Nuinsco Resources (NWI) 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 : Nuinsco Resources (NWI)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: mineman who wrote (2044)	3/21/1999 12:26:00 PM
From: Midas	of 5821

Mineman and Gary: I suggested using an S.G. value of 3.2 because the rock density should be about 3.0. If you then allow for 10% sulfides throughout the zone (5% can be accounted for by redistributing 3m of massive sulfide over 60 m, the other 5% from low grade mineralization in the other 57m) with a S.G. of 4.6, you get an overall S.G. of 3.2. Using the correct S.G. value can be critical to determining the viability of a mine (recall the Canamax deposit in the Yukon) but will be nearly irrelevant if the massive part of the zone doubles in width in the next few holes. Midas

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next