We could not find any results for:
Make sure your spelling is correct or try broadening your search.
Register for Free to get streaming real-time quotes, interactive charts, live options flow, and more.
| Share Name | Share Symbol | Market | Type | Share ISIN | Share Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| European Metals Holdings Limited | LSE:EMH | London | Ordinary Share | VGG3191T1021 | ORD NPV (DI) |
| Price Change | % Change | Share Price | Bid Price | Offer Price | High Price | Low Price | Open Price | Shares Traded | Last Trade | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.50 | 13.33% | 21.25 | 21.00 | 21.50 | 21.25 | 18.65 | 18.75 | 319,461 | 10:36:02 |
| Industry Sector | Turnover | Profit | EPS - Basic | PE Ratio | Market Cap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Miscellaneous Metal Ores,nec | 1.12M | -5.93M | -0.0286 | -7.43 | 44.06M |
From Apr 2022 to Apr 2024
TIDMEMH
RNS Number : 7321E
European Metals Holdings Limited
31 October 2022
For immediate release
31 October 2022
EUROPEAN METALS HOLDINGS LIMITED
SIMPLIFIED EXTRACTION PROCESS DELIVERS EXCEPTIONALLY CLEAN BATTERY-GRADE LITHIUM PRODUCT WITH IMPROVED ECONOMICS
HIGHLIGHTS
-- Simplified Lithium Chemical Plant (" LCP ") extraction process has delivered exceptionally clean battery-grade lithium carbonate
-- Significant reduction in most impurities far exceeds current market accepted battery-grade specifications and steps required in the LCP process reduced from 15 to 7
-- LCP has capability to deliver very high purity lithium hydroxide, lithium carbonate, lithium sulphate or lithium phosphate
-- Simplified process is expected to reduce both Capex and Opex in the LCP by 10-20%.
-- LCP recoveries of 88-93% lithium proven in locked-cycle testwork, an outright recovery improvement of 3-6% over locked-cycle testwork for earlier more complex flowsheet
-- Patent application lodged to protect global intellectual property rights
-- Test work proves re-engineered Front-End Comminution and Beneficiation (" FECAB" ) circuit recovers >87% of lithium
-- LCP pilot programme to commence in 4Q CY22 with marketing samples available to offtake partners in 1Q CY23; pregnant leach solution containing 48kg of lithium carbonate equivalent is ready to be processed
-- New flowsheet provides ESG Benefits - lower reagent use and reduced cooling requirements
European Metals Holdings Limited ( ASX & AIM: EMH, OTCQX: EMHXY, ERPNF and EMHLF ) ( "European Metals" or the "Company" ) is pleased to announce significant developments in the processing flowsheet for the Cinovec vertically integrated battery metals project (" Cinovec ") in Czech Republic.
Keith Coughlan, Executive Chairman, said "The completion of flowsheet development work in both the FECAB and LCP is a significant milestone for the Cinovec Project. The simplification of the process, the improved economics, and the addition of two new significant potential end products are all very pleasing results. This simplification, in reducing the complexity and in reducing the steps required in the LCP process from 15 to 7, eliminates some potential process flowsheet risks. Testwork to confirm optimised FECAB and LCP flowsheets is now complete and production of significant quantities of battery grade lithium chemicals is expected to be available for distribution to long term European offtake partners early next year.
"The quality of the product is also excellent with almost battery grade material produced as our crude material. In addition, the reduction in both reagent use and energy consumption add to already excellent ESG credentials.
"Now that the simplified flow sheet has been released to the market, the Company looks forward to being able to provide more frequent updates regarding progress towards completion of the Definitive Feasibility Study (" DFS ") based on the new flowsheet as well as progress on the offtake discussions in which the Company has been engaged. ".
Simplification of the LCP flowsheet
The simplified LCP flowsheet has been tested in six (6) Locked-Cycle Tests (" LCTs ") at ALS Global in Perth. This simplified new flowsheet has demonstrated overall lithium recoveries of 88-93% in the LCTs programme.
In the programme of six LCTs for the earlier flowsheet, recoveries of 85-87% lithium were demonstrated. The new flowsheet therefore represents an outright lithium recovery improvement of 3-6%.
After roasting and leaching, the pregnant leach solution ( PLS ) is passed through two cleaning steps to remove transition metal and calcium impurities, resulting in a "polished" PLS of lithium sulphate together with sulphates of other similar metals, principally sodium and potassium.
The earlier flowsheet continued to remove unwanted elements before precipitation of a "crude" lithium carbonate. The last step in the earlier flowsheet was to purify the crude lithium carbonate with a bicarbonation and crystallisation step.
The simplified flowsheet precipitates lithium phosphate directly from the polished PLS and then goes on to clean the lithium phosphate to enable precipitation of a much cleaner crude lithium carbonate. The final purification step of bicarbonation and re-precipitation is the same as in the earlier flowsheet but the end-product is of even higher quality due to the input crude lithium carbonate being much cleaner.
The simplification of the central section of the LCP flowsheet reduces the number of basic chemical engineering unit processes (after the initial roast/water leach) from 15 to 7. The revised process also results in the elimination of all energy-intensive cooling processes.
European Metals has been advised by its principal hydrometallurgical adviser, Lithium Consultants Australasia ( LCA ), that the changes to the LCP noted above are expected to reduce both Capex and Opex in the LCP by 10-20%. The basis for this range of estimates is an expert assessment and adjustment by LCA of the equivalent Capex and Opex prepared by Hatch Associates Pty Ltd for the PFS for the production of lithium hydroxide published by EMH in 2019 ( refer to the Company's ASX release dated 17 June 2019) (PFS UPDATE CONFIRMS POTENTIAL OF LOW-COST LITHIUM HYDROXIDE PRODUCTION). The Capex reduction is based upon the fact that the simplified flowsheet requires the use of only two crystallisers vs the four crystallisers and 1 evaporator in the original flowsheet. The similar reduction on Opex in achieved through reduced power use resulting from not having to operate the additional equipment. In the 2022 PFS Update, the LCP represented 49.8% of the Capex of the Cinovec Project and Opex/tonne for the full process to produce lithium hydroxide monohydrate (ignoring by-product credits) was US$6,727.
ESG Benefits from lower reagent use and reduced cooling requirements
Opex and reagent use will be confirmed in the ongoing DFS process; however, EMH's adviser LCA has confirmed lower reagent use and the elimination of all process cooling steps change the environmental footprint of the project positively, reducing the chemicals and energy required in the LCP process. These changes are also expected to further improve the life cycle assessment characteristics of the Cinovec Project reported upon by Minviro ( refer to the Company's ASX release dated 23 November 2021) (LCA QUANTIFIES CINOVEC LITHIUM CHEMICAL PRODUCTION CO2 EMISSIONS AND MITIGATION SCENARIOS IDENTIFIED TO PRODUCE LOW CARBON PRODUCTS) and an update on this life cycle assessment is expected to be reported upon in due course.
High-grade Lithium End-Products
The recently completed testwork for the re-engineered LCP flowsheet produced the following crude and battery-grade lithium carbonate products, compared with the published global standard specification, YS/T 582-2013 with the Li(2) CO(3) results highlighted in yellow:
Hot Features
Premium
Li(2) Na K Mg Ca Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn Al Si Pb SO(4) Cl
CO(3) (2)
-
% ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
YS/T
582-2013 >=99.5 250 10 80 50 3 10 10 3 3 10 30 3 800 30
------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ -----
Crude
LC 99.4 368 3 5 357 0 8 3.4 0.2 1.2 5.1 26 0 4860 NA
------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ -----
Battery-Grade
LC 99.99 3 0.8 0.9 2 0.7 6.3 3.4 0.2 1.3 2.8 2.1 0.07 95 NA
------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ -----
As can be seen from the table, the crude lithium carbonate first precipitated (i.e., with no purification or re-precipitation steps) meets the battery-grade specification for 10 of the 14 impurity thresholds.
The battery-grade lithium carbonate recrystallised after a single bicarbonation step shows an exceptionally clean battery-grade material.
The ability to produce an exceptionally clean battery-grade product in a single bicarbonation step is expected to reduce Capex, energy and reagent costs and consequently the Opex of production.
Chlorine was not assayed for in the assessment of battery-grade status and this result will be published once the assay has been completed.
LabWest Minerals Analysis Pty Ltd, Perth (" LabWest ") assayed for 66 elements. An extended assay table of the 23 elements considered important to minimise for the production of battery-grade lithium carbonate is presented at the end of this ASX release.
Pilot-scale rotary kiln testwork
-- Pilot-scale rotary kiln testwork has taken place at the industrial laboratories of several world-renowned rotary kiln OEMs.
-- Preliminary tests have roasted 1.5 tonnes of zinnwaldite concentrate (3.1 tonnes of roast mix including the roasting reagents gypsum, limestone and sodium sulphate) in pilot-scale rotary kilns. This roast mix is fully representative of the first five years of mining.
-- These tests have demonstrated the effectiveness of the roast mix and optimised roast conditions, yielding up to 99% of the available lithium in a laboratory "ultra-washing" configuration.
-- The expected full-scale industrial rotary kiln process resulting from the engineering design work is expected to yield >90% lithium recovery in this part of the process flowsheet. This represents the yield from roast conditions optimised for operability and economic return of 900degC for a 1-hour residence time and requires the roasted mix to be washed four times with the same water at 60degC.
LCP Pilot Programme
-- The pilot-scale representative roast mix of 3.1 tonnes has successfully been leached with water and the leach residue has been washed in a test to replicate industrial design conditions as closely as possible.
-- The resulting Pregnant Leach Solution (" PLS ") contains 9.2kg of lithium, representing 48.8kg LCE.
-- The PLS will be used to commence a hydrometallurgical pilot programme in 4QCY22 which is expected to be completed during 1QCY23.
-- The LCP pilot programme will test the full hydrometallurgical (LCP) process flow sheet on a semi-continuous basis and will provide engineering design information for equipment vendors, enabling equipment sizing and cost estimation to be assessed in detail for the DFS.
-- The LCP pilot programme is expected to lose around half of the lithium in solution as samples are removed from the process for various tests, resulting in the final quantity of battery-grade lithium carbonate produced being expected to be between 20-24kg.
Filing of Patent Application
A provisional patent application covering the simplified hydrometallurgical processing flowsheet has been lodged by the Company on behalf of Geomet s.r.o. to protect what the Company believes to be a very valuable and simple process to produce battery grade lithium carbonate or hydroxide from any lithiferous ore.
Front-End Comminution and Beneficiation ('FECAB') of Cinovec ore
The following changes have been made to the FECAB as a result of extensive testing of 8 tonnes of run-of-mine ore fully representative of the first five years of the mine plan:
-- Separate beneficiation processes for coarse and fine ore fractions, to optimise overall recovery of Lithium. Coarse (>150<MU>m) ore will be concentrated using WHIMS, while the finer ore (20-150<MU>m) will be beneficiated using froth flotation. Extensive testwork has confirmed high selectivity and beneficiation efficiency of flotation, resulting in superb recovery of lithium.
-- Change of target grind size from P80 <212<MU>m to P80 <500<MU>m to minimise losses to fines (<20<MU>m).
-- The flotation of zinnwaldite has been successfully tested in conditions of near-neutral pH in the 7-8 range. This is an important result for environmental permitting of the plant.
-- Change of ore transport from mine portal to processing plant site (7km) from slurry pipe to steel rope-supported aerial conveyor. Preliminary engineering design has been prepared for the aerial conveyor. Rope supported conveying is a proven technology operating in numerous applications worldwide and would effectively mitigate operational and environmental risks associated with long distance slurry transport.
-- Significant reduction in plant infrastructure footprint at the mine portal area, with primary and secondary crushing now placed underground and no ore processing operations at the mine portal.
-- Change of milling from a SAG mill at the mine portal to twin parallel rod mills at the plant site. This configuration mitigates operational risk while rod milling would deliver significantly improved control over fines generation.
-- Although the granite / greisen samples processed in pilot testing consisted of drill core recovered some 175 to 365m below surface, the granitic ore contains thin layers of clay minerals embedded in the crystal lattice which are liberated during comminution. Together with the minimised super-fines generated during comminution, these slimes make up approximately 7-8% of the milled ROM ore, which is removed as waste below the grain size of 20<MU>m.
Battery-Grade Lithium Carbonate - Extended Assay Table
The extended assay table presented below includes the 14 elements in the published lithium carbonate battery-grade standard, YS/T 582-2013, (top table) together with the further 9 elemental impurities that are important to minimise for the manufacture of cathodes / batteries (bottom table).
The battery-grade lithium carbonate assays were assessed by LabWest Minerals Analysis Pty Ltd, Perth.
LabWest was used as it has world-leading detection limits for assaying lithium chemicals, with detection limits for the assayed elements shown in the tables below of between 0.01 to 500 ppb (0.00001 to 0.5 ppm).
Li(2) Na K Mg Ca Mn Fe Ni Cu Zn Al Si Pb SO(4) Cl
CO(3) (2)
-
% ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
YS/T
582-2013 >=99.5 250 10 80 50 3 10 10 3 3 10 30 3 800 30
------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ -----
Battery-Grade
LC 99.99 3 0.8 0.9 2 0.7 6.3 3.4 0.2 1.3 2.8 2.1 0.07 95 NA
------- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ----- ------ -----
As B Cr Cs F Mo P Rb Sr
ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm ppm
YS/T NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
582-2013
----- ----- ----- -------- ----- ------- ----- ------- -------
Battery-Grade
LC 0.17 2.2 0.26 <0.0001 NA 0.0518 29.2 0.0026 0.0164
----- ----- ----- -------- ----- ------- ----- ------- -------
Fluorine was not assayed for in the assessment of battery-grade status and this result will be published once the assay has been completed.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON CINOVEC
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Cinovec Lithium/Tin Project
Geomet s.r.o. controls the mineral exploration licenses awarded by the Czech State over the Cinovec Lithium/Tin Project. Geomet has been granted a preliminary mining permit by the Ministry of Environment and the Ministry of Industry. The company is owned 49% by EMH and 51% by CEZ a.s. through its wholly owned subsidiary, SDAS. Cinovec hosts a globally significant hard rock lithium deposit with a total Measured Mineral Resource of 53.3Mt at 0.48% Li(2) O and 0.08% Sn, Indicated Mineral Resource of 360.2Mt at 0.44% Li(2) O and 0.05% Sn and an Inferred Mineral Resource of 294.7Mt at 0.39% Li(2) O and 0.05% Sn containing a combined 7.39 million tonnes Lithium Carbonate Equivalent and 335.1kt of tin ( refer to the Company's release dated 13 October 2021) (Resource Upgrade at Cinovec Lithium Project).
An initial Probable Ore Reserve of 34.5Mt at 0.65% Li(2) O and 0.09% Sn reported 4 July 2017 ( Cinovec Maiden Ore Reserve - Further Information ) has been declared to cover the first 20 years mining at an output of 22,500tpa of lithium carbonate ( refer to the Company's release dated 11 July 2018) ( Cinovec Production Modelled to Increase to 22,500tpa of Lithium Carbonate ).
This makes Cinovec the largest hard rock lithium deposit in Europe, the fifth largest non-brine deposit in the world and a globally significant tin resource.
The deposit has previously had over 400,000 tonnes of ore mined with a trial sub-level open stope underground mining operation.
On 19 January 2022, EMH provided an update to the 2019 PFS Update, conducted by specialist independent consultants, which, based upon the production of 29,386tpa of lithium hydroxide, indicates a post-tax NPV of USD1.938B and a post-tax IRR of 36.3% and confirmed that the Cinovec Project is a potential low operating cost producer of battery-grade lithium hydroxide or battery grade lithium carbonate as markets demand. It confirmed the deposit is amenable to bulk underground mining (refer to the Company's release dated 19 January 2022) ( PFS Update delivers outstanding results ). Metallurgical test-work has produced both battery-grade lithium hydroxide and battery-grade lithium carbonate in addition to high-grade tin concentrate at excellent recoveries. Cinovec is centrally located for European end-users and is well serviced by infrastructure, with a sealed road adjacent to the deposit, rail lines located 5 km north and 8 km south of the deposit, and an active 22 kV transmission line running to the historic mine. As the deposit lies in an active mining region, it has strong community support.
The economic viability of Cinovec has been enhanced by the recent strong increase in demand for lithium globally, and within Europe specifically.
There are no other material changes to the original information and all the material assumptions continue to apply to the forecasts.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON CEZ
Headquartered in the Czech Republic, CEZ a.s. is an established, integrated energy group with operations in a number of Central and South-eastern European countries and Turkey. CEZ's core business is the generation, distribution, trade in, and sales of electri city and heat, trade in and sales of natural gas, and coal extraction. CEZ Group is one of the ten largest energy companies in Europe, has 28,000 employees and annual revenue of approximately EUR 9.97 billion.
The largest shareholder of its parent company, CEZ a.s., is the Czech Republic with a stake of approximately 70%. The shares of CEZ a.s. are traded on the Prague and Warsaw stock exchanges and included in the PX and WIG-CEE exchange indices. CEZ's market capitalization is approximately EUR 17.7 billion.
As one of the leading Central European power companies, CEZ intends to develop several projects in areas of energy storage and battery manufacturing in the Czech Republic and in Central Europe.
CEZ is also a market leader for E-mobility in the region and has installed and operates a network of EV charging stations throughout Czech Republic. The automotive industry in the Czech Republic is a significant contributor to GDP, and the number of EV's in the country is expected to grow significantly in the coming years.
CONTACT
For further information on this update or the Company generally, please visit our website at www.europeanmet.com or see full contact details at the end of this release.
COMPETENT PERSONS/QUALIFIED PERSON
Information in this announcement relating to the FECAB metallurgical testwork is based on technical data compiled or supervised by Mr Walter Mädel, a full-time consultant to Geomet s.r.o the Cinovec project company. Mr Mädel is a member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AUSIMM) and a mineral processing professional with over 27 years of experience in metallurgical process and project development, process design, project implementation and operations. Of his experience, at least 5 years have been specifically focused on hard rock pegmatite Lithium processing development. Mr Mädel consents to the inclusion in the announcement of the matters based on this information in the form and context in which it appears. Mr Mädel is a participant in the long-term incentive plan of the Company.
Information in this release that relates to exploration results is based on information compiled by Dr Vojtech Sesulka. Dr Sesulka is a Certified Professional Geologist (certified by the European Federation of Geologists), a member of the Czech Association of Economic Geologist, and a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. Dr Sesulka has provided his prior written consent to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context in which it appears. Dr Sesulka is an independent consultant with more than 10 years working for the EMH or Geomet companies. Dr Sesulka does not own any shares in the Company and is not a participant in any short- or long-term incentive plans of the Company .
Mr Grant Harman (B.Sc Chem Eng, B.Com) is an independent consultant with in excess of 7 years of lithium chemicals experience. Mr Harman supervised and reviewed the metallurgical test work and the process design criteria and flow sheets in relation to the LCP. Mr Harman is a participant in the long-term incentive plan of the Company.
The information in this release that relates to Mineral Resources and Exploration Targets is based on, and fairly reflects, information and supporting documentation prepared by Mr Lynn Widenbar. Mr Widenbar, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and a Member of the Australasian Institute of Geoscientists, is a full-time employee of Widenbar and Associates and produced the estimate based on data and geological information supplied by European Metals. Mr Widenbar has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity that he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code 2012 Edition of the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Minerals Resources and Ore Reserves. Mr Widenbar has provided his prior written consent to the inclusion in this report of the matters based on his information in the form and context that the information appears. Mr Widenbar does not own any shares in the Company and is not a participant in any short- or long-term incentive plans of the Company .
The information in this report is extracted from ASX announcements made by EMH on 11 July 2018 "Cinovec Production Modelled to Increase to 22,500tpa of Lithium Carbonate", 13 October 2021 "Resource Upgrade at Cinovec Lithium Project" and 19 January 2022 "PFS Update delivers outstanding results" which are available to view on the Company's website: europeanmet.com. The Company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and, in the case of estimates of Mineral Resources or Ore Reserves, that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person's findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcement.
CAUTION REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
The Company has concluded that it has a reasonable basis for providing the forward-looking statements and the forecast financial information included in this ASX release. While the Company considers the assumptions to be based on reasonable grounds, there is no certainty that they will prove to be correct or that the range of outcomes indicated by LCA will be achieved. This ASX release has been prepared in compliance with the current JORC Code (2012) and the ASX Listing Rules.
Information included in this release constitutes forward-looking statements. Often, but not always, forward looking statements can generally be identified by the use of forward looking words such as "may", "will", "expect", "intend", "plan", "estimate", "anticipate", "continue", and "guidance", or other similar words and may include, without limitation, sta tements regarding plans, strategies and objectives of management, anticipated production or construction commencement dates and expected costs or production outputs.
Forward looking statements inherently involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the company's actual results, performance, and achievements to differ materially from any future results, performance, or achievements. Relevant factors may include, but are not limited to, changes in commodity prices, foreign exchange fluctuations and general economic conditions, increased costs and demand for production inputs, the speculative nature of exploration and project development, including the risks of obtaining necessary licences and permits and diminishing quantities or grades of reserves, political and social risks, changes to the regulatory framework within which the company operates or may in the future operate, environmental conditions including extreme weather conditions, recruitment and retention of personnel, industrial relations issues and litigation.
Forward looking statements are based on the company and its management's good faith assumptions relating to the financial, market, regulatory and other relevant environments that will exist and affect the company's business and operations in the future. The company does not give any assurance that the assumptions on which forward looking statements are based will prove to be correct, or that the company's business or operations will not be affected in any material manner by these or other factors not foreseen or foreseeable by the company or management or beyond the company's control.
Although the company attempts and has attempted to identify factors that would cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those disclosed in forward looking statements, there may be other factors that could cause actual results, performance, achievements or events not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended, and many events are beyond the reasonable control of the company. Accordingly, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward looking statements. Forward looking statements in these materials speak only at the date of issue. Subject to any continuing obligations under applicable law or any relevant stock exchange listing rules, in providing this information the company does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or revise any of the forward looking statements or to advise of any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.
LITHIUM CLASSIFICATION AND CONVERSION FACTORS
Lithium grades are normally presented in percentages or parts per million (ppm). Grades of deposits are also expressed as lithium compounds in percentages, for example as a percent lithium oxide (Li(2) O) content or percent lithium carbonate (Li(2) CO(3) ) content.
Lithium carbonate equivalent ("LCE") is the industry standard terminology for, and is equivalent to, Li(2) CO(3) . Use of LCE is to provide data comparable with industry reports and is the total equivalent amount of lithium carbonate, assuming the lithium content in the deposit is converted to lithium carbonate, using the conversion rates in the table included below to get an equivalent Li(2) CO(3) value in percent. Use of LCE assumes 100% recovery and no process losses in the extraction of Li(2) CO(3) from the deposit.
Lithium resources and reserves are usually presented in tonnes of LCE or Li.
The standard conversion factors are set out in the table below:
Table: Conversion Factors for Lithium Compounds and Minerals
Convert from Convert to Li(2) Convert to
Convert to Li Convert to Li(2) O CO(3) LiOH.H(2) O
Lithium Li 1.000 2.153 5.325 6.048
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Oxide Li(2) O 0.464 1.000 2.473 2.809
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Carbonate Li(2) CO(3) 0.188 0.404 1.000 1.136
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Hydroxide LiOH.H(2) O 0.165 0.356 0.880 1.000
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Fluoride LiF 0.268 0.576 1.424 1.618
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Sulphate Li(2) SO(4) .H(2) O 0.108 0.233 0.577 0.656
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
Lithium Phosphate Li(3) PO(4) 0.180 0.387 0.957 1.087
-------------------- -------------- ------------------- ------------------ ------------------
This announcement has been approved for release by the Board.
WEBSITE
A copy of this announcement is available from the Company's website at www.europeanmet.com.
ENQUIRIES:
European Metals Holdings Limited
Keith Coughlan, Executive Chairman Tel: +61 (0) 419 996 333
Email: keith@europeanmet.com
Kiran Morzaria, Non-Executive Director Tel: +44 (0) 20 7440 0647
David Koch, Company Secretary Tel: +61 (0) 418 925 212
Email: david@europeanmet.com
WH Ireland Ltd (Nomad & Joint Broker)
James Joyce/Darshan Patel Tel: +44 (0) 20 7220 1666
(Corporate Finance)
Harry Ansell (Broking)
Panmure Gordon (UK) Limited (Joint Tel: +44 (0) 20 7886 2500
Broker)
John Prior
Hugh Rich
James Sinclair Ford
Harriette Johnson
Blytheweigh (Financial PR) Tel: +44 (0) 20 7138 3222
Tim Blythe
Megan Ray
Chapter 1 Advisors (Financial PR
- Aus) Tel: +61 (0) 433 112 936
David Tasker
The information contained within this announcement is considered to be inside information, for the purposes of Article 7 of EU Regulation 596/2014, prior to its release. The person who authorised for the release of this announcement on behalf of the Company was Keith Coughlan, Executive Chairman.
European Metals Ltd - Cinovec Deposit - October 2022
JORC Code, 2012 Edition - Table 1
Section 1 Sampling Techniques and Data
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
============================================================
Sampling techniques Between 2014 and 2021, the
* Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, Company commenced a core
random chips, or specific specialised industry drilling program and
standard measurement tools appropriate to the collected samples
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma from core splits in line
sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These with JORC Code guidelines.
examples should not be taken as limiting the broad Sample intervals honour
meaning of sampling. geological or visible
mineralisation boundaries
and vary between 50cm
* Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample and 2m. The majority of
representivity and the appropriate calibration of any samples are 1m in length.
measurement tools or systems used. The samples are half or
quarter of core; the
latter applied for large
* Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that diameter core.
are Material to the Public Report. Between 1952 and 1989, the
Cinovec deposit was
sampled in two ways: in
* In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done drill core and underground
this would be relatively simple (eg 'reverse channel samples.
circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples Channel samples, from
from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g drift ribs and faces, were
charge for fire assay'). In other cases more collected during detailed
explanation may be required, such as where there is exploration between
coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. 1952 and 1989 by
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg Geoindustria n.p. and
submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed Rudne Doly n.p., both
information. Czechoslovak State
companies.
Sample length was 1m,
channel 10x5cm, sample
mass about 15kg. Up to
1966, samples were
collected
using hammer and chisel;
from 1966 a small drill
(Holman Hammer) was used.
14179 samples were
collected and transported
to a crushing facility.
Core and channel samples
were crushed in two steps:
to -5mm, then to -0.5mm.
100g splits were
obtained and pulverized to
-0.045mm for analysis.
Drilling techniques In 2014, three core holes
* Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole were drilled for a total
hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) of 940.1m. In 2015, six
and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard core holes were
tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or drilled for a total of
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by 2,455.0m. In 2016,
what method, etc). eighteen core holes were
drilled for a total of
6,459.6m.In 2017, six core
holes were drilled for a
total of 2697.1m. In 2018,
5 core holes
were drilled for a total
of 1,640.3 and in 2020, 22
core holes were drilled
for a total of
6,621.7m.
In 2014 and 2015, the core
size was HQ3 (60mm
diameter) in upper parts
of holes; in deeper
sections the core size was
reduced to NQ3 (44mm
diameter). Core recovery
was high (average
98%). Between 2016 and
2021 up to four drill rigs
were used, and select
holes employed PQ
sized core for upper parts
of the drillholes.
Historically only core
drilling was employed,
either from surface or
from underground.
Surface drilling: 149
holes, total 55,570
meters; vertical and
inclined, maximum depth
1596m
(structural hole). Core
diameters from 220mm near
surface to 110 mm at
depth. Average core
recovery 89.3%.
Underground drilling: 766
holes for 53,126m;
horizontal and inclined.
Core diameter 46mm;
drilled by Craelius XC42
or DIAMEC drills.
Drill sample recovery Core recovery for
* Method of recording and assessing core and chip historical surface drill
sample recoveries and results assessed. holes was recorded on
drill logs and entered
into
* Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure the database.
representative nature of the samples. No correlation between
grade and core recovery
was established.
* Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery
and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred
due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse
material.
Logging In 2014-2021, core
* Whether core and chip samples have been geologically descriptions were recorded
and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to into paper logging forms
support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, by hand and later entered
mining studies and metallurgical studies. into an Excel database.
Core was logged in detail
historically in a facility
* Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in 6km from the mine site.
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography. The following
features were logged and
recorded in paper logs:
* The total length and percentage of the relevant lithology, alteration
intersections logged. (including intensity
divided into weak, medium
and strong/pervasive), and
occurrence of ore minerals
expressed
in %, macroscopic
description of congruous
intervals and structures
and core recovery.
Sub-sampling techniques In 2014-21, core was
and sample preparation * If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, washed, geologically
half or all core taken. logged, sample
intervals determined
and marked then
* If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary the core was cut in
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry. half. Larger core was
cut in half and one
half was cut again to
* For all sample types, the nature, quality and obtain
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique. a quarter core
sample. One half or
one quarter samples
* Quality control procedures adopted for all was delivered to ALS
sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of Global for assaying
samples. after duplicates,
blanks and standards
were inserted in the
* Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is sample stream. The
representative of the in situ material collected, remaining drill
including for instance results for field core is stored on
duplicate/second-half sampling. site for reference.
Sample preparation
was carried out by
* Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain ALS Global in
size of the material being sampled. Romania, using
industry standard
techniques
appropriate for the
style of
mineralisation
represented at
Cinovec.
Historically, core
was either split or
consumed entirely for
analyses.
Samples are
considered to be
representative.
Sample sizes relative
to grain sizes are
deemed appropriate
for the analytical
techniques
used.
Quality of assay data and In 2014-21, core
laboratory tests * The nature, quality and appropriateness of the samples were assayed
assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether by ALS Global. The
the technique is considered partial or total. most appropriate
analytical methods
were determined by
* For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF results of tests for
instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining various analytical
the analysis including instrument make and model, techniques.
reading times, calibrations factors applied and their The following
derivation, etc. analytical methods
were chosen: ME-MS81
(lithium borate
* Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg fusion or 4 acid
standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory digest,
checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie ICP-MS finish) for a
lack of bias) and precision have been established. suite of elements
including Sn and W
and ME-4ACD81 (4 acid
digest, ICP-AES
finish) additional
elements including
lithium.
About 40% of samples
were analysed by
ME-MS81d (ME-MS81
plus whole rock
package). Samples
with over 1% tin are
analysed by XRF.
Samples over 1%
lithium were analysed
by Li-OG63 (four
acid and ICP finish).
Standards, blanks and
duplicates were
inserted into the
sample stream.
Initial tin standard
results indicated
possible downgrading
bias; the laboratory
repeated the analysis
with satisfactory
results.
Historically, Sn
content was measured
by XRF and using wet
chemical methods. W
and Li were
analysed by spectral
methods.
Analytical QA was
internal and
external. The former
subjected 5% of the
sample to repeat
analysis
in the same facility.
10% of samples were
analysed in another
laboratory, also
located in
Czechoslovakia. The
QA/QC procedures were
set to the State
norms and are
considered adequate.
It is unknown whether
external standards or
sample duplicates
were used.
Overall accuracy of
sampling and assaying
was proved later by
test mining and
reconciliation
of mined and analysed
grades.
Verification of sampling During the 2014-21
and assaying * The verification of significant intersections by drill campaigns
either independent or alternative company personnel. Geomet indirectly
verified grades of
tin and lithium by
* The use of twinned holes. comparing the length
and grade of mineral
intercepts with the
* Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, current block model.
data verification, data storage (physical and
electronic) protocols.
* Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
Location of data points In 2014-21, drill
* Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill collar locations were
holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine surveyed by a
workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource registered surveyor.
estimation. Down hole surveys
were recorded by a
contractor.
* Specification of the grid system used. Historically, drill
hole collars were
surveyed with a great
* Quality and adequacy of topographic control. degree of precision
by the mine
survey crew.
Hole locations are
recorded in the local
S-JTSK Krovak grid.
Topographic control
is excellent.
Data spacing and Historical data
distribution * Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results. density is very high.
Spacing is sufficient
to establish
* Whether the data spacing and distribution is Measured, Indicated
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and and Inferred Mineral
grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource Resource Estimates.
and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and Areas with lower
classifications applied. coverage of Li%
assays have been
identified as
* Whether sample compositing has been applied. Exploration Targets.
Sample compositing to
1m intervals has been
applied
mathematically prior
to estimation but
not physically.
Orientation of data in In 2014-21, drill hole
relation to geological * Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased azimuth and dip was
structure sampling of possible structures and the extent to planned to intercept the
which this is known, considering the deposit type. mineralized zones at
near-true
thickness. As the
* If the relationship between the drilling orientation mineralized zones dip
and the orientation of key mineralised structures is shallowly to the south,
considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this drill holes were vertical
should be assessed and reported if material. or near vertical and
directed to the north. Due
to land access
restrictions, certain
holes
could not be positioned in
sites with ideal drill
angle.
Geomet has not directly
collected any samples
underground because the
workings are inaccessible
at this time.
Based on historic reports,
level plan maps, sections
and core logs, the samples
were collected
in an unbiased fashion,
systematically on two
underground levels from
drift ribs and faces,
as well as from
underground holes drilled
perpendicular to the drift
directions. The sample
density is adequate for
the style of deposit.
Multiple samples were
taken and analysed by the
Company from the historic
tailing repository.
Only lithium was analysed
(Sn and W too low). The
results matched the
historic grades.
Sample security In the 2014-21 programs,
* The measures taken to ensure sample security. only Geomet's employees
and contractors handled
drill core and conducted
sampling. The core was
collected from the drill
rig each day and
transported in a company
vehicle to the secure
Geomet premises where it
was logged and cut. Geomet
geologists supervised
the process and
logged/sampled the core.
The samples were
transported by Geomet
personnel
in a company vehicle to
the ALS Global laboratory
pick-up station. The
remaining core is stored
under lock and key.
Historically, sample
security was ensured by
State norms applied to
exploration. The State
norms were similar to
currently accepted best
practice and JORC
guidelines for sample
security.
Audits or reviews Review of sampling
* The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques was carried out
techniques and data. from written records. No
flaws found.
=========================== ============================================================ ===========================
Section 2 Reporting of Exploration Results
(Criteria listed in section 1 also apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
===============================================================
Mineral tenement and In June 2020, the Czech
land tenure status * Type, reference name/number, location and ownership Ministry of the
including agreements or material issues with third Environment
parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, granted Geomet three
overriding royalties, native title interests, Preliminary
historical sites, wilderness or national park and Mining Permits which
environmental settings. cover
the whole of the Cinovec
deposit. The permits are
* The security of the tenure held at the time of valid until 2028.
reporting along with any known impediments to Geomet plans to
obtaining a licence to operate in the area. amalgamate
these into a single Final
Mining Permit.
Exploration done by There has been no
other parties * Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other acknowledgment
parties. or appraisal of
exploration
by other parties.
Geology Cinovec is a
* Deposit type, geological setting and style of granite-hosted
mineralisation. tin-tungsten-lithium
deposit.
Late Variscan age,
post-orogenic
granite intrusion tin and
tungsten occur in oxide
minerals (cassiterite and
wolframite). Lithium
occurs
in zinnwaldite, a Li-rich
muscovite.
Mineralization in a small
granite cupola. Vein and
greisen type. Alteration
is greisenisation,
silicification.
Drill hole Information Reported previously.
* A summary of all information material to the
understanding of the exploration results including a
tabulation of the following information for all
Material drill holes:
o easting and northing
of the drill hole collar
o elevation or RL (Reduced
Level - elevation above
sea level in metres)
of the drill hole collar
o dip and azimuth of
the hole
o down hole length and
interception depth
o hole length.
* If the exclusion of this information is justified on
the basis that the information is not Material and
this exclusion does not detract from the
understanding of the report, the Competent Person
should clearly explain why this is the case.
Data aggregation methods Reporting of exploration
* In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging results has not and will
techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations not include aggregate
(eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are intercepts.
usually Material and should be stated. Metal equivalent not used
in reporting.
No grade truncations
* Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths applied.
of high grade results and longer lengths of low grade
results, the procedure used for such aggregation
should be stated and some typical examples of such
aggregations should be shown in detail.
* The assumptions used for any reporting of metal
equivalent values should be clearly stated.
Relationship between Intercept widths are
mineralisation widths * These relationships are particularly important in the approximate
and intercept lengths reporting of Exploration Results. true widths.
The mineralization is
mostly
* If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to of disseminated nature
the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be and
reported. relatively homogeneous;
the orientation of
samples
* If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are is of limited impact.
reported, there should be a clear statement to this For higher grade veins
effect (eg 'down hole length, true width not known'). care
was taken to drill at
angles
ensuring closeness of
intercept
length and true widths.
The block model accounts
for variations between
apparent
and true dip.
Diagrams Appropriate maps and
* Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and sections
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any have been generated by
significant discovery being reported These should Geomet
include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill and independent
hole collar locations and appropriate sectional consultants.
views. Available in customary
vector
and raster outputs and
partially
in consultant's reports.
Balanced reporting Balanced reporting in
* Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration historic
Results is not practicable, representative reporting reports guaranteed by
of both low and high grades and/or widths should be norms
practiced to avoid misleading reporting of and standards, verified
Exploration Results. in 1997 and 2012 by
independent
consultants.
The historic reporting
was
completed by several
State
institutions and cross
validated.
Other substantive Data available: bulk
exploration data * Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, density
should be reported including (but not limited to): for all representative
geological observations; geophysical survey results; rock
geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and and ore types; (historic
method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk data + 92 measurements in
density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock 2016-21 from current core
characteristics; potential deleterious or holes); petrographic and
contaminating substances. mineralogical studies,
hydrological
information, hardness,
moisture
content, fragmentation
etc.
Further work Grade verification
* The nature and scale of planned further work (eg sampling
tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or from underground or
large-scale step-out drilling). drilling
from surface.
Historically-reported
* Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible grades require modern
extensions, including the main geological validation
interpretations and future drilling areas, provided in order to improve the
this information is not commercially sensitive. resource classification.
The number and location
of sampling sites will be
determined from a 3D
wireframe
model and geostatistical
considerations reflecting
grade continuity.
The geologic model will
be used to determine if
any infill drilling is
required.
The deposit is open
down-dip
on the southern
extension,
and locally poorly
constrained
at its western and
eastern
extensions, where limited
additional drilling might
be required.
No large-scale drilling
campaigns are required.
========================= =============================================================== ==========================
Section 3 Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
(Criteria listed in section 1, and where relevant in section 2, also apply to this section.)
Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary
============================================================
Database integrity Assay and geologic data
* Measures taken to ensure that data has not been were compiled by Geomet
corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying staff from primary
errors, between its initial collection and its use historic
for Mineral Resource estimation purposes. records, such as copies
of drill logs and large
scale sample location
* Data validation procedures used. maps.
Sample data were entered
in to Excel spreadsheets
by Geomet staff.
The database entry process
was supervised by a
Professional
Geologist who works for
Geomet.
The database was checked
by independent competent
persons (Lynn Widenbar of
Widenbar & Associates).
Site visits The site was visited by
* Comment on any site visits undertaken by the Dr Pavel Reichl who
Competent Person and the outcome of those visits. identified
the previous shaft sites,
tails dams and observed
* If no site visits have been undertaken indicate why the mineralisation
this is the case. underground
through an adjacent mine
working and was previously
the Competent Person for
exploration results.
The current Competent
Person
for exploration results,
Dr Vojtech Sesulka, has
visited the site on
multiple
occasions and has been
involved
in 2014 to 2021 drilling
campaigns.
The site was visited in
June 2016 by Mr Lynn
Widenbar,
the Competent Person for
Mineral Resource
Estimation.
Diamond drill rigs were
viewed, as was core; a
visit
was carried out to the
adjacent
underground mine in
Germany
which is a continuation
of the Cinovec Deposit.
Geological interpretation The overall geology of the
* Confidence in (or conversely, the uncertainty of) the deposit is relatively
geological interpretation of the mineral deposit. simple
and well understood due
to excellent data control
* Nature of the data used and of any assumptions made. from surface and
underground.
Nature of data:
* The effect, if any, of alternative interpretations on underground
Mineral Resource estimation. mapping, structural
measurements,
detailed core logging, 3D
* The use of geology in guiding and controlling Mineral data synthesis on plans
Resource estimation. and maps.
Geological continuity is
good. The grade is highest
* The factors affecting continuity both of grade and and shows most variability
geology. in quartz veins.
Grade correlates with
degree
of silicification and
greisenisation
of the host granite.
The primary control is the
granite-country rock
contact.
All mineralization is in
the uppermost 200m of the
granite and is truncated
by the contact.
Dimensions The Cinovec Deposit
* The extent and variability of the Mineral Resource strikes
expressed as length (along strike or otherwise), plan north-south, is elongated,
width, and depth below surface to the upper and lower and dips gently south
limits of the Mineral Resource. parallel
to the upper granite
contact.
The surface projection of
mineralization is about
1km long and 900m wide.
Mineralization extends
from
about 200m to 500m below
surface.
Estimation and modelling Block estimation was
techniques * The nature and appropriateness of the estimation carried
technique(s) applied and key assumptions, including out in Micromine 2021.5
treatment of extreme grade values, domaining, using Ordinary Kriging
interpolation parameters and maximum distance of interpolation.
extrapolation from data points. If a computer A geological domain model
assisted estimation method was chosen include a was constructed using
description of computer software and parameters used. Leapfrog
software with solid
wireframes
* The availability of check estimates, previous representing greisen,
estimates and/or mine production records and whether granite,
the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate greisenised granite and
account of such data. the overlying barren
rhyolite.
This was used to both
* The assumptions made regarding recovery of control
by-products. interpolation and to
assign
density to the model (2.57
* Estimation of deleterious elements or other non-grade for granite, 2.70 for
variables of economic significance (eg sulphur for greisen
acid mine drainage characterisation). and 2.60 for all other
material).
Analysis of sample lengths
* In the case of block model interpolation, the block indicated that compositing
size in relation to the average sample spacing and to 1m was necessary.
the search employed. Search ellipse sizes and
orientations for the
estimation
* Any assumptions behind modelling of selective mining were based on drill hole
units. spacing, the known
orientations
of mineralisation and
* Any assumptions about correlation between variables. variography.
An "unfolding" search
strategy
* Description of how the geological interpretation was was used which allowed the
used to control the resource estimates. search ellipse orientation
to vary with the locally
changing dip and strike.
* Discussion of basis for using or not using grade After statistical
cutting or capping. analysis,
a top cut of 5% was
applied
* The process of validation, the checking process used, to Sn% and W%; a 1.2% top
the comparison of model data to drill hole data, and cut is applied to Li%.
use of reconciliation data if available. Sn% and Li% were then
estimated
by Ordinary Kriging within
the mineralisation solids.
The primary search ellipse
was 150m along strike,
150m
down dip and 7.5m across
the mineralisation. A
minimum
of 4 composites and a
maximum
of 8 composites were
required.
A second interpolation
with
search ellipse of 300m x
300m x 12.5m was carried
out to inform blocks to
be used as the basis for
an exploration target.
Block size was 10m (E-W)
by 10m (N-S) by 5m
Validation of the final
resource has been carried
out in a number of ways
including section
comparison
of data versus model,
swath
plots and production
reconciliation.
All methods produced
satisfactory
results.
Moisture Tonnages are estimated on
* Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or a dry basis using the
with natural moisture, and the method of average
determination of the moisture content. bulk density for each
geological
domain.
Cut-off parameters A series of alternative
* The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality cutoffs was used to report
parameters applied. tonnage and grade: Lithium
0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3% and 0.4%.
The final reporting cutoff
of 0.1% Li was chosen
based
on underground mining
studies
carried out By Bara
Consulting
in 2017 while developing
an initial Probable Ore
Reserve Estimate.
Mining factors or Mining is assumed to be
assumptions * Assumptions made regarding possible mining methods, by underground methods,
minimum mining dimensions and internal (or, if with fill.
applicable, external) mining dilution. It is always An updated Preliminary
necessary as part of the process of determining Feasibility
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction Study prepared in 2019
to consider potential mining methods, but the established
assumptions made regarding mining methods and that it was feasible and
parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not economic to use
always be rigorous. Where this is the case, this large-scale,
should be reported with an explanation of the basis long-hole open stope
of the mining assumptions made. mining.
The 2022 updated
Preliminary
Feasibility Study
establishes
that it is feasible and
economic to mine using
long
hole open stoping with
paste
backfill.
Using a total processing
cost of $41/t and a
recovery
of 77% of Li grade in ROM
ore, a gross payable value
per ROM ore tonne of $96/t
($55/t net margin) has
been
assumed before inclusion
in the mine plan. .
Metallurgical factors or A new simplified LCP
assumptions * The basis for assumptions or predictions regarding flowsheet
metallurgical amenability. It is always necessary as has been developed and a
part of the process of determining reasonable locked-cycle test program
prospects for eventual economic extraction to ("LCTs") run at ALS
consider potential metallurgical methods, but the Metallurgy
assumptions regarding metallurgical treatment in 2022 has demonstrated
processes and parameters made when reporting Mineral successfully high lithium
Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this is recoveries of 88-93%.
the case, this should be reported with an explanation The new flowsheet differs
of the basis of the metallurgical assumptions made. from the original
flowsheet
tested in that lithium is
recovered as a lithium
phosphate
product that allows
treatment
of pure lithium bearing
stream to lithium
carbonation
and simplification of the
impurity removal steps
with
little waste product.
Battery-grade lithium
carbonate
produced in the test work
exceeded current
market-accepted
battery-grade
specifications.
LCP pilot programme
utilising
the new flow sheet will
commence in 4Q CY22 with
marketing samples
available
to offtake partners in 1Q
CY23. Bulk representative
zinnwaldite concentrate
has been prepared and
roasted
at ThyssenKrupp and water
leached at Anzaplan. The
resultant pregnant liquor
solution is being
transferred
to ALS Metallurgy in Perth
and will be used in the
proposed pilot plant run.
Extensive testing of 8
tonnes
of run-of-mine ore,
representing
the first five years of
the mine plan, indicates
lithium recoveries of >87%
are achievable from the
proposed comminution and
beneficiation circuit. The
zinnwaldite concentrate
is produced using a
combination
of comminution, magnetic
separation, and flotation.
The work program optimised
the treatment of coarse
and fine ore fractions,
as well as the targeted
grinding size, flotation
parameters and comminution
approach.
Extensive testwork was
conducted
on Cinovec ore in the
past.
Testing culminated with
a pilot plant trial in
1970,
where three batches of
Cinovec
ore were processed, each
under slightly different
conditions. The best
result,
with a tin recovery of
76.36%,
was obtained from a batch
of 97.13t grading 0.32%
Sn. A more elaborate
flowsheet
was also investigated and
with flotation produced
final Sn and W recoveries
of better than 96% and
84%,
respectively.
Historical laboratory
testwork
also demonstrated that
lithium
can be extracted from the
ore (lithium carbonate was
produced from 1958-1966
at Cinovec).
Environmental factors or Cinovec is in an area of
assumptions * Assumptions made regarding possible waste and process historic mining activity
residue disposal options. It is always necessary as spanning the past 600
part of the process of determining reasonable years.
prospects for eventual economic extraction to Extensive State
consider the potential environmental impacts of the exploration
mining and processing operation. While at this stage was conducted until 1990.
the determination of potential environmental impacts, The property is located
particularly for a greenfields project, may not in a sparsely populated
always be well advanced, the status of early area, most of the land
consideration of these potential environmental belongs
impacts should be reported. Where these aspects have to the State. Few problems
not been considered this should be reported with an are anticipated with
explanation of the environmental assumptions made. regards
to the acquisition of
surface
rights for any potential
underground mining
operation.
The envisaged mining
method
will see much of the waste
and tailings used as
underground
fill.
Bulk density Historical bulk density
* Whether assumed or determined. If assumed, the basis measurements were made in
for the assumptions. If determined, the method used, a laboratory.
whether wet or dry, the frequency of the measurements The following densities
, were applied:
the nature, size and representativeness of the 2.57 for granite
samples. 2.70 for greisen
2.60 for all other
material
* 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.
Classification The new 2014 to 2021
* The basis for the classification of the Mineral drilling
Resources into varying confidence categories. has confirmed the Lithium
mineralisation model and
allowed the Mineral
* Whether appropriate account has been taken of all Resource
relevant factors (ie relative confidence in to be classified in the
tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of input data, Measured, Indicated and
confidence in continuity of geology and metal values, Inferred categories.
quality, quantity and distribution of the data). The detailed
classification
is based on a combination
* Whether the result appropriately reflects the of drill hole spacing and
Competent Person's view of the deposit. the output from the
kriging
interpolation.
Measured material is
located
in the south of the
deposit
in the area of new infill
drilling carried out
between
2014 and 2021.
Material outside the
classified
area has been used as the
basis for an Exploration
Target.
The Competent Person (Lynn
Widenbar) endorses the
final
results and
classification.
Audits or reviews Wardell Armstrong
* The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral International,
Resource estimates. in their review of Lynn
Widenbar's initial
resource
estimate stated "the
Widenbar
model appears to have been
prepared in a diligent
manner
and given the data
available
provides a reasonable
estimate
of the drillhole assay
data
at the Cinovec deposit".
Discussion of relative In 2012, WAI carried out
accuracy/ confidence * Where appropriate a statement of the relative model validation exercises
accuracy and confidence level in the Mineral Resource on the initial Widenbar
estimate using an approach or procedure deemed model, which included
appropriate by the Competent Person. For example, the visual
application of statistical or geostatistical comparison of drilling
procedures to quantify the relative accuracy of the sample
resource within stated confidence limits, or, if such grades and the estimated
an approach is not deemed appropriate, a qualitative block model grades, and
discussion of the factors that could affect the Swath plots to assess
relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate. spatial
local grade variability.
A visual comparison of
* The statement should specify whether it relates to Block
global or local estimates, and, if local, state the model grades vs drillhole
relevant tonnages, which should be relevant to grades was carried out on
technical and economic evaluation. Documentation a sectional basis for both
should include assumptions made and the procedures Sn and Li mineralisation.
used. Visually, grades in the
block model correlated
well
* These statements of relative accuracy and confidence with drillhole grade for
of the estimate should be compared with production both Sn and Li.
data, where available. Swath plots were generated
from the model by
averaging
composites and blocks in
all 3 dimensions using 10m
panels. Swath plots were
generated for the Sn and
Li estimated grades in the
block model, these should
exhibit a close
relationship
to the composite data upon
which the estimation is
based. As the original
drillhole
composites were not
available
to WAI. 1m composite
samples
based on 0.1% cut-offs for
both Sn and Li assays were
Overall Swath plots
illustrate
a good correlation between
the composites and the
block
grades. As is visible in
the Swath plots, there has
been a large amount of
smoothing
of the block model grades
when compared to the
composite
grades, this is typical
of the estimation method.
=========================== ============================================================ ===========================
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution of this information may apply. For further information, please contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.
RNS may use your IP address to confirm compliance with the terms and conditions, to analyse how you engage with the information contained in this communication, and to share such analysis on an anonymised basis with others as part of our commercial services. For further information about how RNS and the London Stock Exchange use the personal data you provide us, please see our Privacy Policy.
END
DRLEANEFDSKAFEA
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
October 31, 2022 06:00 ET (10:00 GMT)
1 Year European Metals Chart |
1 Month European Metals Chart |
It looks like you are not logged in. Click the button below to log in and keep track of your recent history.
Support: +44 (0) 203 8794 460 | support@advfn.com
By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions
