 228 or 2.28% & Rb 1260ppm
- Li2O 206 or 2.06% & Rb 1140ppm
- Li2O 338 or 3.38% & Rb 43ppm"
So why are you trying to lie to all the other posters here about incorrect numbers? You don't even understand the difference between ppm and %. This is basic geochemistry in exploration. Rubidium in lithium exploration is bad - its called an LCT pegmatite, not an LCTR pegmatite. If you have rubidium, you've more than likely got lepidolite, zinnwaldite or polylithionite, and not spodumene.
Sample ID Li2O ppm Cs_ppm Ta_ppm Rb_ppm Li2O % Cs % Ta % Rb % 1 MARK047 228 6.7 20.5 1260 0.0228% 0.0007% 0.0021% 0.1260% 2 MARK049 46 4.2 32 363 0.0046% 0.0004% 0.0032% 0.0363% 3 MARK050 206 5.9 13.3 1140 0.0206% 0.0006% 0.0013% 0.1140% 4 MARK061 31 0.3 -0.1 2.2 0.0031% 0.0000% 0.0000% 0.0002% 5 MARK062 26 1.4 42.7 101 0.0026% 0.0001% 0.0043% 0.0101% 6 MARK063 87 7.5 4.8 1580 0.0087% 0.0008% 0.0005% 0.1580% 7 MARK064 24 1.2 125 111 0.0024% 0.0001% 0.0125% 0.0111% 8 MARK065 15 9.5 51.4 1290 0.0015% 0.0010% 0.0051% 0.1290% 9 MARK066 3 4.8 8.8 909 0.0003% 0.0005% 0.0009% 0.0909% 10 MARK067 4 43.7 4.4 6030 0.0004% 0.0044% 0.0004% 0.6030% 11 MARK074 11 3.3 0.7 212 0.0011% 0.0003% 0.0001% 0.0212% 12 MARK075 6 3.3 4.5 353 0.0006% 0.0003% 0.0005% 0.0353% 13 MARK076 4 3.1 5.7 298 0.0004% 0.0003% 0.0006% 0.0298% 14 MARK077 15 1.6 1.5 175 0.0015% 0.0002% 0.0002% 0.0175% 15 MARK079 18 4.2 1.4 344 0.0018% 0.0004% 0.0001% 0.0344% 16 MARK081 4 2 6.8 211 0.0004% 0.0002% 0.0007% 0.0211% 17 MARK082 3 4.7 2.4 479 0.0003% 0.0005% 0.0002% 0.0479% 18 MARK084 72 5.3 1.6 368 0.0072% 0.0005% 0.0002% 0.0368% 19 MARK089 5 1.5 5 409 0.0005% 0.0002% 0.0005% 0.0409% 20 MARK090 6 3.3 1.1 535 0.0006% 0.0003% 0.0001% 0.0535% 21 MARK091 12 9.5 3.1 916 0.0012% 0.0010% 0.0003% 0.0916% 22 MARK092 10 5.4 2.3 517 0.0010% 0.0005% 0.0002% 0.0517% 23 MARK093 17 8.3 4.4 713 0.0017% 0.0008% 0.0004% 0.0713% 24 MARK094 4 4.5 9.7 479 0.0004% 0.0005% 0.0010% 0.0479% 25 MARK095 9 0.5 12.6 54 0.0009% 0.0001% 0.0013% 0.0054% 26 MARK096 5 4.5 8.5 545 0.0005% 0.0005% 0.0009% 0.0545% 27 MARK096 10 4.5 8.3 537 0.0010% 0.0005% 0.0008% 0.0537% 28 MARK097 3 6.7 5.7 753 0.0003% 0.0007% 0.0006% 0.0753% 29 MARK098 3 6.5 3.9 793 0.0003% 0.0007% 0.0004% 0.0793% 30 MARK099 6 10.8 1 1100 0.0006% 0.0011% 0.0001% 0.1100% 31 MARK100 19 0.3 30.4 11.8 0.0019% 0.0000% 0.0030% 0.0012% 32 MARK101 45 4.5 93.8 638 0.0045% 0.0005% 0.0094% 0.0638% 33 MARK102 95 3.9 62.3 455 0.0095% 0.0004% 0.0062% 0.0455% 34 MARK103 338 1.3 86.9 42.8 0.0338% 0.0001% 0.0087% 0.0043% 35 MARK104 31 0.7 46.4 48.4 0.0031% 0.0001% 0.0046% 0.0048% 36 MARK105 3 0.9 72.6 61.6 0.0003% 0.0001% 0.0073% 0.0062% 37 MARK121 2 4.5 6.3 651 0.0002% 0.0005% 0.0006% 0.0651% 38 MARK122 1 0.7 8.2 103 0.0001% 0.0001% 0.0008% 0.0103% 39 MARK123 4 4.4 0.3 609 0.0004% 0.0004% 0.0000% 0.0609% 40 MARK124 15 3.4 4.1 361 0.0015% 0.0003% 0.0004% 0.0361% 41 MARK125 4 3.3 2.1 554 0.0004% 0.0003% 0.0002% 0.0554% 42 MARK126 2 5.6 4.4 556 0.0002% 0.0006% 0.0004% 0.0556% 43 MARK128 13 7 0.7 1420 0.0013% 0.0007% 0.0001% 0.1420% 44 MARK129 6 3.6 9.7 645 0.0006% 0.0004% 0.0010% 0.0645% 45 MARK130 8 4.5 8.4 547 0.0008% 0.0005% 0.0008% 0.0547% 46 AVERAGE 0.0033% 0.0005% 0.0018% 0.0651%
But go on, put the people who are posting correct information on ignore and keep feeding that echo chamber of yours.
- Forums
- ASX - By Stock
- SGQ
- Ann: Significant Lithium Potential at Mt Alexander
Ann: Significant Lithium Potential at Mt Alexander, page-62
-
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 56 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Add SGQ (ASX) to my watchlist
|
|||||
Last
3.1¢ |
Change
0.000(0.00%) |
Mkt cap ! $30.64M |
Open | High | Low | Value | Volume |
3.2¢ | 3.2¢ | 3.1¢ | $46.95K | 1.484M |
Buyers (Bids)
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
3 | 1188241 | 3.1¢ |
Sellers (Offers)
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
3.2¢ | 9081 | 2 |
View Market Depth
No. | Vol. | Price($) |
---|---|---|
3 | 1188241 | 0.031 |
6 | 3811499 | 0.030 |
1 | 150000 | 0.027 |
2 | 320000 | 0.025 |
1 | 1500000 | 0.023 |
Price($) | Vol. | No. |
---|---|---|
0.032 | 9081 | 2 |
0.033 | 231415 | 3 |
0.034 | 272744 | 3 |
0.035 | 1618751 | 7 |
0.036 | 1581500 | 3 |
Last trade - 16.10pm 24/07/2024 (20 minute delay) ? |
Featured News
SGQ (ASX) Chart |
The Watchlist
FHE
FRONTIER ENERGY LIMITED
Adam Kiley, CEO
Adam Kiley
CEO
Previous Video
Next Video
SPONSORED BY The Market Online