Click here to recieve updates directly to you e-mail

Thursday, July 20, 2017

the Tinka of sleigh bells

We have some more intercepts released from Tinka, the results were inline with my expectations and we can see that they have helped increase our officially bad resource by a few tonnes.



I've decided to include a ZnEq table so you can compare my resources against the number from the adjacent deposits to see how they compare.

Here are where the holes have been drilled


Tinka are trying to see how the South Ayawilca zone connects with the Central and West deposits.

Here is a section from South (left) to the Central deposit (right)



I've brought in the intercepts from the previous technical report, it isn't complete but it does illustrate that the lower zone appears to be thicker, and relatively consistent from the South to the central deposit. I also think that hole 74 and 75 just clipped the SE limits of mineralization and a couple of holes to the NW could get back into the thicker (>10m) higher grade (>5% Zn) zone.

It would be nice to see some holes to the SW as the 2 mineralized zones are coming close to surface. A few short holes could add some tonnes!

From South (left) to West Ayawilca (right)



A bit more complicated, do we have a fault between the 2 deposits. A few more holes will help....



Here is something interesting when I was looking at the copper data:



Is the copper data showing us a vector towards the heat source and root to the South and Central deposits?

Leapfrog views here (link)



Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Solgold technical report

A 43-101 report has appeared on Sedar for Solgold's Cascabel Project (link).

You can also download it from here (link).

I'm going to spend the next few days going through it and get back to you with some comments


Monday, July 17, 2017

Camino - Adriana drilled

We had some more results from the diamond drilling at Adriana from Camino minerals (link).

They are putting a nice spin on it, some nice banner headlines stating that they have massive amounts of lovely copper carefully buried under the hills and deserts of Peru.

Lets look at where they have drilled:

Camino Minerals - drilling the same shit twice (TM).
Nice and imaginative, right fecking next to the RC holes.


So we see that there are several wide-ish intervals of ~0.6-0.7% Cu,

Greeeeeeen everywhere, apart from that crappy blue zone at the end of hole 4
But they have some smaller, higher grade intercepts. To the Intervalator!!!!!!!

Now we are less environmentally friendly
Feck, the green has gone, all we have are a few narrow >1% Cu zones floating like beige jobbies in a sea of dirt.

When we looked at the first section it would be easy to draw some nice overly-optimistic copper blobs, imaging the fun we can have interpreting that!! So I asked the FAG to do it for me....


Hello FAG here, I'm going to be using a very hi-tech tool here from the geophysist's toolbox to do my interpretation.

I known, it should be red. please don't judge me...
Geological interpretation is just joining dots, remember:

No data ≠ No copper

You have to be inclusive as there are bonuses (like in candy crush) for linking as many points as you can together. Try and bring out your inner artist, and if you need inspiration, think Dali, Picasso or Normal Rockwell.

There are hundreds of ways make the biggest shape possible. Here is mine, I went for the decapitated Llama as the project is in Peru.


the small blue intercept in hole DCH-002 is a dingleberry.

Unfortunately, the intervalator ruined it, so but, how do you join up the high-grade zones? Maybe there is a clue?

A geologist in his field...


There is a geo-chappy standing on, infront of an old mine. Do the working look like they have exploited:

  • A vertical mineralized zones?
  • A horizontal mineralized zone?
  • hit the Pisco and gone crazy?


So, it looks like the old miners extracted copper from near-vertical mineralized zones. This is what I think is happening at Camino.

ohhhh, shite, I won't get a Christmas bonus for this one....

I've also looked at the type of mineralization, as Camino like to tell us how much of the copper is soluble in acid (i.e. oxides)

Message to Camino - well done, it only took 3.5 months to change the units from g(rams) to Percent for the acid soluble copper assays. Good Job!
There is still a lot of acid soluble copper at some quite impressive depths. Is this because of the Diva fault and is just local, or is the transition from oxide to sulfide mineralization extremely extensive? There could be a call for some early metallurgical testing just to see how much copper can be extracted from this transition zone as the data seems to tell us that it could be very extensive.






Wednesday, July 5, 2017

Tinka Update

In my earlier post (link) I made a mistake when calculating the resources, a simple excel error.



I accidentally multiplied the volume by the Zn cut_off grade so severely skewed the high-grade resources. It was amateur time and I apologize for such a stupid mistake. I've salso updated the Specific Gravity to 3.6 from the 2016 technical report by RPA. I had originally used 2.9 (which was an average from several similar deposits)

Here is the updated resource table, including the latest set of results


So I've updated it and included the new drill-holes, if we ignore my earlier inaccurate resource, we've increased the tonnage . I'm not going to do a full post as I'm trying to get my hands on the DH collars for the earlier Tinka holes to see how the 2 resources may connect!

There are what the holes look like

Add caption

Hole 69 was drilled ~50m away from hole 65 and shows that the lower manto looks nice an continuous, but the upper manto is much thinner and inconsistent.


Hole 70 appears to show an offset in the lower manto mineralization. This may be due to faulting or as I don't have the down hole survey data, I', not able to plot the holes very accurately, and the Zinc zones in holes may line up. The good news is, again we have a nice consistent Zn zone (with a high-grade core) that is open to the NW (right) and SE (left). A few holes here could add a lot of tonnes relatively quickly!


If you want to send me any abusive e-mails, which I fully deserve, please address them to:

teresa.may@gov.uk with the subject line - I like your leather trousers



Monday, July 3, 2017

Hole 23

DISCLOSURE: I own shares in Sol Gold.


Question: What is the easiest way to find a million ounces of gold!

Answer: Drill a hole through the guts of a high-grade copper-gold porphyry

Each of those squares measures 300m
Here is hole 23R from Alpala (link). It went straight through the core of the Alpala deposit. There is a lot of grade smearing going on. In reality they only drilled 474m of economic mineralization (>0.5% Cu and 0.5 g/t Au), with a spectacular high-grade heart grading >1% Cu and ~3 g/t Au.

Here are the updated official bad resources:

A nice jump-up in contained metal!
Alpala will be an underground operation, and here is an excellent summary on costs involved for block cave operations - link. Here are some comparative sizes of some of these projects:
  • Cadia: 1.5BT @ 0.47 g/t Au, 0.27% Cu
  • Hudo Dummit: 500Mt @ 1.66% Cu, 0.35 g/t Au
  • Resolution: 1.8Bt @ 1.54% Cu
Brown = brownfield projects; green = greenfield projects
When we look at the project listed in the figure above we can see that there are 2 types of projects:

Brownfield

  • Satellite, high grade deposits next to an active open-pit mine
  • Depth extension of ore-bodies that were mined by an open-pit but now is too deep to be mined from an open-pit

Greenfield

  • standalone development projects
The reason I highlight this is that the cost to developing a brownfield deposit next to an active open pit mine or going underground to mine the deeper part of the same deposit a lot cheaper than building a new mine one from scratch. This also means that brownfield projects don't need to be as large or as high-grade to be developed.

At the moment, Alpala isn't quite big enough or high-grade to be a stand-alone operation, a few more holes like 23R will help! However, this is where the other exploration targets come in.

From Sol Gold June presentation
At the moment, all drilling has focused on Alpala, let us have a look at Aguinaga.

the hair nicely outlines the Cu mineralization found in a porphyry
We are told that they plan to start drilling there later this year. From Surface mapping and sampling they found some nice juicy rocks at surface, that look very similar to what they have been drilling at depth at Alpala.


Here is Aguinaga and Alpala. What Sol Gold are drilling at depth appears to exist at surface at Aguinaga.


Imagine what would happen if they found another Alpala at Aguinaga?





Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Cascabel - Latest Results

We got results from 2 more drill-holes from Alpala last week (link).

I've plugged the numbers in and this is what it has done to my officially bad (tm) contained metal calculations.

Copper



We have a 14% increase in tonnes and an equivalent increase in contained copper

Gold



Here we have a 10% increase in tonnes and 8% increase in contained gold, so a minor (1%) decrease in grade.

This is some very unfashionable results, normally companies like to drill huge amounts of low grade and amaze everyone with the total contained ounces of gold and tonnes of copper.

So where did these results come from?

Starting to look quite big
Hole 25 was drilled 200m to the SE of hole 19, and below historic hole 13-003 that terminated before it hit the main zone Cu-Au mineralization. It hit a 100m zone of high-grade mineralization from 772-872m but quickly passed into low-grade/marginal material.

It suggests that there could be better mineralization to the NE, maybe an additional hole could be drilled from same platform to the NE?



Hole 24 was disappointing, it was drilled 500m to the SE, and hit a narrow (~50m true width) interval grading 0.65 g/t Au and 0.63% Cu, surrounded by very low (<0.2% CuEq) grade mineralization. It looks like hole 24 just clipped the very edge of Alpala mineralization.



You can get the LF viewer file from here (link).



Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Camino Rojo Opinion

This is just a quick post on the Camino Rojo sale by Goldcorp, who have taken a large write-down, but where there any red flags that undermined the value of Canplat's asset?

Summary


  • Proximity to the property boundary prevented development - drilling by Fresnillo has identified the continuation of the Represa zone and potentially up to 25% of the resources are owned by them
  • Metallurgy - generally poor silver recovery
    • Oxide ore = ~85% Au recovery but only ~30% Ag recovery
    • Transitional = 30-60% Au recovery; 30-40% Ag recovery
    • Sulfide - not reported, I'm guessing that Goldcorp has worked on this.
  • Mining - 2009 pit only focused on Oxide/transition ore
  • Drilling by Fresnillo appears to have found another body, suggesting that additional mineralization could be found in the area
Any development of the main (Represa) zone will need to involve Fresnillo. Can Orla do this, or will their focus be on exploring the property for additional mineralization?

Maybe one option could be something similar to Juanacipio. Do a deal where Fresnillo are the operators and Orla can maintain a minor interest?

Geology Crap

Camino Rojo is an interesting project, according to the last 43-101 filed by Canplats in 2009 it contained the following resources:

A decent resource
Looking at Goldcorp's Dec 2015 resources (link), the resources have increased significantly to:


That is a decent increase, they've added ~6Moz Au and kept a similar grade, which is good. However, when we look at where the drilling is located, we can see a major issue:

red line = property boundary
We can see that the deposit runs right to the edge of the property, and we can see an area of drilling in Google Earth on the other side that indicates that Fresnillo have found the continuation!

We can also see to the NE a second area of drilling that suggests that there are other mineralized bodies in the area. So, if there is a deal to be done, Fresnillo won't be selling cheaply as they could be sitting on >5Moz Au!

I imported the Canplats data into Leapfrog (viewer file here), to have a closer look.

Even the proposed pit crosses the property boundary
Some sections
Black line = proposed pit; blue line = property boundary


Black line = proposed pit; blue line = property boundary
A 3D view

left = Fresnillo; right = Goldcorp
So drilling defined an Au-Ag zone that is ~650m thick right next to the property boundary, and then, Goldcorp have spend >$100m expanding those resources.

Why were Goldcorp not able to do a deal with Fresnillo to acquire the adjacent concession? Did they want to much? If that is the case, what chance to Orla have on developing the project?

I still think it is an interesting deal for Orla, but when is the game plan? I see 2 options
  1. Look for more deposits - drilling has found at least 2 and this is a new (discovered in 2008) camp where drilling has already defined >10Moz Au (I'm assuming that Fresnillo has found something)
  2. Do a JV with Fresnillo with Fresnillo being the operators and Orla having a 40% interest.

We can see that there are a lot of targets around the property, and a well funded exploration campaign could turn up 2-3 new deposits in an emerging camp. 


Thursday, June 15, 2017

Tinka, Tailor, Soldier......Zinc!

Some new results from Tinka, so here is an update!

Summary:

  • Hole A17-063 continued to give some excellent results. The lower zinc zone has been extended by >200m.
  • However, drilling away from the core zone just hit narrow, albeit high-grade zones and veins
  • Good potential to expand resources to the NW of holes 061 and 063 - Tinka are drilling holes 69, 70, 71 and 72 into this area and theses are holes to look out for as they could bring the size of the South Ayawilca deposit to >12Mt @ >7% Zn

I've also updated the Officially Bad (TM) resource table

A nice bump up in resources
I've also built up the Leapfrog Model (you can have a look at the 3D views - link), and included the faults from the plan map on the Tinka Website. I want to see how mineralization is related to the faults.

It sits nicely in the middle
We can see that the best mineralization is found between the 2 green faults. I've drawn a think black line to show what I think is the spine (i.e. the thickest part) of the mineralization.

It would be nice to see some holes to the SW (right) of hole A17-064
When we look at the section, we can see that hole A17-063 hit a high-grade, but relatively deep zinc zone, and the shallow zones hit by holes A17-056 and 061 don't continue to hole 063.

Why? Did they hit a vertical (chimney) zone of zinc mineralization, or is this upper zone hosted in a small, laterally discontinuous unit of favorable host rocks?

Left = horizontal mineralization; right = vertical chimney around hole A17-056
Tinka have been kind and included a map showing where the additional holes have been drilled, but the assay results haven't been released (it does take time to get the samples from the Andes down to Lima for analysis).


Saturday, June 10, 2017

Camino - Road to Chala

Tired if working the traveling sideshow circuit investment show circuit in Canada, the Camino Dream team, got tangled up with raising 5 million loonies, but have triumphantly returned with some core, from driest, sandiest Peru.

so beautiful...

Summary.

Negatives
  • Poor correlation between diamond hole and earlier high-grade RC hole
  • Presence of Acid Soluble copper throughout the hole - could this lead to metallurgical complexities?
Positive
  • DCH-001 intersected a third, deeper zone(s) of Cu mineralization (27m @ 1.63% Cu)
I was disappointed that there was such a discrepancy between holes CHR-002 and DCH-001.
  • Original Hole - CHR-002 = 106m @ 1.3% Cu
    • inc. 38m @ 2.12% Cu
  • Twin Diamond hole - DCH-001 = 168.5m @ 0.72% Cu
    • including a couple of ~10m zones grading >1% Cu
We can see that visually:

those holes are only 10-15m apart - much less red stuff in hole DCH-001!

So, we have 2 holes, drilled right next to one another that have returned significantly different results. I'm ignoring the PR intervals and looking at the individual samples (the colored bars) and you can see that there are significant differences between the holes. Are we seeing sample bias caused by the RC drilling? It may have:
  • Washed away of fines and lighter material (i.e. the gangue)
  • Caused dilution and mixing of grade across zones, particularly at the water table
Or, do we have a very heterogeneous zone of mineralization, with significant changes in grade over small distances?

My feeling is that the RC drilling has produced non-representative sample, and for me it will be interesting to see what is reported in the diamond holes.


Here are my annotated notes for this section, just to highlight some important areas.

Add caption
I'm also intrigued with the Magnetite rich zones. They have been interpreted as being horizontal, but the cool thing with Leapfrog, you can test a variety of ideas.

Are they horizontal?

cross section through Adriana


Are they vertical?

vertical dykes (grey)
We can see that there is a significant difference in the depth to the magnetite-rich unit between sections, and the vertical interpretation could be an reasonable alternative, I'm thinking that there could be a series of vertical post-mineral (i.e. after copper) dykes cutting through the project.

You can get the Leapfrog viewer file from here (link).


Just some feedback for Camino, could you get someone to review your PRs before you set them free?
loads of errors
You have some typos, using the wrong units and refer to gold assays in the blurb below the table - or is the AssCu number meant to be gold?




Monday, May 15, 2017

Tinka - Ayawilca

We have seen some decent hits from Tinka's Ayawilca project in Peru.


  • 62.4m @ 5.6% Zn, inc. 17.9m @ 11.6% Zn (link)
  • 51.9m @ 10.1% Zn, 62 g/t Ag (link)
  • 18.6m @ 10.4% Zn and 52 g/t Ag (link)


Summary


  • Drilling has hit multiple high-grade zinc (with Ag credits) lenses over a ~200m length
    • officially bad tonnage guesstimate = 8Mt @ 4.7% Zn
    • including a 2.3Mt core grading 7.2% Zn
  • Early days, mineralization open to the north and south
  • Faulting may have a significant impact on size of the deposit.


I've brought the data into Leapfrog Geo (you can get the 3D viewer file from here (link), back calculated the residual grades to see how everything looks.

Zinc

Multiple lenses
Silver

Silver is essentially in the same place as zinc
Lead

Lead is restricted to a few, narrow zones.

We see a number of zinc lenses, that appear to pinch-out to the NW and SE. What will be critical is what the faults (dashed black lines) do to the mineralization, are they:

  • Pre-mineralization – minimal effect, but could have some high-grade Zn (+Ag) mineralization up them
  • Post – offset the mineralization – i.e. the mineralization could be deeper or shallower
I was intrigued by the zonation (?) in different metals:

  • Zinc appears to be relatively consistent, forming continuous >5% zones between the drill-holes, but there does appear to be higher grades in the Northwest.
  • Silver - there are higher grade silver zones, several appear to be close to the northwest (left) fault, and there is a nice high-grade zone at depth.
  • Lead - minimal lead, some high-ish grade intervals associated with the NW fault, but in general the Pb levels are very low.
It does appear that the NW fault could be an important controlling structure and may have some high-grade mineralization (a chimney) associated with it. It was a shame that hole A17-059 wasn't pushed on a bit further to test this fault at depth.

Hole 58 is interesting, does it show a continuation of this zinc zone to the NW or is it a separate zone or related zinc vein.chimney associated with the NW fault zone?

I did a quick and dirty 'resource' tallying


So that is a good start, so why don't we look at the upside


A Crap doodle - i'll be updating this

You can clearly see that the zinc zone is open to the NE and SW, and will offer good potential to define a good chunk of mineralization, as this zone is ~300m wide and so far drilling has focused (6 holes - 56A was an extension of 56, so i'm counting it as 1 hole), on a 100m section.

I'm also interesting to see what hole 59 will hit. I'm not very confident (maybe a couple of narrow zones) as mineralization is pinching out towards the NW fault, and my gut feel is that this fault is an important controlling structure, which either controlled the ore bearing fluids or has offset the mineralization.