Share
18,850 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 9
clock Created with Sketch.
17/04/18
13:42
Share
Originally posted by ddzx
↑
below is an example of 'theoreticalism'
AMN = grade of 8.25 vs RWD grade of 11.35
AMN scoping study said: "steady-state brine extraction of 66.5 gigalitres (“GL”) per year over a 20 year life... for a production target of 370,000 tonnes per annum (“tpa”) of SOP "
RWD scoping study said: "60-70 million cubic metres of brine delivered to the system each year...the production of 400,000 tonnes per annum of SOP "
now both desk-top estimates are similar yet the RWD grade is 38% higher
the most recent AMN presentation says: "370,000 tonnes per annum target... trench extraction of 78.5Mtpa of groundwater "
now using the scoping study assumptions with a 67% recovery:
AMN = 66.5GL x 8.25 grade x 67% recovery = 367,579 tonnes
RWD (low case) = 60.0GL x 11.35 grade x 67% recovery = 456,270 tonnes
RWD (high case) = 70.0GL x 11.35 grade x 67% recovery = 532,315 tonnes
i think the significant differences here show how theoretical previous assumptions are
the impression is either AMN have over-estimated or RWD have under-estimated
..........
Expand
whats the saying
a mine is a hole in the ground owned by a liar.
its all subjective, the only thing that matters is share price. money flow
AMN has institutional backers and euroz
SO4 middlemass and friends
the question to ask is why RWD has the market cap that it has