REG - Thor Mining PLC - Tungsten Resource Increase at Pilot Mountain <Origin Href="QuoteRef">THRL.L</Origin> - Part 2
22/05/2017 07:06
- Part 2: For the preceding part double click ID:nRSV7378Fa
as part of the resource estimation.
Site visits · Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of those visits.· If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the case. In 2012, a Golder Associates geologist was delegated by the Competent Person to inspect the Desert Scheelite site as part of the resource estimation process. A delegate
was used due to logistical issues at the time. The inspection reviewed the drilling and sampling process and confirmed the site and data were accurately represented in
reports of prior owners and the drillhole database. The delegate visited all Pilot Mountain deposit sites at this time.
Geological interpretation · Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological interpretation of the mineral deposit.· Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made.· The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource estimation.· The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource estimation.· The factors affecting continuity both of grade and geology. The geology of the deposit was interpreted using logged lithology and sample analyses to define zones of mineralised skarn. The area is commonly faulted resulting and
numerous discontinuous blocks. Detailed modelling of the fault blocks was not possible at the current drill spacing. The resource classification reflects this
uncertainty. The geological interpretation along strike and up dip is confined by the drilling and model extent.
Dimensions · The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource. The deposit is identified in drilling over a 4 km by 4 km area.Discontinuous mineralisation has been identified over 80 m vertically from subcrop.
Estimation and modelling techniques · The nature and appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation method was chosen include a description of computer software and parameters used.· The availability of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate account of such data.· The assumptions made regarding recovery of by-products.· Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance (e.g. sulfur for acid mine drainage characterisation).· In the case of block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the average sample spacing and the search employed.· Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining units.· Any assumptions about correlation between variables.· Description of how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource estimates.· Discussion of basis for using or not using grade cutting or capping.· The process of validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if available. The Mineral Resource estimated was based on drill holes available as of 26 April 2017. Resources were estimated using an Inverse Distance cubed algorithm. Grades for
WO3, Mo, Zn, Pb and Cu were estimated. Only WO3 had sufficient numbers of analyses to provide a reliable result. The estimation of the other analytes provides an
indication of the grade that many be attained if further sampling was undertaken. A three-pass estimation plan was used with an octant based search. The second and third
passes using progressively larger search neighbourhoods to enable the estimation of blocks which remained un-estimated following the preceding passes. Blocks based on
geology and a single analysis result were assigned the grade of the analysis. Block discretisation was set to 3 (X) by 3 (Y) by 3 (Z) to estimate grades of 25 m by 25 m
by 5 m parent blocks. Sub-cells of 5 m by 5 m by 1 m received the parent cell estimate. A minimum of 2 composites and a maximum of 32 composites (Pass 1) The same
parameters were used for each analyte to maintain any statistical relationship between them. Length-weighting was applied to compensate for variations in composite length
for the data used in the estimation. No high grade outlier samples were identified that required restraining or cutting. The estimation was constrained by the
interpreted geology and performed by mineralised domain code which separates individual mineralised domains. The estimation was validated statistically comparing the
average composite grade to the block estimate grades on a domain basis The model was also validated visually against the drill data. The validation showed the model to
be a robust representation of the drill data and geological interpretation. The resource block model is Garnet_1705.bmf
Moisture · Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the moisture content. Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis.
Cut-off parameters · The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters applied. Modelling of the mineralised zones used a nominal 2000 ppm WO3 edge cut off, but relied more on geology. The resource has been reported at a range of cut off grades. No
mining or financial analysis has been undertaken on the deposit to validate this figure.
Mining factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions made. No mining assumptions have been incorporated into the resource estimate. The deposit contains near surface mineralisation and as such it could be anticipated that
preliminary mining will be by open pit methods.
Metallurgical factors or assumptions · The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made. No metallurgical factors or assumptions have been incorporated into the resource estimate.
Environmental factors or assumptions · Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It is always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing operation. While at this stage the determination of potential environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with an explanation of the environmental assumptions made. Preliminary investigations by the tenement holder have not identified any environmental impacts from conceptual mining operations which would influence the cost base or
the viability of mining of these resources.
Bulk density · Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the samples.· The bulk density for bulk material must have been measured by methods that adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc.), moisture and differences between rock and alteration zones within the deposit.· Discuss assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation process of the different materials. No Garnet samples have been assessed for dry bulk density. Dry Bulk Density values were obtained from 720 samples of core from the Desert Scheelite drilling program.
These were statistically analysed by lithology and resource domains. Average in-situ dry bulk density values were assigned to the mineralised skarn (2.9 tm-3) and waste
(2.5 tm-3) based on the Desert Scheelite data.
Classification · The basis for the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories.· Whether appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e. relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, quality, quantity and distribution of the data).· Whether the result appropriately reflects the Competent Person's view of the deposit. The Garnet resource estimation is classified as Inferred. Drill hole spacing and estimate confidence form the basis of the block classification. Uncertainty in the
assigned bulk density also contributes.
Audits or reviews · The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource estimates. At this stage of the project no external audits have been undertaken.
Discussion of relative accuracy/ · Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.· The statement should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures used.· These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be compared with production data, where available. The Competent Person considers the resource to be a robust global estimate of the data available. The integrity of the historical raw data cannot be guaranteed other
confidence than to state that the data is consistent with the recent drilling and the geology is consistent with the type and style of mineralisation. There is no production data
against which to compare the estimate.
Discussion of relative accuracy/
confidence
· Where appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence
level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or procedure deemed
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the application of
statistical or geostatistical procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of
the resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not
deemed appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could affect
the relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate.· The statement should
specify whether it relates to global or local estimates, and, if local, state
the relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to technical and economic
evaluation. Documentation should include assumptions made and the procedures
used.· These statements of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate
should be compared with production data, where available.
The Competent Person considers the resource to be a robust global estimate of
the data available. The integrity of the historical raw data cannot be
guaranteed other than to state that the data is consistent with the recent
drilling and the geology is consistent with the type and style of
mineralisation. There is no production data against which to compare the
estimate.
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1 report Desert Scheelite Resource 2014
Sampling techniques · Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under The Desert Scheelite resource is defined by 86 diamond drill holes comprising 15 drilled in 2012 and the remainder drilled in the 1970s. The 2012 drill core was oriented. The 2012 drilling was sampled by half core. Core samples are weighed, dried and crushed to better than 70% passing a 2 mm screen. A split of up to 1000 g is taken and pulverised to better than 85% passing a 75 micron screen. This method is appropriate for rock chip or drill core samples. The pulp sample is digested in acid and analysed by inductively coupled plasma - atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES). Sampling and analysis for the 1970s drilling is unknown.
investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.·
Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.· Aspects of the
determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.· In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg
- More to follow, for following part double click ID:nRSV7378FcRecent news on Thor Energy
See all newsREG - Thor Energy PLC - Award of Two New Prospective Licence Applications
AnnouncementREG - Thor Energy PLC - Quarterly Activities and Cash Flow Report Q4 2025
AnnouncementREG - Thor Energy PLC - Molyhil Update - A$2,250,000 Payment Received
AnnouncementREG - Thor Energy PLC - HY-Range Seismic, Geochemistry & Portfolio Update
AnnouncementREG - Thor Energy PLC - Director/PDMR Shareholding
Announcement