One more thing, why are AYM so hell bent on retaining their current brokers? There are a couple of outfits out there who could only do a better job! |
 kooba; I don't think the issue here is the questioning of the credentials of Rheenergise because signing an MOU, which incidentally from a legal perspective, is not worth the paper it is written on, ONLY gives them some PR upside; not that of AYM. You are correct when you state AYM needs to explain in more detail how this perceived coalition can work to the benefit of Parys Mt.
From an engineering point of view, and specifically a water engineering point of view, AYM is now so far down the waste pipe and cannot get back up because the 'non-return' valves prevent it. I believe the interpretation of most shareholders and potential investors was to see non-dilutive funding to enable Parys Mt to be an economically viable operation and the only way, bar some government grant scheme/s (which don't seem to be forthcoming), was to get the PFS completed, as previously promised by October last year, and then, subject to the outcome of that, to attract metal streaming and offtake outfits, perhaps in conjunction with other project financing to further develop and exploit Parys Mt in a way we were all led to believe. |
I guess in any deep mining operation they need extensive pumping and pipe equipment to keep the mine from re flooding..maybe thats how we need to look at this!"Our solution uses equipment that is already in regular use on a mine site Minerals contained in local tailings can be used in our HD Fluid Energy can be created from slurries and repurposed to regenerate electricityPumped storage provides the lowest levelized cost of energy storage for durations of > 4 hours and is a mature technology of 100+ years , it makes up 98% of global deployment " |
Worth a look.hTTps://www.rheenergise.com/hTTps://www.newcivilengineer.com/innovative-thinking/how-a-pumped-hydro-innovation-using-fluid-2-5x-denser-than-water-could-change-energy-storage-05-02-2025/Seem a well funded very professional outfitWould be good for the company to better explain how this works in tandem with their prime strategic aim of getting Parys back to production though i grant you.If it can progress both avenues as they suggest then it further enhances the green credentials of developing the site and possibly the local job opportunities then it will undoubtedly strengthen the local support already seen.hTTps://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/08/powering-up-uk-hills-could-be-used-as-energy-batteries |
How can they explore and investigate with no money? And when will we see the results and benefit of the alleged potential exploitation and investigation? Will there be a report? Which year shall we expect it?
And why has there been no more news on the exciting hydro plant at Grangersberg which was RNS’d a couple of years ago now? |
Was it really worth issuing the RSN
(MOU) to “explore”; the potential
Intention to jointly “investigate” the feasibility |
Probably the biggest CAPEX cost of an underground mechanised (or non-mechanised) mine is a vertical shaft, followed by declines/ramps large enough for significant haulage. I can't recall reading if ramps of a sufficient size deep within the old mine exist but I doubt it otherwise excavating a shaft of the size of the Morris would be somewhat counterproductive and a much smaller diameter shaft could have been bored suitable for ventilation and an emergency escape.
As I mentioned earlier today, using a heavy liquid requires a reduced head to produce the same energy (assuming all parameters are equal) so a heavy liquid with a specific gravity of 2.5 (1 cubic meter equates to 2.5 metric tonnes; non-saline water has a specific gravity of 1) could, over 250-300 metres, produce energy via a turbine/s located at the base of the Morris shaft. However, the diameter of the column/pipe of heavy liquid would occupy too much of the shaft volume to make the shaft ill-fit for any other purpose. I can see the upside for the energy company in question but the upside there counteracts that of the projected mining operation and the envisaged mine plan discussed in the much hyped PEA of some years back.
De-watering a shaft of this size is an expensive operation so it is likely that if the energy company, after exhaustive studies, considers it a worthwhile operation then unfortunately Parys Mt will unlikely be mined in the way it was planned for her mineral wealth.
We have all been looking forward to non-dilutive financing and perhaps the best chance of this, given where Parys Mt is (in terms of development) would be via some government or local government grant/s and whether or not ALL these avenues have been explored we can only hazard a guess. However, given there is no reported advancement on these perceived initiatives one can only deduce that Parys Mt is too underdeveloped to attract grants and hence the renewed focus on Plan B, C, D or whatever it is. If Parys Mt had been fully exploited/mined out, then I can fully understand the upside principles of today's RNS but as it is, even I seem lost for words! |
Nuttyboy - You're absolutely right to question it. If the 300m deep Morris Shaft is repurposed for energy storage, it could create a major bottleneck for future underground mining operations, especially if mechanised equipment, ore transport, and ventilation rely on that shaft.
Potential Issues:
Access Restriction – If the shaft is converted into an energy storage system, it may limit the movement of mining equipment, personnel, and materials.
Ventilation & Safety – Underground mines require proper airflow, and using the shaft for energy storage could interfere with this.
Hoisting & Ore Transport – If the mine is redeveloped, an alternative route for ore extraction may be needed, which could be costly.
Meanwhile cash is dripping away. I think the next placing will be a big one, they’ll use the “future non-dilutive financing” line in the placing RNS to sucker in more mugs.
I think the timeline for AYM to begin production is now way past 2035, what happened to the PFS that’s been “ongoing”; for over 5 years? |
I guess you just have to read the rns."Securing a source of consistent green power on site while benefiting from the synergies between deployment of the technology and establishing a presence back underground at Parys Mountain is key to the strategy of de-risking the incremental development of the mine."One of the key costs and time consuming aspects of getting the mine back into production was dewatering the shaft ..So if they have a funding option of dewatering without dilution i would think a positive.As to mine development Anglesey plan on excavating new underground resources to produce resources not necessarily using the older tunnelled out areas..so i presume the two activities can be developed in tandem in a mutually beneficial way ..slightly different to then proposed plan in Sweden which was to end of mine life.Interesting demonstration on how one might develop large scale energy storage and a very good place to do it ...Anglesey, also known as the "Energy Island", is using wind, solar, marine, hydrogen, and other renewable energy sources to fight climate change...so a method of storing such renewable power is important. |
Interesting RNS I would say. The hydrostatic head principle using higher density (than water) fluid to generate electrical power via turbines is not new. The query I have is; if this proposed methodology is going to utilise the 300 m deep shaft then surely this will be a bottleneck to any future underground mechanised mining. However, if I have missed a pertinent point and the two can coexist and bring in non-dilutive funding, and perhaps attract government grants, then its worthwhile exploring. |
Bashers out? Silly little man, grow up and go back waste more money on fools gold at CGNR |
Bashers out in force early doors trying to protect their short positions, oh dear, the market can re-rate these minnows dynamically. |
An MOU means nothing |
Same old, same old, from 2023…
Anglesey Mining entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Swedish energy storage company Mine Storage International AB in March 2023. This partnership aims to explore the development of a pumped hydro-energy storage project at the Grängesberg Mine in Sweden |
I would advise before the government push too much toward the path of 'artificial intelligence, they get a grip with 'natural stupidity' !! |
I may be wrong, but I suspect that Rachel Reeves is more likely to push meaningful amounts of money towards oil exploration and A.I. development than small scale mining initiatives, unfortunately. |
I don't disagree trader; my sentiment is basically saying the same thing. Price of the shares in the inevitable soon-to-be fund raising will dictate the number of shares. The ONLY way forward for AYM now is, fingers crossed, they manage to get a sizable government grant similar to that of Cornish Metals. However, one stumbling block will be, or may be, Cornish Metals are somewhat more advanced in their development to attract this investment in the first place. |
All the indications point to a broker orchestrated share price hike in readiness for a fund raise! The key question is ‘at what price’ and who will be invited to participate?? |
Nothing available online currently. |
Could this surprise to the upside, low free float etc, copper / zinc / gold / lead deposits at Parys Mountain
One wonders if they could secure a deal like Cornish Metals have done recently with Gov funding or some grant finance.
There was talk of asset disposals if I recall or a significant JV partner found?
420m shares in issue values AYM at just £3.6m. |
With gold at C. 2900 US$ that also helps the potential for AYM. Gla. |
pigeons,
You already have the true price of Anglesea, it's dictated by the market.
This is just a lifestyle vehicle, it's not going anywhere, but if you're happy to fund their salaries, benefits, and expenses, that's fine.
Anyone investing here at the current state of affairs is just bonkers IMO. |
Register to chat with like-minded investors on our interactive forums.
Hot Features
Premium
