I just read the post of longtermlegs on the NTU board (#
15582430) and think his/her's following quotes are just as for CUX. They are:
"of the 48,000 operating wind turbines operating in the United States only 377 are direct drive that employ permanent magnets.
the US Department of Energy says the low usage of rare earths elements in wind industry is due in part to insufficient and uncertain supply.
that means the other 47,623 operating wind turbines are not as reliable and not as efficient gearbox designed
so currently, the US domestic wind turbine fleet uses negligible amounts of rare earth elements
Siemens the worlds largest manufacturer wind turbines has announced that it will use direct drive technology for its 125 forthcoming offshore units ... it's recognizes the superior technology derived from using rare earths ...
it is estimated that the demand for dysprosium and neodymium could increase by 700% and 2600%, respectively, over the next 25 years in a business-as-usual scenario
the overall (wind turbine) industry is transitioning towards larger, more powerful turbines to meet the demands of high-power renewable energy. These larger turbines are more likely to use rare earth permanent magnets, as these magnets can reduce the size and weight of the generator as compared to designs that do not use permanent magnets, such as induction or synchronous generators. A second trend is toward turbines that are capable of operating at slower speeds, allowing electricity generation at slower wind speeds than traditional high-speed turbines. The slowest turbine speeds are achieved through a direct-drive arrangement, where the rotating turbine blades are coupled directly to the generator, rather than through a series of gearing stages as in high-speed turbines. The direct-drive arrangement is more efficient and reduces maintenance requirements, two benefits that will be important to off-shore wind deployment where maintenance can be difficult and expensive.
However, the new direct drive design also requires larger permanent magnets for a given power rating, demanding greater rare earth content—as much as several hundred kilograms of rare earth content per megawatt
http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAA&url=http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/02/f19/QTR%20Ch8%20-%20Critical%20Materials%20TA%20Feb-13-2015.pdf&ei=wGeYVdD-OcXBmwXguoGIBQ&usg=AFQjCNGjMdD-LOY0ukQhxV99lKNTnZkoXw&bvm=bv.96952980,d.dGY
the above has been taken from the US Department of Energy report so is from a US perspective
the Chinese I assume would have similar rare earth / wind turbine capabilities and aspirations"
I am going to remind you all of the size of the resources of NTU compared with CUX determined in my previous post #
14598286 being:
"I'm going to use the figure provided by Ltl as to the percentages of CUX's TREO in his post # 14512440 and use those percentages to calculate the amout of each rare earth element from the JORC defined TREO resource of 235,000 tonnes being:
Nd - 14.93% - ((235,000 x 14.93)/100) = 35,085.50 tonnes
Eu 1.20% - ((235,000 x 1.20)/100) = 2,820 tonnes
Tb 0.37% - ((235,000 x 0.37)/100) = 869.50 tonnes
Dy 2.11% - ((235,000 x 2.11)/100) = 4,958.50 tonnes
Y 12.90%- ((235,000 x 12.90)/100) = 30,315 tonnes
Remember this is for only 1% of the alluvial resource of Charlie Creek. Let's look at what is possibly an extreme case of 100% of the alluvial resource of Charlie Creek.
Nd - 14.93% - ((235,000 x 14.93)/100) x 100 = 3,508,550 tonnes
Eu 1.20% - ((235,000 x 1.20)/100) x 100= 282,000 tonnes
Tb 0.37% - ((235,000 x 0.37)/100) x 100 = 8,6950 tonnes
Dy 2.11% - ((235,000 x 2.11)/100) x 100= 495,850 tonnes
Y 12.90%- ((235,000 x 12.90)/100) x 100= 3,031,500 tonnes
In comparison let us examine NTU's resources to gain an indication of the size of the CUX resource in context with another proposal.
The NTU's Mineral Resource Estimate October 2014 from NTU's Quarterly Activity Report for the quarter ending 30 September 2014 page 4 states Total Indicated and Inferred TREO resource as being 52,372 tonnes.
Using the corrected (by Ausheds) Ltl's percentages again to determine the total amount of NTU resources:
Nd - 3.15% - ((57,372 x 3.15)/100) = 1,807.22 tonnes
Eu - 0.44% - ((57,372 x 0.44)/100) = 252.44 tonnes
Tb - 1.32% - ((57,372 x 1.32)/100) = 757.28 tonnes
Dy - 8.79% - ((57,372 x 8.79)/100) = 5,043 tonnes
Y - 58.21% - ((57,372 x 58.21)/100) = 33,396 tonnes"
It is easy to see why the consortium purchasing Pancon's stake wants to get into Charlie Creek from the above figures. Much larger resource than NTU's that will allow a greater spread of the capital costs, that are also lower than NTU's.
Let's hope we can get on track to production in the near future.
Thanks ltl info provided. Keep up the good work.
Cheers
Stoops
