Don't know how to put it in words. I'm not interested in how good these guys are at communicating, I'm only interested in how good they are at geology. This site has been through the hands of some very good mining companies, but their geologists missed it. To AML's credit, their geologists discovered it last year. And it's a beauty. In the two recent ammendments (check the Appendix) they describe that: "The deposit type is similar to Mt Isa style". Also, the PY3 layer contains "abundant galena, sphalerite and minor chalcopyrite and material visually interpreted to be cobaltiferous pyrite." WOWEE.
I'll try to slow down a bit and clarify. Firstly, all minerals that they have named are "metal-sulfides". That is, pyrite is iron sulfide, galena is lead sulfide, chalcopyrite is copper-iron sulfide, sphalerite is zinc sulfide, and cobaltiferous pyrite is cobalt-iron sulfide. Some of these minerals often also are combined with other metals (eg Galena often has silver sulfide with it). So when they report that in the PY3 layer: "The average sulphide content of the entire interval is estimated at approximately 40%", what will be the other 60%. Yes, we can interpret that statement as meaning that most of the rest of it is just METAL. Yes about 60% metal and its 21 metres in thickness. Probably, the main metal could be in the form of iron sulfide (pyrite) and that would be a pity, but until the results come in, we can only guess. Nevertheless, "abundant galena" means plenty of lead with some silver. And "abundant sphalerite" means plenty of copper. And so it goes. (I'll throw in my comment - the cobaltiferous pyrite may be similar to the deposits of copper-cobalt pyrite in the Congo - but that's only my guess.) AML add that the results are consistent with the existing resource (i.e., reported a few weeks ago for 6 km of Varley and Marley - I may have got these names wrong, but too excited to check). Go AML, you little beauty.
Expand
(20min delay)
