Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
SX-EW (solvent extraction and electrowinning) are distinct metallurgical unit operations that recover high purity metal from leachate solutions. Solvent extraction is used to concentrate materials in an organic solution, while electrowinning is used to recover these pay elements. The two procedures are often conducted together. While electrowinning can be used with other processes, it is always used after solvent extraction.
http://www.sgs.com/en/Mining/Metallurgy-and-Process-Design/Unit-Operations-and-Metallurgical-Services/Solvent-Extraction-and-Electrowinning.aspx
SGS has proven experience recovering a number of elements through SX-EW including:
Gold and silver
Copper (from sulfate and cyanide solutions)
Nickel (including nickel laterite)
Cobalt and zinc
Zirconium and rare earth elements
Manganese and vanadium
Niobium and tantalum
Limited but specific info on niobium beneficiation from Hatch website:
http://www.hatch.ca/mining_metals/non_ferrous/articles/solvent_extraction_southern_africa.htm
"Several other flowsheets that use SX technology are currently under commissioning, development, or feasibility study for implementation in this part of the world, including those for cobalt, nickel, tantalum and niobium."
This was 2005 so prob doesn't refer to Sarissa, but implied may be that Hatch expertise is in SX (solvent extraction) Technology / Liquid-liquid extraction.
Do you know if the CAD was a proposed solvent extraction plant?
Know anything about solvent extraction?
"Nemegosenda Niobium Project: Ferro-Niobium Production Facility Pre-Feasibility Study (Phase 1)," currently being prepared for Nio-Star.
What is this report? Who is preparing it?
From IAG conf call, Aug 13 2013:
http://m.seekingalpha.com/article/1631852
Question from: Dan Rollins - RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Research Division
"...Are you still seeing [niobium spot prices] around that $40 a kilogram, or have you seen a little bit of pressure coming off on that?"
Letwin (CEO): "...even though China' is being a slowdown, our niobium market really doesn't depend right now in China....right now, most of our sales are in Europe, in the U.S., some into China. So we really haven't seen our contracts' spot prices be hit in any material way..."
In the call they claim multiple times that 97% of niobec production is sold forward. Then the answer to the analyst implies that most of the 97% is being sold into the US and Europe.
Anyone know who the customers are?
Sept 5 2013
"The fastest Chinese steel output on record is still too slow to meet demand from builders, reducing inventories and driving prices toward a bull market."
http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2013-09-04/steel-rallying-with-chinese-builders-beating-mills-commodities.html
“The overcapacity that everybody was so worried about is turning out to be moot because 2013 is shaping up as a record year for steel demand,”
What's up with the increase in authorized shares?
"double down double mention double insurance" professional work coordination meeting."
Sounds serious.
"Group Vice President Tingyu, the company "triple double" of the professional group for personnel"
Wish I had "triple double" in my work title.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-06-19/sports/40054259_1_nba-finals-tuesday-night-triple-double
Capistrano got pretty good terms @ 35% interest assuming the well hits. That multiplies up the $6.5M debt by $2.275M. They'll have to take on more to complete KMD, and more on top to start Elk Hills. Have to assume the same rates given the risks that are even higher now under that $10M load. But, what's the alternative? I'm betting Ramirez can pull off the high rate financing and won't have to issue equity. It's all good if they hit. If the wells are dry then we all knew what we were into. This is not a stock for nest eggs. IMO.
On OREO, do you know if Ramirez is still associated with Vollmers?
Seems like an increase in value of the potentially recoverable asset would make it easier to land the financing to continue. My opinion. I know yours is different.
Backstory on Vince
http://www.vince007.com/folder3/cv_vrex.htm
I can't believe none of them have made the buggy-whip stock joke yet.
Another source on deep directional drilling, below, suggests it is routine. This is one of many that refutes the unsubstantiated claims of 30% success rates made previously on this board.
http://www.appea.com.au/oil-gas-explained/operation/horizontal-drilling/
"To steer the well path, rotary steerable equipment is mounted on the drill pipe just behind the drill bit. These systems can be remotely steered from the surface to redirect the drill bit to deviate the well on any desired path.
Directional drilling can be very precise. Wells kilometres deep can be directed to within centimetres of their targets."
We are 2.3 km deep at the directional plug.
LOL! This board has the best bashers. I'm doubling down.
Oil's up. Foreign supply in question.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/oil-rises-on-syria-concerns-supply-data-on-tap-2013-08-27
18 month high.
You're obviously very knowledgable. I know we should all do our own DD but maybe you could spare us a few details?
Maybe you could share what your industry contacts told you about issues with the whipstock at depth.
Or were you kidding about that too?
Huh. Thought you were:
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=90534802
Were you just kidding?
Some of the questions in the last cc made me think that smart money was getting a bit impatient. They were stuck in the hole on that one, too, due to the pressure differential between the shale and the sand. They were just quieter about it. One guy asked a pretty pointed question about budget. And Ramirez answered that he was within the bounds of the budget. Which seemed to mean over current forecast but under the ceiling. So I think he blew management reserve on that plug and drilling around it.
I haven't listened to the conference call yet but my guess is that today's haircut is because they've blown through the top of the budget now on the hole and still have to pay for resolution of the stuck pipe.
Maybe that was addressed in the call. I'll wait until it posts before continuing comment.
I read an article by an engineer at Shell who said the chances of a stuck pipe in a well are 12%. Wonder what are the chances of two?
http://www.slb.com/~/media/Files/resources/oilfield_review/ors91/oct91/5_perspective.pdf
As you can read, it's not a disaster, but its not inexpensive. If smart money was trimming position, that might be why.
You're certain that the whipstock won't work at depth? What makes you say that? Most sources seem to contradict you.
So you didn't cover yet I guess? Thought you might. You think the close was just a bounce? Gonna ride it all the way down?
Great post. Do you know any details about "Nemegosenda Niobium Project: Ferro-Niobium Production Facility Pre-Feasibility Study (Phase 1)," that was referenced in the last update? Is that a SGS effort?
Good to see you posting here. I followed you into this one.
You're not the only one:
"In general, US energy companies have shifted their focus from the Middle East back to North America. I believe Oxy is doing the same thing."
http://m.seekingalpha.com/article/1608862
According to the source, Occidental is second in energy production in California, behind Chevron. They seem to be in the same spots as Rango. Or maybe Hangtown, now Rango, acquired leases in the spots Oxy wants to be?
Ramirez echoed that in both conference calls. Interesting thing is that Sangha calls it a development project because of the 3D seismic while Ramirez points to the historic drilling.
I tend to believe the historic over the seismic, but that's based on the fact that I got burned on HENC after believing a bunch of people about the seismic. Here there's seismic indicating a hydrocarbon trap and historic evidence of sufficient porosity. Will see what happens when they drill it.
"For pure upside, no North American deal I have seen in the last 18 months comes close to this," states Sangha, "To use precious metals terminology, this is a 'mother lode' type project".
http://www.4-traders.com/news/Rango-Energy-Drill-Advances-on-Target-Oil-Formation--17125107/
The Monterey Shale is believed to be the energy savior of the United States, with an estimated 15 billion barrels of oil in place across the field. That's more than twice that of both the Eagleford (3 billion) and Bakken (4 billion) combined.
Oil has been pumped from the the Monterey for many decades, however, only recently have the benefits of directional drilling, and improved fracking methods been employed. The timing for Rango and its neighbors is better than ever to tackle the Monterey, and already it's been proven through the Kettleman North and South Domes that this region is quite economic indeed.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/financial-press-there-will-be-more-blood-rango-energy-chasing-gunslinger-lookalike-2013-07-25
Wonder if the 2.5V control range is on top of some higher voltage bias. Also, wonder what the current requirement is to keep the glass heat/light opaque. If it's a straight 2.5V control range and the current is low you could picture active windows and skylights with an embedded photodiode feeding a microcontroller that adjusts the transparency of the glass based on the incoming solar strength. The control could be fed by NiMH or Lithium rechargeables that were trickle charged by a solar cell in the frame with the charger IC also run by the micro so the whole thing was self contained. That would be an inexpensive circuit to proto using an Arduino board for the micro and ADC -- and with a Bluetooth shield you could make it remote contol with an Android app. I'd buy a set for my family room.
Certainly does wrap the whole thing up in a nice little package with a bow, doesn't it?
News out
Hey Tom. Good to see you.
The Elk Hills holes are shallow and about $600k each so they're not going to need $100M to go forward with that part of the project.
I agree that it would be bad news if the first Kettleman well had to be abandoned, but there would still be the strong possibility of a hit at Elk Hills that could finance continued exploration at Kettleman.
Seems to me Kettleman is the short term potential, but there's still long term in Elk Hills and there appears to be enough free capital to exploit.
That said -- do you know what the technical difficulties were in the 1950's that forced Shell to abandon drilling Middle Dome?
When you say that the chances are that they won't hit -- is this just an opinion based on a guess or have you uncovered something that shows that the Rango rig is incorrectly placed with respect to the historic data showing liquid oil in the formations?
Also, if they already have financing that covers the Kettleman drilling and that hole was to prove noncommercial, then wouldn't the additional financing allow them to start tapping the resources at Elk Hills and potentially use those profits to justify additional exploration at Kettleman?
I'm just trying to understand how access to additional capital puts the nail into the lid of any coffins?
And, by not selling equity to access the additional capital before starting to realize value from ongoing operations, aren't they operating in their best interests by delaying? Based on the fact that conservatively projected profits (assuming successful wells) more than cover the debt? Seems like it to me.
Not a huge loan if the conservative potential of 3000 bpd mentioned in the conf call for Kettleman and Elk Hills plays out. You can discount the current Chevron CA prices by 10% and still pay the loan in 22 days at those rates. Got to have the capital to achieve the potential though. So, explain to me again how the loan goes against investor interests?
I wasn't throwing to third.
Interesting. Thanks. So then, why are they talking it down? To kill time?
I've already posted my opinions on the archibald report. But regardless, based on the company's response the 788k could easily have been spent on implementing those recommendations. They would certainly seem to qualify as grass roots exploration expenditures. Or it could have been spent on the PR'ed activities from prior years -- the ones you keep raising as valid examples of exploration expenses. I'm assuming SMD asked why they were recharacterized. Wait and see.
If you are assuming that Scott is a FT shareholder then you are agreeing that he is financing exploration expenses out of his own pocket. This seems to contradict your previous claims that he was embezzling money last year. I think you're working yourself closer to the truth.
No. Not fact. Speculation should have been IMO. Sorry.
Yep. I was off the mark with that post. I don't know that Scott was the flow through share holder. That was an assumption. Don't know if the company recharacterized the expenditures or if the government made them.
You (and I) no longer can be certain that the expenditures occurred in 2012 and I don't know if the 7xxK number is the entire recharacterization or if it will be spread out over time.
All good questions for Merle. But it's nowhere near as black and white as you're trying to make it.
Did the qualifying expense reduce the value of your shares or did you have to pay them like a reverse dividend?
If the expenses were initially characterized as flow through expenses then the company thought they were grass roots expenditures. At least, we can assume that they tried to characterize them as grass roots. A more appropriate question to ask Scott might be why the expenses had to be recharacterized. Was it the company that recharacterized the expenses as I suggested in my previous post or did the CRA audit the expenses and determine that they were not grass roots expenditures. This is a definite possibility because it isn’t clear if metallurgical testing (of the recent check samples) or expenses incurred in respect of a feasibility study are valid grass roots expenditures. If the expenses were the result of an audit of expenditures previously passed through then the answer to your question would be, “taxes", and the expenses could be from prior years.
"Take your time and send me a list of questions" does not sound like apathy to me.