Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Canadian Diamond Play Cafi -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: VAUGHN who wrote (2399)	2/3/2005 7:06:08 PM
From: Letmebe Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 16206

Vaughn, I think that article made a mistake on the grade of Victor - "The grade is thought to be around 2.5 carats/100 tonnes and the average diamond value is thought to be as high as US$300/carat." I recall it being about .6 ct/ton or so. BTW, off topic for a moment, I was listening to CBC Radio 1 "Here and Now" yesterday, and I caught part of an interesting discussion with the author of a book called "Younger Next Year". I thought his explanation of the aging process was done in such way that it struck a chord with me - lights started going on and I felt an epiphany of sorts ... anyways, I dig some googling and found a cached copy of a summary there. Let me know what you think... 64.233.167.104 LMBF - hoping to be younger AND richer next year!

To: VAUGHN who wrote (2399)	2/3/2005 7:58:18 PM
From: Letmebe Frank	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 16206

Vaughn, here is an older map of the Atttawapiskat claims: www2.cdn-news.com As well here is a report on the Victor pipe with a nice 3D model. They sure turned that pipe into a pin cushion! ott.wrcc.osmre.gov In it is says "Grade is variable, with an average of 25 carats per hundred tonnes, with considerable variation between the different geological kimberlite facies (Figures 2 and 3)." Just rediscovered them from the GEM thread... Here are some of the problems with the area explained, from the report... 2. Technical issues Water is the main technical challenge facing the project. Surface water level is close to the land surface. This is separated from the underlying bedrock by a low permeability glacial sequence. The underlying country rock is a carbonate sequence that is waterlogged. The carbonates contain various other minerals that contribute to mildly saline waters. About 225 metres below surface, the bedrock changes from a dominantly carbonate sequence to mudstones, and then to a carbonate and evaporite sequence, before reaching the Archaean basement granites and gneisses around 280 metres. The deeper ground waters are saline (Figure 4). Access to the area is poor because of the muskeg environment. Road and site construction are therefore important and expensive. Preliminary hydrological and mining studies have shown that while underground mining might be feasible, it is not practical because of the safety problems associated with the groundwater, and the related expense. If the feasibility study is positive and a mine goes ahead, this would be for an open pit operation. Studies have shown that between the site and the village of Attawapiskat, construction of an all season road is impractical. There is no aggregate or rock available for the western half of the road. Construction costs thus sore, and the estimate for a 110-Km road is in excess of $150 million, a cost that the project cannot support. Because the site is entirely with in the muskeg of the James Bay Lowlands, access and foundations are problematic. There are no roads, and it is difficult to move when the ground is not frozen as everything is one huge swamp. Gravel and sand deposits are few and far between: there are however, a number of limestone bioherms that come close to surface, and inn places outcrop. It is planned to use these to provide aggregate.