Naxos Resources (NAXOF) Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Naxos Resources (NAXOF)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Kim W. Brasington who wrote (7528)	12/18/1997 9:58:00 PM
From: Larry Brubaker	Read Replies (1) of 20681

<<Successful lab results are a strong indicator of what could be the likely outcome of a pilot plant scale-up.>> Kim: My point was that successful lab results were NOT a strong indicator of the likely outcome of scale up at IPM and GPGI (so far, anyway). I find it interesting that Naxos is using a lab to provide certification of the Johnson Lett process while IPM used engineering firms to provide certification of their process. The engineering firms would not provide certification of recovery (only assay of the head ore) because they determined the recovery process to be non-commercial. I'm just speculating here, but it seems possible that a lab would have certified IPM's higher recovery numbers where Behre Dolbear/Bateman didn't. The difference being that a lab has no interest in whether the lab recovery process is ultimately scaleable, whereas an engineering firm would be more hestitant to certify a lab process which is not scaleable. A note of caution seems worthwhile that certification of high recovery results by Ledoux does not necessarily imply that the Johnson-Lett process will result in a commercial process.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next