HIGH-GRADE NI-CU-PT-PD-ZN-CR-AU-V-TI DISCOVERIES IN THE "RING OF FIRE"

NI 43-101 Update (September 2012): 11.1 Mt @ 1.68% Ni, 0.87% Cu, 0.89 gpt Pt and 3.09 gpt Pd and 0.18 gpt Au (Proven & Probable Reserves) / 8.9 Mt @ 1.10% Ni, 1.14% Cu, 1.16 gpt Pt and 3.49 gpt Pd and 0.30 gpt Au (Inferred Resource)

Free
Message: Re: Rail Cost Estimate tonnage
10
Nov 15, 2008 09:52AM
12
Nov 15, 2008 02:13PM
12
Nov 16, 2008 10:27AM
11
Nov 16, 2008 11:32AM

tau
Nov 16, 2008 12:12PM
5
Nov 16, 2008 03:43PM
6
Nov 16, 2008 04:02PM
1
tau
Nov 16, 2008 04:20PM
6
Nov 16, 2008 04:24PM

Nov 16, 2008 04:27PM
2
tau
Nov 17, 2008 05:11PM
16
Nov 17, 2008 05:42PM

My experience is from a shipper point of view, but my thoughts were something between 3 and 6 trains per week to make track viable as well.

In terms of rail cars even at 30 to 40 trains per year you would only be able to manage with 100 cars if you had a very efficient unit train service (all cars stay together from origin to destination and back). My 100 car number was given just to give an order of magnitude of what a train move would handle. In terms of movements in manifest service 8 turns per year is about normal for rail cars. Probably looking at more than 200 cars, to allow for loading unloading and full and empty transit times, even in a best case senario. It wouldn't change the overall economics much though as the track would be the big capital item.

3
Nov 17, 2008 06:17PM
1
Nov 18, 2008 04:47AM
10
Nov 18, 2008 04:54AM
4
CMP
Nov 18, 2008 05:50AM
2
tau
Nov 18, 2008 06:16AM
5
Nov 18, 2008 06:45AM
5
Nov 18, 2008 06:50AM
Share
New Message
Please login to post a reply