gram*meters: Golden Mile guesstimates
in response to
by
posted on
Oct 04, 2008 01:05PM
Creating shareholder wealth by advancing gold projects through the exploration and mine development cycle.
I have doubts about doing this, sigh, but everyone else is going to do it anyways ...
Makes me think of being a kid and Mom asking "so if everyone else is steering their bikes with their feet, does that mean you have to do it too?" And we didn't wear helmets in those days. Explains a few things.
g*m (and g*m/ton)
To be scientific and picky about units and all, g*m is actually gram*meter/ton (g*m/t). They are taking grams/ton assay figures and multiplying then by the associated vein widths in meters. You never see "g*m/t" as they drop the /tons part when writing it, to make it shorter. If you keep /t in, to be more technical, the units all cancel nicely. I am leaving out the tons vs. metric tonnes business as it's a small factor - I'm an engineer, not a physicist.
1. Dreamland: First, to get it out of the way: dream-land numbers for the Golden Mile:
9000m long x 2500m deep x average15g/t*m x 2.6t/(m**3) x 1ounce/31g x 1/5th efficiently mineable and recoverable = 5.7 million ounces gold.
You can see that all the units cancel out nicely to get ounce of gold. You can also see that we're dreaming. We can't say much of anything yet about what's 2.5 kilometers down, and Kodiak hasn't yet touched a part of the GM with either hoe or drill yet.
Be aware that all the guessing here is mine and not Kodiak's, and I have no solid idea about the average grade (parts of the GM not tested yet) and I am not a mining engineer and I can't know how much ore is efficiently recoverable. I am just having fun! Red Lake, which appears to be comparable to GM (Page 19 in .pdf), produced a lot more than even what we see here, but for now this figure is just a bit of Saturday afternoon musing.
2. Guesstimate-land: I like to go to the extremes of an estimate (dreamland) and then back off to see what might approach reality. Only roughly 2/3 of the GM has been looked into even a bit, and the structures proven up we can only reasonably guess about going down to maybe 1.25 km down, as the deepest drill hole is roughly 600m deep so far. Doing the figures again:
6000m long x 1250m deep x average15g/t*m x 2.6t/(m**3) x 1ounce/31g x 1/5th efficiently mineable and recoverable = 1.9 million ounces gold.
That sounds not-unreasonable for a partial length and partial depth of the probable GM. Putting a moderate price on gold in the ground of $150/oz and dividing by 88 million shares, that would be $3.22/share for just that part, with those assumptions. "Your mileage may vary."
Other factors:
Of course, that doesn't speak to:
i) the rest of the 9 km strike at the GM,
ii) improving grades with depth and the probable valuable intersections of veins,
iii) depth beyond 1.25 km,
iv) the other parallel vein systems (Lucky Strike, Marino, 7 of 9, Golden Grail, Penelton, Yellow Brick Road, WLGZ, Derek Lee, Gold Rush, the multiple unnamed veins such as the veins (besides the ones labelled) on Page 21 of the .pdf, and additional veins likely to be discovered in the vast remaining Kodiak area of the Elmhirst Intrusion,
v) the other Beardmore-Geraldton Kodiak prospect areas including a) West Geraldton, b) Maki, c) Bearskin/Sturgeon, d) EastLeitch+KlotzLake+etc, each company-makers in and of themselves,
vi) the Uranium prospects and other Kodiak properties,
vii) other things you will think of that I didn't cover.
Well, that felt reckless, and at this point one bike wheel is missing a few spokes and I've got brambles and a bee down my shirt. Obviously, time to take another run at it.
One more time - I am picking these numbers of the air, they are mine alone, and you have to come to your own conclusions. But of course you know that the majors are doing the exact same thing albeit in a more sophisticated way. That's why the Kodiak drill program is strategic, gathering the data the most convincingly and efficiently, and that's what the sheaf of Confidentiality Agreements Brian Maher mentioned in the Times Star article are for.
I hope I am not putting a spin on this and I very much welcome other takes on this.
Can't wait to hear from the conference!! - wishing you all a great day / cedar