InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 46
Posts 11326
Boards Moderated 1
Alias Born 12/28/2005

Re: gappa2 post# 499

Sunday, 08/16/2009 10:19:59 AM

Sunday, August 16, 2009 10:19:59 AM

Post# of 14019
I am not in the mining industry and do not have a geology degree.

My background is B.S. in Math and M.S. in physics.

It has always been my experience that the more useful information you use in a calculation, the more accurate the result. (Similar to "garbage in, garbage out" axiom.)

This is why I factored in the data from the trench analysis. The trench analysis provided by URST. Common sense suggest that mineralization is bound to have a varying amount of Vanadium concentration across the strike zone.

I assumed each trench was uniform. And the company used the Vanadium mineralization zones in the trenches to arrive at the 200 million tonne estimate of Vanadium mineralization.

The only thing left to due was to determine in the best way possible the percentage of Vanadium over each mineralization zone. Both the length of mineralization and the concentration of Vanadium was provided by the company.

Each trench contained different mineralization lengths and Vanadium concentrations in the mineralization.

The length of the mineralization was used to determine the amount (weight) of mineralization relative to the total mineralization.

The average concentration percentage over the length (provided by URST) was then applied to determine the amount of Vanadium.

In this way I kept the calculation as simple as possible while using all the information available.

Mike