Starting a general comments thread to note the significance of...

Starting a general comments thread to note the significance of the CID discovery.

Here's the discovery georeferenced to GDA94 (EPSG:28351). There's 9km of strike of the observed and inferred CID package covering an area of 1.3km², with average width of 150m.




Typical geomorphology of CIDs below, and its likely PGD represents a Type 2 valley CID. Note that API have the JV with MIN for Ashburton (type 1 mesa). The presence of the basal CFeb (yellow unit at the base of the CID images below) unit suggest this is mostly un-eroded, with the CFeb unit being on average 300m wide, which suggests that the Cfeb unit in the paleochannel is somewhere between 30-50m thick based on basic math of a semi-circle.
Fe% grades potentially outside of the CID within the CFeb.

Fe% grades across the CID:

This is an exert from MIN's resource statement for Ashburton:

Iron mineralisation at Ken’s Bore consists of a series of lenses and pods with the mineralisation defined by three distinct zones:
• Goethitic (semi) hard cap occurs at the interface between the alluvial/immature detritals/clayey cover. This unit is relatively thin (~6m thick) and not always laterally continuous.
• The primary ore body is hard and competent CID (~19m thick) and typically occurs below the hard cap and clayey zones. CID here is generally very well preserved and more hematitic than goethitic.
• The basal mixed CID zone occurs almost exclusively below the hard primary ore zone. It is thickest in the middle of the channel and tapers out towards the flanks of the channel (~ 6m thick)

Assuming a basic bowl (1/2 * [margin thickness + max thickness] * width) we can get broad estimates for a trapezoidal style volume. PGD have noted that the CID thickness is ~10m near the margins of the CID package, which should in theory result in depths of 20-40m towards the centre of the paleochannel, as hypothesised by PGD. I've used an average width of 150m (the average width of the inferred channel measurements above).
The potential scale of this is directly comparable to CZR's Robe Mesa, where the PGD CID is likely to be in the 20-40m depth range resulting in 40-65Mt, compared to the 33Mt of CZR.


GRADES

This is comparing surface rock chips to final blended product but it does show that these grades are very competitive as a high Al, low P product. You also need to be mindful of CID stratigraphy where the surface CID mineralisation (of MESAS) is typically more siliceous at surface (due to residual enrichment weathering processes) and more goethitic, rather than haematitic before reaching the higher-grade haematite rich zones deeper into the channel. However, as this is not a typical mesa CID, the typical mineralisation stratigraphy may or may not apply.
I've also applied a >55% Fe cut-off which is typically industry standard. Calcined Fe is somewhat of a proxy for goethitic clays as LOI% is somewhat representative to water in clays that will be driven off, and therefore % diff calcined to Fe is again somewhat of a proxy for goethite mineralisation.

CZR ROBE MESA SALE
CZR sold their 85% interest in Robe Mesa for $75m ($88m for 100%) for 33Mt of ore reserves. This has the potential to be the same, or bigger, scale than CZR.





CLOSING THOUGHTS

Genuine T1 CID discovery potential but it may take 9 months to see a drill rig as the wet season will likely hamper any drill planning. Applying a 50% risk discount to a unproven but slightly larger style deposit to CZR gets us to about $40m in ground value + whatever the other tenements are worth.
@calmbeforestorm @Boolgeeda Dream