InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 73
Posts 6055
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 04/21/2017

Re: Mean Weimaraner post# 1725

Wednesday, 07/19/2017 12:17:01 PM

Wednesday, July 19, 2017 12:17:01 PM

Post# of 19631
NAFS a mathematical projection. The 43-101 provides a better insight into the asset size and value.

The calculation is based on the following information:
1) original exploration covered 12,900,000 sq. ft.
2) average depth of frac sand in original exploration program was just over 10'
3) NAFS controls over 39,000 acres
4) an acre is 43,560 sq ft.
5) frac sand weighs 96 lbs/ cu. ft.

A) the original exploration program contained 6,000,000 tons of frac sand. This number was in earlier filings and on the website. (This number is not 43-101 compliant, thus this should not be relied on until it is confirmed by the 43-101. I will use this information to illustrate the formulae used to calculate the size of the resource.)

Calculation: (12,900,000 sq. ft.) x (10' depth of sand) x (96 lb./cu. ft.) / (2000 lbs./ton) = 6,192,000 tons of frac sand.

Note: 12,900,000 sq. ft. / 43,560 sq. ft. (area of original exploration program in sq. ft. / sq. ft. In an acre) = 296 acres. Thus, the calculation verifies that 6,000,000 tons on about 300 acres with a sand thickness of 10 ft.

B) the calculation for a 10' thickness of frac sand on the 1680 mentioned in the earlier post:
1680 acres x 43,560 sq. ft./acre x 10' thick x 96 lbs./cu. ft. / 2000 lbs./ton = 35,125,784 tons

C) the calculation for a 1' thick depth of frac sand over 39,000 acres is as follows:
39,000 acres x 43,560 sq. ft./ acre x 1' thick x 96 lbs/cu. ft. / 2000 lbs./ton = 81,644,320 tons

That's why I suggest that the size of this asset may be substantially larger than what is being suggested on this board. 80,000,000 tons is the result of only a 1' thickness across the 39,000 acres. It appears there is at least 10' thickness for the first exploration program. So if we can extrapolate that the entire site averages between 1' and 10' in thickness then we can just multiple the average thickness over the entire site to calculate the size of the resource. Example: if the average thickness is 5' over the entire site, the asset would contain 400,000,000 tons of frac sand.

All of these calculations are for illustrative purposes, but they do start to hint that NAFS does potentially have a monster asset. All we have to do now is wait for the 43-101 to provide more information.

In my humble opinion, this site could hit 100,000,000 tons of frac sand on the first 5000 acres drilled if the depth of sand is consistently 10' deep over all 5000 acres. If that happens, NAFS still would have another 34,000 acres to drill. The sky would be the limit.

These are just some of my thoughts about the potential of NAFS.