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"


Appia Intersects REE-Bearing Monazite in Three of Six Drill Holes and Completes 2026 Alces Lake Summer Drill Program

Appia Rare Earths & Uranium Corp. (CSE: API) (OTCQB: APAAF) ... READ MORE

August 6, 2026

Sorrento Resources Ltd. Intersects 31m of 0.42g/t Au, Rodgers Cove, Newfoundland

Sorrento Resources Ltd. (CSE: SRS) (OTCQB: SRSLF), a Canadian exp... READ MORE

August 6, 2026

EraNova Announces Positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the Adanac Molybdenum Project: After-Tax NPV of $714.4 Million and 23.5% IRR

Study confirms Adanac as a large-scale, long-life primary molybde... READ MORE

August 6, 2026

Oroco Drills 26.48m of 1.18% CuEq in South Zone

Oroco Resource Corp. (TSX-V: OCO) (OTCQB: ORRCF) is pleased to re... READ MORE

August 6, 2026

Winshear Reports Drill Results from the Rodburn Target, Portsoy Project, NE Scotland

High-Grade Mineralization Extended Downdip at the South Zone and ... READ MORE

August 6, 2026

Copyright 2026 The Prospector News