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 : Nuinsco Resources (NWI) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BLZBub who wrote (2218)	3/23/1999 10:07:00 AM
From: mineman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 5821

What effect is the anticipated de-railment of the Nuinsco train going to have on funding of Canadian exploration ventures this year?? Can anyone guess???

To: BLZBub who wrote (2218)	3/23/1999 10:35:00 AM
From: Brumell	Respond to of 5821

Some time ago, I posted some comments from my geo friend in Quebec City. As events have unfolded, it looks like his comments have been on the money. Surprisingly, he has become more positive about the geological potential for additional discoveries at depth. If you recall, that was my concern several weeks ago. Anyway, just got these comments by e-mail. << E. Charters is very imprecise in his comments. With the exception of astroblems, nickel is ALWAYS associated with mafic to ultramafic rocks. «Associated» does not necessarily mean «located in». Beside every nickel mine in Archean and Proterozoic rocks lay mafic to ultramafics rocks. It is not theory, it is a fact of life. Most of the time, nickel sulfides are segregated within the magma chambers and sometimes leave their hosting mafic rocks to migrate in fractures, etc .... Thompson and Lynn Lakes are examples. Marbridge too. Same thing in the Ungava and Labrador Trough. The more mafic the rock is, the less volume it needs to generate nickel sulfides since Ni concentration is normally higher in ultramafic (peridotite) than in mafic (gabbro) rocks. As long as there is sulphur around. Since we are in gabbro/norite intrusive, I continue to think that this small «plug» is not big enough to have generated by differenciation ten feet of massives sulfides and ten times more feet of disseminated sulfides. These sulfides do not seem to have been remobilized, so they were probably produced in a very large magma chamber. Regional geology lets me think that this intrusive is underground instead of having been over actual ground level and eroded. Let Charters look for nickel under the Etna or Mount St-Helens. I will keep looking for it near ultramafic rocks. >> Regards, Bob