Firering Strategic
Minerals plc / EPIC: FRG / Market: AIM / Sector: Mining
27 November 2024
Firering Strategic Minerals
plc
("Firering" or "the
Company")
Maiden JORC-Code Compliant MRE at
Limeco
Providing support for Limeco's Tier 1
quicklime operations for at least 50 years
Firering Strategic Minerals plc (Firering), an
emerging quicklime production and critical mineral exploration
company, is pleased to announce a maiden JORC-code compliant
Mineral Resource Estimate ("MRE") for its quicklime project in
Zambia ("Limeco" or the "Project"), which is being fast-tracked
towards an imminent phased commissioning.
HIGHLIGHTS
· 97%
increase in resource tonnes compared to the previous non-compliant
2017 MRE.
·
MRE totals 145.2Mt at 95.7% CaCO3, comprising
11.8Mt in the Measured category, 55.4Mt in Indicated, and 78.0Mt in
Inferred.
·
Provides for over 50 years of potential quicklime
production.
· Pit
optimisation indicates a negligible stripping ratio with low
sensitivity to costs and pricing.
Yuval Cohen,
Chief Executive of Firering, said:
"I am delighted to announce
a maiden JORC-compliant MRE, which almost doubles the resource
tonnage of the Project based on the previous non-code resource, and
which supports over 50 years of quicklime production. This firmly
positions Limeco to become the largest quicklime producer in Zambia
and a prominent regional player for many years to come, enabling it
to meet the growing demands of the copper industry and other
industrial clients.
"Earthlab has
once again demonstrated that Limeco's high-quality Tier 1 limestone
deposit forms the foundation of its robust quicklime business.
Following the identification of three distinct domains within the
Project, A, B, and C, including the new exploration licence granted
in September, Domain A has been the primary area of focus. However,
Domains B and C present significant opportunities for Limeco to
unlock additional value in the future, with potential applications
across various industries."
DETAILS
Aligned with its strategy to fully
capitalise on the significant market opportunities for quicklime in
the Zambian Copperbelt, given its essential role in copper
production, Firering commissioned Earthlab Exploration
and Mining Consulting (Pty) Ltd ("Earthlab") to undertake a maiden JORC-compliant MRE for its Limeco
quicklime project in Zambia. This study incorporated Limeco's newly
granted exploration licence (see RNS dated 3 September
2024).
The newly published MRE (November
2024) revealed a 97% increase in tonnage compared to Limeco's 2017
non-compliant estimated mineral resource of 73.7Mt at 95.3% CaCO3.
The updated estimate totals 145.2Mt at 95.7% CaCO3, comprising
11.8Mt in the Measured category, 55.4Mt in Indicated, and 78.0Mt in
Inferred (Table 2).
Notably, the maiden MRE enables over 50 years
of potential quicklime production.
The MRE incorporates a detailed analysis of the
deposit's geological structure, including its physical and chemical
properties and associated facies. The local geology is
characterised by a depositional setting typical of a
lagoonal-shoals shelf environment, where wind and still water
deposited sediments forming wackstone, packstone and upward
grainstone in horizontal to wavy grey laminated layers (Figure
1).
Figure 1: Proposed depositional setting of the project area
(Saller, 2001).
Based on the geological interpretation and the
chemical signatures displayed by the exploration data, Earthlab was
able to divide the limestone deposit into geological facies with
unique chemical data populations. The demarcated geological
facies coincide with statistical domains that have been processed
geostatistically to produce the MRE (Figure 2).
Figure 2: Plan view of the domain wireframes with drill hole
collars superimposed (Earthlab, November 2024).
To estimate the resource tonnes, Earthlab
created a potential final pit shell (Figure 3) by applying
modifying factors as per the guidelines of JORC, which dictate that
resource tonnes should be estimated based on Reasonable Prospects
for Eventual Economic Extraction ("RPEEE").
Figure 3: Representation of the pit shell; the lime plant can
be seen in the upper right corner (Earthlab, November
2024).
Earthlab completed the mineral resource
classification for the entire model (Figure 4) and for the final
pit shell (Figure 5).
Figure 4: Final classification for Domains A, B, and C
(Earthlab, November 2024).
Figure 5: Final classification for the optimised pit shell
(Earthlab, November 2024).
PIT
OPTIMISATION RUNS
Earthlab's pit optimisation runs indicated a
negligible stripping ratio with low sensitivity to costs and
pricing (Table 1).
Table 1: Sensitivity of ore tonnage to changes in plant
operating costs and quicklime prices (Earthlab, November
2024).
Table 1 shows that by more than doubling the
lime plant operating costs from USD7 per ROM tonne to USD15 per ROM
tonne, while keeping the quicklime price at USD150 per saleable
tonne, the change in ore tonnage is -1,175,180 tonnes or -0.76%,
which is neglectable.
Earthlab decided to use the pit shell of run 13
shown in Table 1, which was based on a lime plant OPEX of USD15 per
ROM tonne and a quicklime price at the gate of USD150 per saleable
tonne, which Earthlab states are both conservative. The pit shell
shown in Figure 3 above is derived from run 13 in Table
1.
MAIDEN JORC
COMPLIANT MRE
The gross Mineral Resource for Domain A is
145.2 Mt comprising 11.8 Mt in Measured, 55.4Mt in Indicated and
78.0Mt in Inferred (Table 2).
Table 2: Domain A gross Mineral Resource for Limeco Resources
(Earthlab, November 2024).
Total gross potential saleable quicklime for
Domain A is 31.9Mt comprising 2.6Mt in Measured, 12.1Mt in
Indicated and 17.2Mt in Inferred (Table 3).
Table 3: Domain A gross potential saleable quicklime for
Limeco Resources (Earthlab, November 2024).
Total gross potential saleable aggregate for
Domain A is 87.1Mt comprising 7.1Mt in Measured, 33.2Mt in
Indicated and 46.8Mt in Inferred (Table 4).
Table 4: Domain A gross potential saleable aggregate for
Limeco Resources (Earthlab, November 2024).
Deon du
Plessis, Chief Executive Officer of Earthlab, said:
"Completing the JORC
compliant MRE for Firering proved to be a very exciting
project. Our research indicated that the key to understanding
Limeco's deposit was its chemical characteristics in addition to
its geological information. Our work clearly showed three
Domains A, B and C, each with a unique chemical fingerprint.
Our JORC compliant MRE is only for Domain A, which is the high
grade CaCO3/CaO domain with low MgCO3/MgO and Fe2O3, making this
domain perfect for the production of high-quality quicklime through
Limeco's lime plant. Earthlab considers Limeco's deposit a
significant deposit providing Limeco with decades of high-quality
limestone for its quicklime operation. The upside and
production scalability of Limeco's deposit puts it in the Tier 1
category, when compared to other limestone
deposits".
Competent
Person
In accordance with the AIM Rules - Note for
Mining and Oil & Gas Companies, the information contained in
this announcement has been reviewed by Mr. Deon du Plessis. Mr du
Plessis is a qualified professional Geologist (Pr.Sci.Nat. -
400050/05) and Fellow of the Geological Society of South Africa
(FGSSA - 963338). Mr du Plessis has over 22 years of relevant
experience within the geology and mining sectors.
THIS ANNOUNCEMENT CONTAINS INSIDE INFORMATION AS STIPULATED
UNDER THE UK VERSION OF THE MARKET ABUSE REGULATION NO 596/2014
WHICH IS PART OF ENGLISH LAW BY VIRTUE OF THE EUROPEAN (WITHDRAWAL)
ACT 2018, AS AMENDED. ON PUBLICATION OF THIS ANNOUNCEMENT VIA
A REGULATORY INFORMATION SERVICE, THIS INFORMATION IS CONSIDERED TO
BE IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.
*** ENDS ***
For further information visit
www.fireringplc.com or contact:
Firering
Strategic Minerals
Yuval
Cohen
E:
info@firering-holdings.com
SPARK Advisory
Partners Limited (Nominated Adviser)
Neil Baldwin / James Keeshan / Adam
Dawes
T: +44 20 3368 3550
Optiva
Securities Limited (Joint Broker)
Christian Dennis / Daniel
Ingram
T: +44 20 3137 1903
Shard Capital
Partners LLP (Joint Broker)
Damon Heath / Erik
Woolgar
T: +44 20 7186 9950
St Brides
Partners Limited (Financial PR)
Isabel de Salis / Susie Geliher / Seb
Weller
E: firering@stbridespartners.co.uk
Notes
Firering Strategic Minerals plc is an AIM
listed resource company set to commence commissioning a significant
quicklime project in Zambia in Q4 2024 to produce 600-800 tonnes of
quicklime per day along with ancillary products. With over US$100
million in historical investment, the project is strategically
positioned to support the expanding copper producers in the Zambian
Copper Belt, which are currently reliant on imported quicklime from
South Africa. Firering currently holds an SPA over a 20.5%
stake in Limeco Resources Limited ("Limeco") with 16.7% already
accumulated and an option to increase this to 45%. Additionally,
the Company is advancing the Atex Lithium-Tantalum Project in
northern Côte d'Ivoire, an exploration project rich in lithium and
tantalum-niobium, with drilling results indicating significant
resource potential in this established mining
jurisdiction.
|
Criteria: JORC Table 1 - Section 1: Sampling techniques and
data
|
|
|
Explanation
|
Answer
|
|
|
Sampling Techniques
|
|
|
·
Nature and quality of sampling (e.g., cut
channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry-standard
measurement tool appropriate to the minerals under investigation,
such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc).
These 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
measurements 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 (e.g.,
'reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from
which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire
assay'). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as
where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems.
Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (e.g., submarine
nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.
|
·
Diamond drilling core samples were split into
half-core and cut into sample intervals, which were submitted to
the labs. Where duplicates were sent to multiple labs, the
half-core samples were split into quarter-core samples (field
duplicates).
·
Sampling was done across the entire depth of each
drill hole, excluding only the unconsolidated overburden material.
Sample lengths ranged from 10 cm to >8 m, but mostly ranged
between 1 and 2 m which captured a reasonable representation of the
alternating material types. 92% of assay samples were sampled to
material type geological contacts.
·
The sampling SOP dictated sample collection
methodology and insertion of quality control samples.
·
The total amount of assay samples captured in the
dataset was 6,959 samples.
·
Multiple labs have been used for analyses. Sample
preparation and analysis methods were not disclosed for samples
analysed by Mopani, Ndola, Alex Stewart, or Limeco.
Samples analysed by SGS: <3kg were dried at
105°C for 4 hours,
pulverised to 90% passing 2.36 mm, split 250 g - 1 kg and
pulverised to 85% passing 75 μm. CaO, CaCO3, MgO,
Fe2O3, and Al2O3 were
analysed by atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS) after
multi-acid (HNO3/HClO4/HCl/Hf)
digestion using 0.4 g pulp. Volume was bulked up to 100 ml.
Determination of available CaO was by titration. SiO2
was measured with AAS after sodium fusion.
|
|
|
Drilling Techniques
|
|
|
·
Drill type (e.g., core, reverse circulation,
open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and
details (e.g., core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of
diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is
oriented and if so, by what method, etc).
|
·
Drill data used in this Mineral Resource was only
that of diamond core drilling (HQ and NQ core sizes).
·
Eighty-five (85) drill holes were drilled at a
-60° angle to intersect the 30-40° dipping lithology at an
approximately perpendicular angle.
·
Fifty-three (53) drill holes were drilled
vertically.
·
Downhole surveys were not performed.
·
Drill core was not orientated.
|
|
|
Drill Sample Recovery
|
|
|
·
Method of recording and assessing core and chip
sample recoveries and results assessed.
·
Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and
ensure representative nature of the samples.
·
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.
|
·
Core recovery was measured and calculated from the
core with an average of >95% core recovery in the 81 drill holes
which were subjected to basic Geotech logging.
·
Core recovery was low in areas where
unconsolidated overburden material, cavities, or clay material were
intersected.
·
Measures taken to maximise core recovery were not
recorded in historical reports.
·
No clear correlation was observed between grade
and core recovery.
|
|
|
Logging
|
|
|
·
Whether core and chip samples have been
geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to
support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and
metallurgical studies.
·
Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in
nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc.) photography.
·
The total length and percentage of the relevant
intersections logged.
|
·
Geological logging was qualitative and was
completed to the level of detail sufficient to support Mineral
Resource modelling and estimation, mining studies, and
metallurgical studies.
·
Basic Geotech logging was done on 81 drill holes
with several quantitative variables. Advanced geotechnical analysis
was done on 6 drill holes to quantify cohesion, internal angle of
friction, and modulus of elasticity.
·
Drill holes were logged and sampled from top to
bottom, which equated to 9,115 m of geological logging entries
across the 138 drill holes (100% of the total drilled
length).
|
|
|
Sub-Sampling Techniques and Sample
Preparation
|
|
|
·
If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter,
half or all core taken.
·
If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary
split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.
·
For all sample types, the nature, quality, and
appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.
·
Quality control procedures adopted for all
sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of
samples.
·
Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is
representative of the in-situ material collected, including for
instance results for field duplicate/second-half
sampling.
·
Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain
size of the material being sampled.
|
·
HQ and NQ core was split into half-core - one half
for sampling, the other half retained for future reference. When
samples were sent to a single lab, half-core samples were
submitted. When sent to multiple labs, the core was split into
quarter-core to create field duplicates which were sent to the
respective labs. Sampling procedures were guided by the
SOP.
·
Multiple labs have been used for analyses. Sample
preparation and analysis methods were not disclosed for samples
analysed by Mopani, Ndola, Alex Stewart, or Limeco.
·
Samples analysed by SGS: <3kg were dried at
105°C for 4 hours,
pulverised to 90% passing 2.36 mm, split 250 g - 1 kg and
pulverised to 85% passing 75 μm. CaO, CaCO3, MgO,
Fe2O3, and Al2O3 were
analysed by atomic absorption spectrometry (AAS) after multi-acid
(HNO3/HClO4/HCl/Hf) digestion using 0.4 g
pulp. Volume was bulked up to 100 ml. Determination of available
CaO was by titration. SiO2 was measured with AAS after
sodium fusion.
·
Sample preparation techniques were assumed to be
appropriate for limestone samples to be analysed for the respective
elements.
·
No details were available on quality control
procedures adopted to maximise representivity during sub-sampling,
however, this was not a concern for the CP given the type of
deposit and mineralisation.
·
Sampling was mostly done to material type
geological contacts from top to bottom of the drill holes. Field
duplicates (quarter-core) samples were analysed.
·
Sample sizes were appropriate for the type of bulk
commodity deposit and its mineralisation.
|
|
|
Quality of Assay Data and Laboratory
Tests
|
|
|
·
The nature, quality and appropriateness of the
assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique
is considered partial or total.
·
For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF
instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis
including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations
factors applied and their derivation, etc.
·
Nature of quality control procedures adopted
(e.g., standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks)
and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e., lack of bias) and
precision have been established.
|
·
Where AAS was used by SGS, the method was total.
Insufficient details were available on sample preparation for ICP
analysis. Where titration was possibly used, it would have been a
partial technique.
·
The analysis techniques used on the accepted
samples (excluding Ndola results) were regarded as appropriate and
acceptable for this type of commodity, deposit, and grade
ranges.
·
The use of reputable laboratories such as Alex
Stewart and SGS and the comparison of these labs' results with
Mopani added to the general confidence in the assay
results.
·
2012 - 2013: The sample batches did not include
CRMs and blanks inserted by the geologist. No details were
available on the in-house QC samples that would've been inserted by
the labs. Field duplicates (quarter core) were sent to an umpire
laboratory (Alex Stewart) at a rate of 1 in every 10 samples.
Despite the lack of comprehensive blind QC, the comparison (mean
error) between the main lab (Mopani) and the umpire/secondary lab
(Alex Stewart) leads to the acceptance of the results.
·
2017: According to the SOP, AMIS0250 CRMs were
inserted at a rate of 1 CRM after every 14 samples. Duplicates were
prepared for every 10th sample in a 60-sample batch.
Blanks were inserted at the beginning, end, and at every
12th sample. Pass/fail criteria dictated by the SOP. SGS
inserted their own in-house QC samples as well to monitor accuracy,
precision, and contamination.
Both Mopani and SGS reported a consistent negative bias in the
AMIS0250 attributed to the different matrix of the CRM (fluorspar
and dolomite). The use of the CRM was ceased. No contamination was
measured. Precision performance for the target element, Ca, as well
as Mg were very good. The mean error between Mopani and SGS
suggested that Mopani results could be accepted based on the
reputability of SGS.
|
|
|
Verification of Sampling and
Assaying
|
|
|
·
The verification of significant intersections by
either independent or alternative company personnel.
·
The use of twinned holes.
·
Documentation of primary data, data entry
procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and
electronic) protocols.
·
Discuss any adjustment to assay data.
|
·
No verification drilling or sampling was done as
part of this Mineral Resource Estimation.
·
No drill holes were twinned. General geology could
be confirmed in the historical quarry where mining took place in
2016.
·
Lab results were received in the form of lab
certificates and presumably spreadsheets. Spot checks were done by
Earthlab to compare the assay dataset and the scanned lab
certificates.
·
Data has been stored mostly in Microsoft Excel
workbooks as well as Microsoft Access tables. Standard logging
sheets were used by geologists, but no details regarding electronic
data-capturing procedures were available.
·
No adjustments made to assay data other than
disqualification during data validation steps, and top-capping
after compositing.
|
|
|
Location of Data Points
|
|
|
·
Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate
drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings
and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.
·
Specification of the grid system used.
·
Quality and adequacy of topographic
control.
|
·
DGPS was used to survey collar coordinates which
is significantly more accurate than an ordinary GPS.
·
No historical reported information on downhole
surveys but based on the single data record per drill hole, it was
presumed that downhole surveys were not done and the orientation of
the drill rig setup was recorded for the drill holes that ranged
between approximately 60 and 90 m in drill length.
·
All coordinates are in Arc 1950 UTM Zone
35S.
·
The topographic scan was limited and did not cover
the entire project area. The surface was expanded using the drill
hole collars. The topography in the area is flat gradually ranging
from 1,190 to 1,200 mamsl.
|
|
|
Data Spacing and
Distribution
|
|
|
·
Data spacing for reporting of Exploration
Results.
·
Whether the data spacing, and distribution is
sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade
continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve
estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.
·
Whether sample compositing has been
applied.
|
·
Drill hole collar spacing varies across the
project, ranging between 50, 100, 175, 200, 250, and 350 m and was
appropriate for Mineral Resource Estimation of a bulk limestone
deposit. The average spacing based on a simple formula is 143 m.
The widest spacing was sufficient for Inferred Mineral Resource
Classification, while the area with tight spacing (50 - 100 m on
average) included Indicated and Measured classification.
·
Samples were taken from top to bottom of the drill
holes at lengths ranging on average between 1 and 2 m.
·
Samples were composited to 1.25 m in vertical
drill holes and 1.45 m in angled drill holes to represent equal
vertical support which was 50% of the resource block's vertical
dimension (2.5 m).
|
|
|
Orientation of Data in Relation to
Geological Structure
|
|
|
·
Whether the orientation of sampling achieves
unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which
this is known, considering the deposit type.
·
If the relationship between the drilling
orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is
considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be
assessed and reported if material.
|
·
Although angled drill holes intersecting the
lithology at an approximately perpendicular angle were more ideal
than the vertical drill holes intersecting it at an angle, the
possible bias/effect caused by this in a bulk deposit such as this
would be negligible. The deposit is a bulk limestone deposit and
therefore "mineralisation" isn't limited to key
structures.
|
|
|
Sample Security
|
|
|
•
The measures taken to ensure sample
security.
|
•
Core and sample transport procedures were dictated
by the SOP and the core has been securely stored in shipping
containers inside a fenced storage yard. No details regarding the
sample chain of custody were available.
|
|
|
Audits or Reviews
|
|
|
•
The results of any audits or reviews of sampling
techniques and data.
|
•
No official internal or external audits have been
reported on that Earthlab knows of.
•
Golder (2017) reviewed and improved some of the
interpretation, methodology, and work previously done by Mopani
(2013).
•
Earthlab reviewed the historical work by Mopani
(2013) and Golder (2017). While Earthlab accepted the logging and
assay data, Earthlab applied its own, new interpretation and
created a new geological model and Mineral Resource
Estimation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Criteria: JORC Table 1 - Section 2: Reporting of Exploration
Results
|
|
Explanation
|
Answer
|
|
Mineral Tenement and Land Tenure
Status
|
|
|
•
Type, reference name/number, location and
ownership including agreements or material issues with third
parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties,
native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national
park and environmental settings.
•
The security of the tenure held at the time of
reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence
to operate in the area.
|
•
The current owner of the project is Limeco
Resources Limited (Limeco), with Firering Strategic Minerals PLC
(Firering), owning 20.5% of Limeco based on a binding shares
purchase agreement (SPA) with the company. Firering is also granted
an option to acquire an additional 24.5% interest in Limeco which
will then increase Firering's shareholding to 45%.
•
Limeco is leasing two farm portions adjacent to
each other. Both farms are leased for 100 years from 1 June 1975.
The farms are subdivision '1' of subdivision 'K' of farm 688
(Certificate number: 307409) occupying 206.94 Ha and subdivision
'581' of subdivision 'A' of farm number 1957 (Certificate number:
315597) occupying 260.04 Ha.
•
License number 21279-HQ-MPL (Mineral Processing
Licence) is owned by Limeco under the Mines and Mineral Development
Act of 2015 (Act No. 11 of 2015). License 21279-HQ-MPL was granted
on 21-11-2016 and is valid until 20-11-2041 for Limestone
production. The license has a size 382.68 Ha and is owned by
Limeco.
•
A small-scale exploration license 37483-HQ-SEL has
been granted on 09-08-2024 over a portion of the property to Limeco
and covers 148.43 Ha for the exploration of limestone and marble,
which is valid until 08-08-2028.
•
A second small-scale exploration license
37900-HQ-SEL was granted on 15-08-2024 and is valid until
14-08-2028 for the exploration of dolomite, feldspar, granite,
graphite, limestone, marble, mica, quartz, talc-soapstone, tin and
tungsten over the 392.51 Ha.
|
|
|
Exploration Done by Other
Parties
|
|
•
Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by
other parties.
|
•
The historical exploration work by Mopani in 2013
and Golder in 2017 that makes up all the data used for this Mineral
Resource Estimate was discussed in this CPR.
|
|
Geology
|
|
•
Deposit type, geological setting, and style of
mineralisation.
|
•
The project is underlain by Precambrian
meta-sediments which host intrusions of basic and granitic rocks.
The basement complex comprises of Palaeozoic calcareous quartzite
and biotite gneiss. The Katanga Supergroup unconformably overlies
the basement complex rocks and contain the limestone and dolomites,
likely from the lower Kundelungu Group on the Lusaka Plateau
(Lusaka Dolomite Formation as mentioned in Golder Associates,
2017). The rocks of the Katanga Supergroup show regional-scale
metamorphism. These rocks are covered by quaternary
sediments.
•
The Lusaka Plateau comprises three formations
namely the Lusaka Dolomite Formation, Cheta Formation and the
Chunga Formation. The lowermost geological unit is the Chunga
Formation which comprises basement rocks including gneiss and
quartzites. The overlying Cheta Formation comprises schist and
quartzite and is dominated by thick and extensive sequences of
carbonates. The Lusaka Dolomite Formation is the uppermost
geological unit and comprises calcareous and dolomitic
marbles.
•
It was interpreted that this limestone was
deposited on a lagoon-shoal shelf, where wind and still water
deposited sediments forming wackstone, packstone and upward
grainstone in horizontal to wavy grey laminated layers. Due to the
geological time period of deposition, the atmosphere was already
rich in oxygen which could give rise to the deposition of iron-rich
minerals or layers within the limestone deposits. Where the
limestone is more dolomitic in composition and in contact with more
calcitic limestone, greater water retention occurs leading to the
internal weathering of these iron-rich minerals or layers. If
specific conditions occurred in the dolomite during deposition, the
dissolution of the dolomite occurs, which could also lead to
iron-rich phases forming including hematite and
ferrihydrite.
|
|
Drill Hole Information
|
|
·
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.
|
·
Historical drill holes were used for the
compilation of this MRE. The information is tabulated in
Table 36 in
Appendix A: Drill Hole Summary of this report.
|
|
Data Aggregation Methods
|
|
·
In reporting Exploration Results, weighting
averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations
(e.g., cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually
Material and should be stated.
·
Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short
lengths 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.
|
·
During initial analysis at material type
resolution (pre-compositing) length-weighting was applied. Vertical
holes' sample lengths were adjusted with a correction factor of
cos(30°) to be used
with close to equal support when combined with the angled holes'
samples.
·
Compositing was done within domain boundaries.
Vertical holes composited to 1.25 m and angled holes to 1.45 m to
have fair vertical support.
·
Topcapping was applied after compositing and is
disclosed in detail in Table 12
in this CPR.
·
No metal equivalents were reported.
|
|
Relationship Between Mineralisation
Widths and Intercept Lengths
|
|
·
These relationships are particularly important in
the reporting of Exploration Results.
·
If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect
to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be
reported.
·
If it is not known and only the down hole lengths
are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect
(e.g., 'down hole length, true width not known').
|
·
The dip and dip direction/strike of the lithology
were measured on outcrop and inside the historical quarry and used
to guide the modelling, geostatistical analysis and estimation. The
drill holes are fully situated within the bulk limestone, and
therefore the only case where the relationship between interception
length and geological geometry is relevant is the waste domain,
Domain D.
|
|
Diagrams
|
|
·
Appropriate maps and sections (with scales) and
tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant
discovery being reported. These should include, but not be limited
to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate
sectional views.
|
·
Appropriate and relevant diagrams are included in
this CPR.
|
|
Balanced Reporting
|
|
·
Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration
Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low
and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid
misleading reporting of Exploration Results.
|
·
Reporting of Exploration Results in this CPR is
balanced. The report does not only include the positive results
e.g. the significant number of drill holes, the high CaO grade, and
the large Mineral Resource, but also includes "negative" and real
aspects of the work such as the reporting of missing information,
presence of erroneous data, and deleterious element grades
restricting certain domains from being declared as Mineral
Resources.
|
|
Other Substantive Exploration
Data
|
|
·
Other exploration data, if meaningful and
material, should be reported including (but not limited to):
geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical
survey results; bulk samples-size and method of treatment;
metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical
and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating
substances.
|
·
Golder (2017) incorporated trench observations in
their interpretation and modelling. Earthlab did not have access to
the raw data of trenches but did not consider this as a
limitation.
·
Mopani (2017) and Golder (2017) mentioned that
resistivity survey and hydrogeological work were done, but Earthlab
did not incorporate it in this MRE due to not having access to the
data or the interpretation.
·
Golder (2017) measured bulk density by the
calliper method on 48 of the 2017 drill holes. Earthlab accepted
625 bulk density samples.
·
Golder (2017) performed basic geotech logging on 81 drill holes. Advanced geotechnical
analysis was done on 6 drill holes to quantify cohesion, internal
angle of friction, and modulus of elasticity.
·
Maerz performed chemical analysis, shatter tests,
decrepitation tests, and burning tests. Cimprogetti did chemical,
mineralogical, and thermal (TG and DTG) analysis and slaking tests.
Details can be found in individual reports or compiled and
summarised in EARTH-FIRE-PO_#-2-Desktop_Study_1.
·
Limeco also routinely performs burning tests in
their on-site laboratory.
·
The limestone is to be processed into quicklime,
and therefore the other chemical constituents measured (Mg, Fe, Al,
and Si) would be considered as deleterious substances as the higher
their concentration, the less pure the quicklime. The
concentrations of these elements were also estimated to be used in
the Mineral Resource definition.
·
The stockpiles consisted of a 72:28 ore (B1, B2,
B8)-waste (B3-B7 + soil) ratio.
|
|
Further Work
|
|
·
The nature and scale of planned further work
(e.g., tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or
large-scale step-out drilling).
·
Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of
possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations
and future drilling areas, provided this information is not
commercially sensitive.
|
·
Mine design and scheduling should be prioritised
as the next study work to be completed.
·
Infill drilling in near-term mining areas should
be prioritised over step-out drilling to extend the model
outward.
·
Further burning tests should be performed under
conditions that resemble kiln conditions as much as possible to
refine the understanding of the calcination behaviour and physical
properties of the material.
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Criteria: JORC Table 1 - Section 3: Estimation and Reporting
of Mineral Resources
|
|
Explanation
|
Answer
|
|
Database Integrity
|
|
·
Measures taken to ensure that data has not been
corrupted by, for example, transcription or keying errors, between
its initial collection and its use for Mineral Resource estimation
purposes.
·
Data validation procedures used.
|
·
Details on historical measures taken to ensure
that data was not corrupted were not available for
review.
·
Earthlab performed spot verification checks to
compare logged data with markings on the core as well as assay data
with the lab certificates.
·
Earthlab performed rigorous data validation to
clean and/or disqualify erroneous data. Validation steps are
reported in detail in Section 6.3.
|
|
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.
|
·
Earthlab's Senior Resource Geologist conducted a
site visit on behalf of the CP in September 2024. The CP could not
conduct the site visit at the specific time due to unavailability.
Earthlab verified the existence of the drill core and did various
spot checks comparing logging and sampling intersections in the
database with those marked on the core. The site visit also
entailed a visit to the existing lime plant, navigating to drill
hole collars in the field, and taking structural measurements
inside the historical quarry.
|
|
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.
|
·
Earthlab has substantial confidence in the
geological interpretation based on the regional and local
geological setting, the chemical assay results, as well as the
burning tests.
·
Earthlab based the model on historical diamond
drill core logged and assayed, as well as structural measurements.
Earthlab used the lithological categorisation done by Golder
(2017). Apart from the validation steps implemented by Earthlab,
Earthlab relied on the assumption that where detailed information
and meta-data were lacking in the database the historical data
would have been produced through acceptable good
practice.
·
Being a bulk limestone deposit, the Mineral
Resource Estimation was controlled by the lithology and chemistry
of the geology.
·
While continuity was difficult to establish at the
level of individual material types (B1-B8), at the level of general
lithology (and grade) (limestone and dolomite) the continuity is
very good and the extents of the formation were not intersected
with drilling and is therefore still open in all
directions.
|
|
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.
|
·
While the model extends wider, the portion
declared as a Mineral Resource has the following
dimensions:
o Along
strike (NW-SE): ~2,500 m
o Along dip
(SW-NE): ~150 - 650 m
o Vertical:
From surface to 80 m below the surface
|
|
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., sulphur 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.
|
·
Most of the statistical and geostatistical
analyses were done in Snowden Supervisor v9.0. Datamine StudioRM
v2.0.66 was used for the grade estimation and
classification.
·
Estimation domains were modelled based on chemical
differences of the limestone.
·
Topcapping (tabulated in Table 12) was done on composites based
on various statistical parameters and visualisations. Topcappings
were all at (varying) percentiles ranging between 98.8 and 99.9
while reducing the arithmetic mean by 0.2 - 1.5%.
·
Due to limited data in Domains B and C,
variography was done in Domains A, B, and C combined, given the
gradual grade differences. Estimation was done within each domain
separately but using the same variograms.
·
Ordinary kriging was applied to estimate grade in
Domain A, B, and C. Inverse Power of Distance to the power of 3 was
used in Domain D.
·
Four passes were run, each remaining constant in
dimensions equal to variogram ranges.
o Run 1:
Minimum 5 samples, maximum 20 samples. Minimum of 3 octants.
Maximum of 3 samples per drill hole.
o Run 2:
Minimum 4 samples, maximum 20 samples. Minimum of 3 octants.
Maximum of 3 samples per drill hole.
o Run 3:
Minimum 3 samples, maximum 20 samples. Minimum of 3 octants.
Maximum of 3 samples per drill hole.
o Run 4:
Minimum 5 samples, maximum 20 samples. No octants required. Maximum
of 3 samples per drill hole.
·
The model was extrapolated to 200 m beyond data
extents along strike, 100 m along dip, and 20 m in the vertical
beyond the maximum depth of the drill holes.
·
This Mineral Resource is based on newly created
domains due to the new chemical interpretation, but the average
grades are relatively similar to previous estimates'
grades.
·
Historical mining data was not incorporated in
this Mineral Resource apart from the principle that the lithology
and orientation below the surface could be confirmed during the
site visit.
·
Resource parent blocks were 25 mX by 25 mY by 2.5
mZ, allowing subcelling down to 5 mX by 5 mY by 2.5 mZ. No change
of support was implemented to selective mining unit-sized blocks.
The parent block dimensions in X and Y were ~50% of the tightest
sample spacing, 25% of the slightly wider-spaced areas, and 7 - 12%
of the widest-spaced areas (Inferred).
·
In general, CaO (main variable of interest) was
negatively correlated with the other (deleterious) variables. Weak
but-existent correlations were noted between the respective
deleterious variables. MgO and Fe2O3 showed
good correlations in the variograms, as well as
Al2O3 and SiO2, which led to using
the same variogram for MgO and Fe2O3, and
Al2O3 and SiO2.
·
The geological interpretation and modelling relied
on the chemical differences spatially. The geological (chemical)
domains were also the estimation domains for grade
estimation.
·
Model validation (Section 15.5) included:
o Visual
comparison between composites and blocks
o Swath
plots
o Composite
arithmetic mean compared with block model arithmetic
mean
o CaO -
CaCO3 ratio check
o Sum of
oxides and LOI adding up to 95% - 105%.
o Bootstrapping CaO.
|
|
Moisture
|
|
·
Whether the tonnages are estimated on a dry basis
or with natural moisture, and the method of determination of the
moisture content.
|
·
Based on the moisture measured by Maerz and
Cimprogetti, it was assumed that internal moisture would be
negligible and therefore tonnage is on a dry basis.
|
|
Cut-Off Parameters
|
|
·
The basis of the adopted cut-off grade(s) or
quality parameters applied.
|
·
The Mineral Resource is not based on a CaO (main
variable of interest) cut-off grade.
·
In an attempt to keep deleterious elements in the
quicklime product below a certain specification, blocks in Domain
A2 where the MgO in quicklime (not limestone) was estimated to be
>5% were classified as waste before pit optimisation.
·
Based on the deleterious element concentrations in
Domains B and C concerning quicklime, only Domain A was considered
for the Mineral Resource.
|
|
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.
|
·
Material will be extracted by conventional open
pit mining/quarrying, using rigid or articulated dump trucks,
backhoe excavators, and ancillary equipment.
·
Pit optimisation was completed using cost
parameters reported in this CPR and using a pit slope angle of
55° based on
geotechnical analysis.
·
The monthly ROM tonnes at steady state with the
current lime plant configuration of eight (8) vertical kilns is
estimated at 84,075 tonnes of limestone feeding into the installed
primary jaw crusher of the two-stage crushing circuit.
·
Blast hole drilling will take cognisance of
material types and waste contacts for grade control purposes as
well as appropriate fragmentation. The waste material (B5 and B6
material types) has higher concentrations of Fe and has a
yellowish/brownish colouration (contrasting from the grey colours
of the material types of the Mineral Resource), which will be
spotted and controlled during drilling and loading activities in
the pit. It will be necessary to conduct on-site XRF analysis of
the blast hole drilling samples to monitor the CaO% and the
deleterious concentrations for grade control purposes based on
cut-off or topcut grades in terms of product specifications. The
blast holes will be charged with emulsion explosives. These
explosives will be detonated remotely from a safe distance. After
successful blasting operations, the broken rock will be removed by
excavators following a dig plan and loaded onto trucks, which will
transport the material to designated waste and ROM
areas.
·
Mining could be conducted in 5 or 10 m benches
(minimum flitch size will be 2.5 m, in line with the original
z-height of the parent cell dimension, which will be the smallest
mining unit). Flitches of the waste material may vary between 2.5 m
and 10 m for both blasting and loading activities.
|
|
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.
|
·
Material burning tests have been performed by
Maerz Laboratory and Cimprogetti Lime Technologies. Ongoing burning
tests are also performed in the on-site laboratory.
·
The target quicklime specifications for the
Mineral Resource were set to:
o CaO:
>90%
o MgO:
<2.5%
o Fe2O3: <1.0%
o Al2O3: <1.0%
o SiO2: <2.0%
·
The lime plant comprises the following (Investor
Presentation, October 2024):
o Two-stage
crushing circuit with an installed primary throughput capacity of
300 tonnes per hour of limestone (a jaw and an impact crusher). Two
sets of screens follow the crushing circuit: a double and a triple
deck.
o Eight (8)
vertical kilns for burning crushed limestone (+60 mm -90 mm
fraction separated by the double deck screen), to produce an
average of 700 tonnes of quicklime per day. From the crushing
circuit, the -60 mm stream will go to the triple deck screen to
split into three aggregate size fractions.
o Renovations are being done on one of the kilns. The previous
heat source of Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) is being replaced by a Coal
gasifier. The HFO containers are rented out to a third party for
fuel storage.
o At steady
state the estimated quicklime output per regular production month
is estimated as 18,900 tonnes.
o Other
products will be generated from the -60 mm fraction which among
other include aggregate and cement for the local construction
industry.
|
|
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.
|
·
Coal gasifiers will be used as a heat source to
burn the limestone inside the vertical kilns to drive the
CO2 gas off to produce saleable quicklime with the
maximum allowable impurities in the final product. Coal ash is
planned to be sold to the cement industry.
·
The environmental impact of the dust generated by
the vertical kilns during the burning process should be considered.
A filtration system to capture the dust to be discarded as waste,
saleable product or treated in an environmentally accepted manner
should be considered.
·
Due to the low stripping ratio (0.2), the dumped
waste will not be sufficient to backfill the entire quarry
post-mining.
·
The bulk mineral deposit is open at depth, which
means that concurrent rehabilitation will not be possible, to
prevent sterilisation of mineable limestone.
·
Environmental and other impacts of the eventual
back-fill of the void should be considered.
·
A pre-identified graveyard/burial site is located
on the deposit and sterilises a portion of the deposit
currently. A buffer zone of 65 m around the demarcated area
is included in the exclusion area. This stand-off distance should
be reviewed in future and adjusted if necessary. This area is
excluded from the Mineral Resource.
|
|
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.
|
·
Tonnage was based on a single dry bulk density
value of 2.68 t/m3 applied across the entire
model.
·
The calliper method was used to measure density in
core samples. The SOP did not state whether samples were dried
before weighing, but Earthlab made the assumption that the
personnel who performed the measurements would have followed good
practice and dried the samples before weighing.
·
Sample lengths ranged mostly between ~8 and 13 cm,
at intervals ranging mostly between 2 and 6 m.
·
619 samples were accepted ranging between 2.24 and
3.59 t/m3, topcapped (2 samples) to 3.2, resulting in an
arithmetic mean of 2.68 t/m3.
·
Density was accepted as representative of the
model.
·
Although cavities exist in the geology, it was
decided to account for the loss in tonnage by means of a geoloss
factor applied to the Mineral Resource, and not accounted for in
the density.
·
Based on the moisture measured by Maerz and
Cimprogetti, it was assumed that internal moisture would be
negligible and therefore tonnage is on a dry basis.
·
No correlation was noted between grade and
density, nor between depth and density, therefore justifying using
a constant density value across the entire model.
·
A constant density value 2.0 t/m3 was
applied to the overburden.
|
|
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.
|
·
Earthlab performed extensive data validation on
the input data and accepted the final input data as reliable.
Earthlab was of the opinion that even if the true downhole paths of
the drill holes were slightly different from the paths desurveyed
from single orientations, or even if there were a slight error in
the assay values, the Mineral Resource would still be applicable
given the nature of the deposit being a bulk commodity with good
grade continuity.
·
Earthlab considered Kriging Efficiency and Slope
of Regression as the two geostatistical parameters informing the
classification, while also considering drill hole spacing, number
of samples used, and whether the model was interpolated or
extrapolated.
·
Geostatistical scorecard:
o Measured:
§ KE: 0.8 -
1.0
§ SR: 0.8 -
1.0
o Indicated:
§ KE: 0.4 -
0.8
§ SR: 0.6 -
0.8
o Inferred:
§ KE:
<0.4
§ SR:
<0.6
·
The CP is comfortable with the classification,
especially given the type of deposit, amount of drilling, and
existence of a historical quarry.
|
|
Audits or Reviews
|
|
·
The results of any audits or reviews of Mineral
Resource Estimates.
|
·
No official audits or reviews have been conducted
on this MRE.
|
|
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.
|
·
Bootstrapping was performed on CaO in the entire
Domain A to determine a 95% confidence interval of the mean. The
range of the 95% confidence interval was extremely narrow/precise
at just 0.4%. The estimated mean of CaO in Domain A was within the
95% confidence interval. Confidence intervals were not calculated
for other elements or domains and were only done for the entire
Domain A, not local portions separately.
·
Despite historical mining, no production data was
available to compare with the estimate.
|
APPENDICES
Glossary of
Terms
|
Term
|
Explanation
|
|
AAS
|
Atomic Absorption Spectrometry -
A technique used to measure the
concentration of a specific metal or metalloid in a sample.
AAS detects elements in either liquid or solid
samples through the application of characteristic wavelengths of
electromagnetic radiation from a light source. Individual elements
will absorb wavelengths differently, and these absorbances are
measured against standards.
|
|
Bootstrapping
|
Bootstrapping is a statistical
resampling method used to estimate the properties of a dataset,
such as its mean, variance, or confidence intervals, by repeatedly
sampling with replacement from the original data. This technique is
particularly useful when the underlying distribution of the data is
unknown or when the sample size is too small to rely on traditional
parametric methods. Bootstrapping creates multiple "resampled"
datasets, computes the desired statistic for each, and uses the
distribution of these statistics to make inferences.
|
|
Calcination
|
Calcination is a thermal
decomposition process in which material, typically carbonate, is
heated to a high temperature in the absence of air or oxygen to
remove volatile components. In the context of limestone processing,
calcination involves heating calcium carbonate (CaCO₃) in a kiln to
produce calcium oxide (CaO), also known as quicklime, by driving
off carbon dioxide (CO₂). Calcination is
fundamental in various industrial applications, including the
production of cement, lime, and the processing of ores in
metallurgy, as it alters the physical and chemical properties of
the raw materials to achieve desired characteristics.
|
|
Caliper Method
|
The Caliper Method is a simple and
direct measurement technique used to determine the thickness or
dimensions of a sample, typically in geological, mining, or
engineering applications. This method involves using a calliper - a
precision instrument with a sliding scale or digital display-to
measure the width, diameter, or thickness of an object. The
dimensions are used to calculate the sample's volume which is then
used with its weight to calculate its density.
|
|
Compositing
|
Compositing is the process of
combining multiple individual samples into a single representative
sample to provide an averaged result across the samples which
simplifies analysis. The technique is used to meet the requirement
of using equal-length samples in geostatistical analysis and
estimation.
|
|
Chain of Custody
|
Chain of Custody refers to the
documented and unbroken process of handling samples, data, or
materials from collection through transport, storage, analysis, and
final disposal or reporting. It ensures the integrity,
traceability, and accountability of the sample or material,
minimising the risk of tampering, loss, or
contamination.
|
|
CRM
|
Certified Reference Material (CRM)
is a high-quality, well-characterised material that has been
certified for one or more specific properties or analytes by a
technically valid procedure. CRMs come with a certificate that
provides the certified values, measurement uncertainties, and
traceability to a recognised standard. CRMs are used as benchmarks
to ensure accuracy and precision in analytical
measurements.
|
|
CPR
|
Competent Persons Report is
an independent assessment of a company's
mineral properties, including its Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves, reported and signed off by one or more Competent
Persons.
|
|
Cut-off Grade
|
Cut-off grade is the minimum grade
or concentration of a mineral or metal in ore required for it to be
economically viable to extract and process. It acts as a threshold
that determines whether material is classified as ore (profitable
to process) or waste (uneconomical). The cut-off grade depends on
several factors, including metal prices, mining and processing
costs, recovery rates, and market conditions.
|
|
Domain
|
In geology, a domain often describes
a spatially distinct region with consistent/homogenous geological,
mineralogical, or geochemical characteristics, such as a
mineralised zone or lithological unit. Domains are used to model
ore bodies, analyse spatial distributions of elements, and guide
resource estimation.
|
|
DGPS
|
Differential Global Positioning
System - An advanced navigation and positioning system that
enhances the accuracy of standard Global Positioning System (GPS)
measurements. DGPS uses a network of fixed ground-based reference
stations to correct GPS signals, significantly reducing errors
caused by satellite orbit variations, atmospheric interference, and
clock discrepancies.
|
|
Geoloss
|
A geological loss factor is applied
to the Mineral Resource to account for a loss in the material of
interest due to the discontinuation of the geological unit or the
inability to mine the material due to geological
conditions.
Geological loss is expressed as a
percentage by which a Mineral Resource is discounted. There are two
types termed "Known" and "Unknown" losses. Mineral Resources are
discounted by the total approximated geological losses.
|
|
Geostatistics
|
A branch of statistics that analyses
and predicts spatial data. It uses statistical models to
incorporate spatial coordinates into data acquisition, allowing for
the following: describing and modelling spatial data,
predicting values at unsampled points, and evaluating the
uncertainty of estimates.
|
|
Geotechnical logging
|
A process that involves the detailed
examination of rock from drill holes or excavation sites to collect
data about their quality and structure. The
data collected can include information on rock fracture frequency;
weathering; rock mass quality; joint conditions; and type,
location, orientation, and surface conditions of
fractures.
|
|
HQ
|
A letter name specifying the
dimensions of bits, core barrels, and drill rods in the
H-size and Q-group wireline diamond drilling system having a core
diameter of 63.5 mm and a hole diameter of 96 mm.
|
|
ICP
|
Inductively Coupled Plasma (ICP) is
an analytical technique used to detect and quantify trace elements
and isotopes in a wide range of sample types. It relies on a
high-temperature plasma-created by ionizing argon gas using an
electromagnetic field-as an energy source to excite atoms and ions
in the sample. These excited species emit characteristic
wavelengths of light, which are measured using a
spectrometer.
|
|
Indicated
|
An Indicated Mineral Resource is
that part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or
quality, densities, shape and physical characteristics, can be
estimated with a level of confidence sufficient to allow the
appropriate application of technical and economic parameters, to
support mine planning and evaluation of the economic viability of
the deposit. The estimate is based on detailed and reliable
exploration and testing information gathered through appropriate
techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches, pits,
workings and drill holes that are spaced closely enough for
geological and grade continuity to be reasonably
assumed.
|
|
Inferred
|
An Inferred Mineral Resource is that
part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity and grade or quality
are estimated on the basis of limited geological evidence and
sampling. Geological evidence is sufficient to imply but not verify
geological and grade or quality continuity. It is based on
exploration, sampling and testing information gathered through
appropriate techniques from locations such as outcrops, trenches,
pits, workings and drill holes. An Inferred Mineral Resource has a
lower level of confidence than that applying to an Indicated
Mineral Resource and must not be converted to an Ore Reserve. It is
reasonably expected that the majority of Inferred Mineral Resources
could be upgraded to Indicated Mineral Resources with continued
exploration.
|
|
Inverse Power of Distance
|
The inverse power of distance
is a mathematical
method of interpolation. Samples are weighted proportional to the
inverse of the distance between each sample and the point
estimated.
|
|
JORC
|
Joint Ore Reserves Committee - The
Australian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results,
Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves (the JORC
Code) is a professional code of practice that sets minimum
standards for Public Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral
Resources and Ore Reserves.
|
|
Kriging Efficiency
|
Kriging efficiency is a
geostatistical metric that measures the effectiveness of the
kriging estimate to reproduce the local block grade accurately. A
higher Kriging Efficiency value means a lower degree of
over-smoothing and a more robust estimate.
|
|
Measured
|
A Measured Mineral Resource is that
part of a Mineral Resource for which quantity, grade or quality,
densities, shape, and physical characteristics are estimated with
confidence sufficient to allow the application of Modifying Factors
to support detailed mine planning and final evaluation of the
economic viability of the deposit. Geological evidence is derived
from detailed and reliable exploration, sampling and testing
gathered through appropriate techniques from locations such as
outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and drill holes, and is
sufficient to confirm geological and grade (or quality) continuity
between points of observation where data and samples are gathered.
A Measured Mineral Resource has a higher level of confidence than
that applying to either an Indicated Mineral Resource or an
Inferred Mineral Resource. It may be converted to a Proven Ore
Reserve or under certain circumstances to a Probable Ore
Reserve.
|
|
NQ
|
A letter name specifying the
dimensions of bits, core barrels, and drill rods in the N-size and
Q-group wireline diamond drilling system having a core diameter of
47.6 mm and a hole diameter of 75.7 mm.
|
|
Optimised Pit Shell
|
The outline of an optimal open
pit/quarry that maximises net present value while meeting
operational requirements. The process of determining the pit shell
is called pit optimisation, and it's a key preceding step in
designing and scheduling open pit mines. The goal of pit shell
optimisation is to find the pit shell that generates the highest
net present value for a given deposit while adhering to limitations
imposed such as geotechnical or spatial limits.
|
|
Ordinary Kriging
|
Ordinary Kriging is a geostatistical
interpolation method used to estimate unknown values at unsampled
locations based on known data points while minimising estimation
variance. It assumes that the mean of the data is unknown but
stationary across the area of interest. Ordinary Kriging uses
spatial autocorrelation, quantified through a variogram, to weigh
the influence of nearby data points, giving greater weight to those
closer to the estimation location while also considering each data
point's location relative to other data points.
|
|
QAQC
|
Quality Assurance and Quality
Control refers to the systematic processes and procedures
implemented to ensure the accuracy, precision, and reliability of
data, results, and operations in various industries, including
mining, geology, and laboratory analysis. QAQC ensures that data
and processes meet predefined standards, providing confidence in
decision-making, regulatory compliance, and reporting in
exploration, resource estimation, and other critical
applications.
|
|
Quicklime
|
Quicklime, also known as calcium
oxide (CaO), is a white, caustic, and alkaline material produced by
the thermal decomposition of limestone (calcium carbonate, CaCO₃)
in a lime kiln at high temperatures (approximately 900-1,000°C).
This process, known as calcination, removes carbon dioxide (CO₂),
leaving behind quicklime.
|
|
Resource Classification
|
Defined as classes or categories as
per the JORC Code (2012) in decreasing confidence levels as
Measured, Indicated and Inferred.
|
|
RPEEE
|
Reasonable Prospects for Eventual
Economic Extraction - a technical and economic assessment of the
factors that could affect the possibility of extracting a resource
economically. These factors include:
Mining, Metallurgical and
Processing, Economic, Marketing, Legal, Infrastructure,
Environmental, Social, and Governmental. It's a principle used to
define mineral resources and is a key component of the Definition
Standards for Mineral Resources.
|
|
ROM
|
Run-of-mine refers to the raw,
unprocessed ore material as it is extracted from the mine, and
ready for processing in the plant where it will be subjected to
treatment including crushing, screening, and in this project's case
calcination.
|
|
SOP
|
Standard Operating Procedure
- A document that provides
step-by-step instructions for how to perform a specific
task.
|
|
Slope of Regression
|
The Slope of Regression is a
geostatistical metric that measures the degree of over-smoothing of
the high and low grades and represents the regression slope of the
estimated block grades against the corresponding true, but unknown
block grades.
|
|
SPA
|
A Share Purchase Agreement (SPA) is
a legally binding contract that outlines the terms and conditions
for the sale and transfer of shares in a company. It is typically
used in mergers and acquisitions, private equity transactions, or
business sales, ensuring that both the buyer and seller agree on
key details of the transaction.
|
|
Subcelling
|
Subcelling refers to the process of
subdividing large parent blocks in the block model into smaller
blocks to honour domain wireframe boundaries more
accurately.
|
|
Topcapping
|
Topcapping, also known as grade
capping or outlier capping, is a data processing technique used in
resource estimation to limit the influence of extremely high
values, or outliers, in a dataset.
|
|
Variography
|
Variography is the process of
analysing and modelling spatial variability in a dataset by
examining how values of a variable change with distance and
direction. It is a fundamental tool in geostatistics, used to
quantify spatial relationships and create models for resource
estimation, environmental studies, and other applications where
spatial continuity is important.
|
|
XRF
|
X-ray fluorescence is a
non-destructive analytical technique used to determine the
elemental composition of materials. It works by exposing a sample
to high-energy X-rays, causing the atoms in the sample to emit
secondary (fluorescent) X-rays at characteristic wavelengths. These
emitted X-rays are detected and analysed to identify and quantify
the elements present.
|