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 : ECHARTERS -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Ripley who wrote (3082)	3/22/1999 11:33:00 PM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3744

Cyanide although not to be handled by fools is cheap readily available and proven in efficacy. It quickly degrades to where it is harmless in a few days of residency in water exposed to sunlight. It is not an enviromental hazard per se. There are many cheap and proven effective ways to recover 99.99% of all cyanide ions from water including some new ones recently patented that cost less than 15 cents a ton. (Iron process, water dahlias, H2O2, electrolytic precipitation etc..). The liability in the large cyanide ponds in the States is due to the fact that they receive a large amount of fresh cyanide solution every day. I can remove this cyanide 100% without the H2O2 process that suffers inefficiencies when it is improperly monitored as it has been in the past. The H2O2 process has since been upgraded and all that is necessary is to keep ducks off the pond for a period in order to remove this particular hazard from affecting wildlife. Nevertheless I am interested in all process that promise cheap efficient halide leaching of gold of which I know several. Non can compare to cyanide for cost at present. (the test comparison at the website probably did not even include simple acidulation cyanide recovery from the 1890 Merril-Crowe process) I would need to know far more about the process than the company is telling to make an informed decision. One of the most efficient an low capex methods of recovering gold from easy ores is to float the ore and cyanide the concentrate after roasting. (Kerr Addison) 90% recoveries are possible. It is the best for small orebodies. Another is to use gravity/floation, roasting and cyanide. This process is 100 years old an defeats all refractory ores. Roasting licenses can be easily obtained if you know a little bit about process chemistry for recovering sulphur. Most mining companies appear to be pathetically ignorant about this 40 year old technology that removes 99.99 % of the sulphur(perhaps because it is patented!). The power producers in the States did not use it because the gov't would not pay to have it installed and the far more inefficient method of scrubbing was not patented! The idea that this process interferes with furnace efficiency and therefore cuts back on production is not true because design changes can be made to increase efficiency back to regular flow through levels. Inco would not do this because they would have had to replace their furnaces and pay the patent fee. It would have gotten rid of all acid rain in North America from sulphur roasting plants, coal and oil power plants, and metal reduction furnaces if the gov't and given the companies accelerated tax deductions for the change over. And now you know the rest of the story. Don't vote for the politicians who put the Sierra Club on your tax form as a direct payment deduction because they have lied to you for 40 years. EC<:-}