The Prospector News

Gwen Preston – “Mailbox: Premium Nickel”

You have opened a direct link to the current edition PDF

Open PDF Close
Uncategorized

Share this news article

Gwen Preston – “Mailbox: Premium Nickel”

 

 

 

 

 

I had a question about your recent Premium Nickel comments. The topic is the prospect of only a 62% recovery of nickel in the ore. Assuming the downhole EM’s do in fact turn out decent tonnage, is the 62% recovery a deal killer? Also: any thoughts on how to assess the probability that they can meaningfully improve that number?

Reader CL

 

62% recovery is not ideal, to be sure. Is it a deal breaker? No. If the EM plates indeed represent massive sulphide deposits of good grade, then the scale of what’s at hand could handle 62% recovery.

 

But improvements would be lovely, of course.

 

The standard flowsheet they tested generated two tailings streams – one high volume/low sulphur and one low volume/high sulphur – and two concentrates (copper and nickel-cobalt). Copper recoveries are great. Nickel is only 62%. To improve that they’re testing different grind sizes. They are also seeing if there’s a way to second-process the low volume/high sulphur tailings, as that’s where the unrecovered nickel ends up. For example, would some kind of hydrometallurgical process liberate more nickel from the tailings?

 

It’s good it’s the low-volume tailings that would potentially need another round of work. Lower volume is less capital and operating expense.

 

Odds of success? I think it’s likely they will find a way to pull a good chunk (perhaps half?) of the remnant nickel from the tailings. The question will then be the cost and complexity of adding that step to the process plant. Since it’s hydromet (basic chemistry) of low volumes and not high-pressure chemistry of high volumes, costs are not likely going to be dramatic.

 

This is 20,000-foot arm waving at this point, based on general principles. Until PNRL says more about the met processes they’re testing, I can’t really say more!

 

But I do think (1) the targets here are big enough, and the precedents suggest they could be rich enough, to very much make 62% recovery work, even if higher recoveries would be better and (2) there is a good chance PNRL will find an economic way to improve from 62%.

 

Courtesy of Resource Maven

 

Posted July 18, 2023

Share this news article

MORE or "UNCATEGORIZED"


Imperial Provides Update on Mount Polley 2025 Production and Exploration

Imperial Metals Corporation (TSX:III) reports that 2025 metal pro... READ MORE

February 11, 2026

Ascot Resources Announces Key Elements of 2026 Vision, Proposes Name Change to Cambria Gold Mines Inc. and Updates Restructuring

Ascot Resources Ltd. (TSX-V: AOT.H) (OTCID: AOTVF) is pleased to ... READ MORE

February 11, 2026

Discovery Reports Excellent Exploration Results from All Porcupine Targets

Hoyle Pond1 S Zone: High-grade intersections confirm potential to... READ MORE

February 11, 2026

First Quantum Minerals Reports Fourth Quarter 2025 Results

First Quantum Minerals Ltd. (TSX: FM) reports results for the three mont... READ MORE

February 11, 2026

Fireweed Metals and Ross River Dena Council Sign Exploration and Collaboration Agreement for Mactung and Macpass Projects

Fireweed Metals Corp. (TSX-V: FWZ) (OTCQX: FWEDF) and the Ross Ri... READ MORE

February 10, 2026

Copyright 2026 The Prospector News