The posts that tonio has just posted is an example of what annoys me.
Say the specific gravity of the alluvium is .61sq metres/tonne. It's a figure I have used before and at that time quoted the source.
The inverse of this figure is 1.64 tonnes/sq mtr.
Therefore, tonio's calculation of 1sq kilometre x 10 metres containing 18million tonnes is close enough to being correct.
1,000 x 1,000 x 10 x 1.64 = 16,400,000 tonnes. Close enough in my opinion.
The potential with 2000 sq klms with an average depth 15 metres becomes:
2,000 x 1,000,000 x 15 x 1.64 = 49,200,000,000 tonnes of potential alluvium ore.
At 18 MTPA thats about 2,700 years of resource or a total of:
3,780 tonnes TREO x ~2,700 years = ~10 millions tonnes of recoverable TREO.
And what does tonio say, "when you have the lowest grade and the lowest insitu."
I don't think 10 million tonnes of recoverable TREO is the lowest commercial rare earth resource. It's a 1,000 times more than the current NTU JORC.
Also the wonderful statement:
Mining 18Mt p.a would require an area of 1 sq Km to a depth of 10m every year, which doesn't sound like much when you have 2000Km2 of allevial flats but would tend to average the grade somewhat.
With possibly over 2000 years of resource I don't think mining 18MTPA over the next few decades will average out the grade much at all. Further as the mathematic suggest that with an average half of the resource will have a grade below 0.03% while the half will have a grade over 0.03%. Theoretically then CUX will be able to mine a grade over 0.03% for over 1000 years. All hypothetical but shows the fallacy of tonio's statement.
The next statement is:
'Still my point was that CUX should pursue the refining option, hopefully something similiar to NTUs' $40m Hydrometallurical facility, operating cost $4.40 Kg per concentrate feed.'
Did toni not read page 18 of the "Presntation to the Strategic Metals and REE Conference" posted by the CUX on 26th February? That is exactly what the management is planning.
What tonio may not have appreciated that the concentrate grade of NTU is 30% and CUX's is ~40%. Therefore, assuming the same recovery rate, NTU will need to process 30% more concentrate in a hydromettallurgical facility than CUX. Therefore, logically, for the same amount of final product the Capex and the costs will be substantially cheaper than for NTU.
Perhap's what is worst is that tonio has failed to appreciate are that estimates of these figure are due within the next month.
tonio's either ignorant or deliberate pessimism with CUX is really annoying to me as putting down an Australian company without justification, in its infacy is to me simply unreasonable, to say the least.
Ausheds, I agree with a lot, if not all, of what you are saying Ausheds BUT there is no point to jumping to the challenges of selling of the resource of Charlie Creek if it isn't economical to mine FULL STOP. One challenge at a time.
DYOR
Cheers,
Stoops
CUX Price at posting:
3.3¢ Sentiment: Buy Disclosure: Held
