Tuesday, November 22, 2011

Geodex mining and mineral processing report

Geodex published an independent "preliminary economic assessment" of
the Sisson Brook tungsten-molybdenum-copper deposit in New Brunswick,
Geodex Minerals Ltd.., (The "Company") is pleased to announce the
contents of an independent preliminary economic assessment
(Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA)) for its 70% ownership stake in
the tungsten-molybdenum-copper deposit known to be in the north of
Fredericton, New Brunswick, is located. The NI 43-101-compatible
report was drafted by Wardrop Engineering Inc. (Wardrop) in Vancouver,
with financial and operational estimates, where deviations of plus /
minus 35% should be considered. The full PEA report will be processed
within a week on SEDAR. The PEA will be the first stage of more
detailed studies, if the development is progressing the project.
Advance will be made this point a feasibility assessment, which will
be completed in summer 2008.
The assessment (PEA) is based exclusively on the southern half of the
Sisson Brook deposit, which is referred to as Zone III, and in the
partially drilled in the years 1979 to 1982 by Texasgulf / Kidd Creek
Mines. This tungsten and molybdenum dominant part of the large
mineralized system of Sisson Brook was established in 2006 through
7053 m of diamond drilling and 14,500 m of diamond drilling in 2007
(not yet Bohrverschalung is completed).

In October 2007 a resource estimate was conducted in five increments,
as shown in the table below. This was by Mercator Geological Services
Limited (Mercator) of Dartmouth, Nova Scotia and details were prepared
in a news release on the 17th October 2007 announced. The resource
estimate was prepared as a "derived category" categorized, as it is in
the standard definitions and guidelines for mineral resources and
reserves of the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
(CIM) and as amended by the Council of the CIM defined in 2005. The
estimate reflects a series of WO3% (tungsten trioxide)-equivalent
parts. This was done at this time for a better understanding of the
resource, since it is estimated similar contributions be made to
estimate the value of both tungsten and molybdenum. The conversion of
molybdenum is equivalent in WO3 and is based on the factor of 2.97 to
reflect the average rack rates of the two metals. The period is over
37 months and began in January 2004. It is assumed that the revenue
will be from metallurgy and processing of 100% for this conversion.
Table 1 Mineral Resource Estimate for Sisson Brook Zone III - 17
October 2007, valid date
Resource equivalent W03 Category
% Cut-off Tonnes (rounded)
Million in W03 W03% Mo%% equivalent
inferred 290 784 224 290.8 0.025 0.059 0.020 0.118
inferred 214 997 356 215.0 0.075 0.069 0.024 0.140
inferred 109 039 490 109.0 0.125 0.084 0.032 0.179
inferred 0.175 43,440,318 43.4 0.100 0.043 0.227
inferred 0.225 15,836,218 15.8 0.121 0.054 0.281
* Note: Mo and WO3 values ​​are respectively covered with 0.7% and
1.2% WO3 equivalent = (WO3% + 2.97% * Mo)

The timing of the resource estimate does not allow to include the
approximately 75% of the interconnecting holes were drilled 2007th
Samples of which are currently being processed and examined. It
reflects not (or PEA), the recently discovered zone of the eastern
area, which is located on the edge of the zone III, where most
recently in a news release 30th Reported in October 2007, high grade
molybdenum samples was. These additions, together with the ongoing
evaluation of drilling results from the tungsten-copper-rich zones I
and II are for future resource estimates for the anticipated positive
This PEA study should be considered preliminary and consequently
contains mineral resources that are geologically speculative to make
sure economic recommendations can and to make it possible for them to
be categorized as mineral reserves. Mineral resources which are not
mineral reserves, do not have demonstrated economic viability. One can
not safely assume that these preliminary assessments will be

PEA - Base case / base case specifics.
Wardrop has advised that correspond to the situation of the base case,
metal prices and exchange rates with the SEC guidelines, essentially a
three-year retrospective average, there are still uses discounted
another 20%. Therefore, the base case / base case = SEC Guidelines -
All dollars are Canadian dollars, if not stated otherwise.

Base metal prices
Molybdenum U.S. $ 21.60 / lb
Wolfram U.S. $ 8.00 / lb
Average annual metal production
Molybdenum (lbs) 3.3 million
Tungsten (lbs) 8.1 million
Tax repayment (in years) 2.7 years
Pre-tax internal rate of return 29.8% base case
Base case-30% (in metal prices) 15.0%
Capital value tax base case, $ 693 million
(8% discount rate) Base case -30% (in metal prices) $ 186 million
Exchange rate (U.S. / C) 1.17
Annual throughput (tonnes) 6.8 million

Degree of the procedure (in the first ten years)
Molybdenum (Mo%) 0.026%
Tungsten (W03%) 0.081%
Band rate (in the first ten years) 1.1:1
Mahlrate (tons / day) 20,000
Yield 70% tungsten
(Aggregate gravity / flotation)
Molybdenum yield 85%
Investment cost is $ 353 million
(Excluding working capital and environmental costs)
Operating costs (in the first ten years) $ 9.16 / ton
Intended exploitation of the mine 31 years

The planned open open-pit mine has good infrastructure such as paved
roads, a nearby railway line and a power grid that goes across the
grounds. Small border towns such as Napadogan and Stanley each in the
north and south on it and there are still many smaller settlements in
the wider environment. The capital city of Fredericton is located 100
km south-east and the Port of Saint John in the Bay of Fundy, about
the same distance south from it.
Mine plan and production
The PEA is considering an open pit mining, which is based on the
assumed resource that is listed in the table above. A Surpac block
model with Whittle pit optimization was used to carry out the planning
of the construction of the mine. Mine the nominal throughput is 20,000
tons / day. Operational limits, such as berms and access roads were at
this level of detail not yet included.
The mine plan includes conceptual designs and proposals for the dumps,
roads and reservoirs.
The selected design is based on the general principles and practices
for the reduction of tungsten and molybdenum. Modern mineralogical
studies and metallurgical test program a little last winter were
carried out on site and came to no adverse outcome. Samples of a study
conducted by SGS Lakefield Research Limited in 2007 to run straight.
The processing facilities are designed so that they provide an annual
task of the plant from 6.8 million tons per year of 343 working days.
The processing at this stage involves the delivery of ore to a
stockpile, four stages crushing screening and heeled them by a rod
mill. After previous treatment and sulfide slurry, molybdenum is
washed, cleaned and packaged. A gravity current is then used to
produce a tungsten concentrate. The tungsten washout followed by
regrinding the outflow from the gravity circuit and a second
Table 2 estimated investment costs

Area Description Amount
Direct costs
A General Investment $ 5,699,360
B Mining $ 20,677,550
C storage and recovery of the broken ore $ 52,703,837
E Grinding and Flotation $ 105,317,610
F $ 24,027,710 Disposals
G plant operation and equipment $ 1,657,809
J Additional buildings $ 7,441,595
K mobile equipment of the system $ 2,086,340
Indirect costs
Indirect X projects $ 69,601,000
Y cost the owner $ 5,000,000
Z Unforeseen circumstances (20%) $ 58,843,000
Total estimated cost of $ 353,056,212

Table 3 Running costs

Running costs
$ Per ton $ per ton of mined material of the mined ore *
Unit costs of degradation (CDN $ / t) 1.30 2.74
Unit cost of processing (CDN $ / t ore) 5.33
G & A costs (CDN $ / t mined ore) 1.09
Overall 9.16
* In the first ten years
Table 4 Pre-tax NPV and IRR Summary
IRR & NPV @ 8% discount rate results for various cases
Case of molybdenum tungsten price NPV IRR
Price (U.S. $ / mtu) ($ CDN) (%)
(U.S. $ / lb)
Mo in Mo03 flotation severity 000 s
Concentrate Concentrate
W03 W03
Base case 21.6 29.8 117.6 164.8 692 688
Average three years 27.0 146.9 205.6 1,118,238 40.6
Current price / exchange rate 32.3 150.9 211.3 1,000,828 37.7
70% of the base case 15.1 82.3 115.4 186,494 15.0

Wardrop decides that would be based on the assumed parameters in this
preliminary economic assessment, an operating open pit mine with
20,000 T / T profitable and a more viable investment. The results show
is so stable that they are justified to further study the feasibility
level, is thus the next stage of development.
All metallurgical, geotechnical, environmental, modeling, design and
cost studies should be further developed to achieve this goal.

Competent people
Mr. Jack Marr, M.Sc., P. Geo., Is the responsible person in the house
for this project and Mr. Michael Cullen, P. Geo., Which is responsible
for the technical information, especially for the estimation of
resources by Mercator Geological Services Ltd.. are presented.
Mr. Andy Nichols, P. Eng., Senior Mining Engineer of Wardrop
Engineering Inc. is the person responsible for matters related to the
mine design and financial analysis. Mr. Andre De Ruijter, P. Eng.,
Senior Metallurgical Engineer of Wardrop Engineering Inc. is the
person responsible for matters relating to the metallurgy and mineral
Geodex will acquire a 70% interest in the field of Sisson Brook, which
was established in the conditions of a consent form, which on 15
October 2004 with Champlain Resources Inc. was posted, a private
company based in Nova Scotia. Geodex expects this figure to have
acquired in December 2007, which reflects the expenditure of $ 2
million in work commitments, which have already been exceeded. There
are no additional license fees. The original consent was on 6 July
2006 by a full option and joint venture agreement replaces the terms
of the LOA to include.
Forward-looking statements
Certain information in this press release regarding the Company may
contain forward-looking statements under applicable securities laws.
Forward-looking statements may include estimates, plans, opinions,
forecasts, projections or other statements that are not facts.
Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in such
statements expressed are reasonable, it can give no assurance that
such expectations will prove correct. The company cautions that actual
performance depends on a number of factors, many of which can not be
influenced by the company, and that future events and results may
differ materially from current projections of the company.

On behalf of the Board of Directors
Jack M. Maris

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.