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: Tim Hall who wrote (8275)	11/7/1998 8:50:00 AM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Tim, I suspect that the smelting is just another method to separate out "other" elements that would flood or pollute the extraction method. I understand that most nickel and copper producers recover PGMs during their normal refinement process. I guess my simple minded thought is to let others simply pollute raw copper with PGM rich precipitate and then let normal copper refinement recover the PGMs at the end. Could GPGI sell a PGM pollutant to a copper company that wants to also work in precious metals? There seems to be a number of possible permutations possible. That may let GPGI concentrate more on ore (a pun) and leach and let others do the processing as by product. Just a thought.

To: Tim Hall who wrote (8275)	11/7/1998 9:06:00 AM
From: Richard Mazzarella	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 14226

Tim, << ore contains 10 oz/ton it is hard to imagine that a standard fire assay wouldn't show at least a couple of oz per ton!>> I think they have. My understanding of the GPGI ore is that much of the metal is bound interstitially and mechanical grinding still leaves much of the metals shielded, fire assay can't get at it. Somehow milling and chemical treatment (leach) seems to find the metals. However, I would think that GPGI could SFA the precipitate, don't you?