InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 15
Posts 3671
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/23/2011

Re: value1008 post# 1400

Monday, 08/01/2011 1:14:11 PM

Monday, August 01, 2011 1:14:11 PM

Post# of 4675
Nice x-post from Chris/Stockhouse, thanks value

You notice, twice I indicated that I did not believe AMY would have gone down this road if they felt water sufficiency would be a show stopper.

What I actually said about the mention of water recovery seen in the old working's audit from their withdrawal for drilling was to the effect that I have not seen any numbers on tests for draw-down and recovery rates, which I feel would have to happen before anyone could speculate on the adequacy of that as a water source. The water needs for a couple of drill rigs is pretty minor compared to likely range of operational needs.

Chris seems to have seen info on the AMY projected water consumption level which I have not, hence I only said AMY likely has alternatives to minimize water needs in the raw concentration phase.

All that said, I still am of the opinion that AMY would face some fairly strong contests over using Alamo Lake. The historic numbers are one thing, the numbers covering the past decade plus of drought are likely quite different. Even with the locals in favor, this would be a state issue, and the local population is probably around 0.001% of the state if not less. If AMY employs in the projected range, most of the people would be commuting. It would be ecological interests that would tie up use of Alamo water in a lengthy process, and I would be surprised at not seeing that happen. I cannot image AMY has failed to play out all of these scenarios and seen a green light in all events.

At any rate, good information from Chris.

So Frankkfurt should be closed ey ? Anyone have volume numbers out of the Eruo area ?