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 : Global Platinum & Gold (GPGI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JACK R. SMITH JR. who wrote (7776)	10/3/1998 10:40:00 PM
From: Zeev Hed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Jack, that is where you are wrong. Assume that the pile is indeed "homogeneous", ask yourself why do we get so many variations in yield? Because the process is not "fixed", not "repeatable". The leaching and precipitation process should probably be relatively repeatable (unless the mysterious "catalyst" causes so major variations. Then we go into the process of smelting the precipitation, and believe me, high temperature thermochemistry will throw you a curve every time you try to repeat it, there you probably can have large variations from "batch to batch", but if now you take the copper from ten such batches and dissolve it so as to recover the goodies on resin, how would you know which one of the smelting campaigns (and it associated "special conditions") gave you the best extraction? You will not, since you are going to average on all those "smelts". Of course, if the pile is not homogeneous, and if the catalyst is somewhat finicky, you treble your repeatability problems. Zeev