A recent email described to me some of the problems faced by mineral resource project developers in former USSR countries.

The main problem with these former USSR countries is the unknown cost of operation and operational risk which are not taken into account during planning.  Unfortunately, professionals from western countries can see these operations through western eyes and can be unaware of the reality of operating in these countries.

One (here unnamed) deposit brought to my attention looked fantastic on paper prior to mining. However, once in operation, anything and everything that was not bolted down was stolen by the workers. This included the copper wires, even those laid out for geophysical surveys!

And then there are all those diesel pipelines you see around industrial sites? Well, it seems that not all of those pipelines are legitimate. I’m not talking about for the mine being at fault here, but, rather, those pipelines made by the locals to siphon fuel off into the bush.  That’s right, locals filling up tankers on the sly and selling the fuel elsewhere. 

One has to ask how this sort of thing could go unnoticed. Or, perhaps it is being noticed, but only by those who might be prepared to turn a blind eye…. and who drive Mercedes….. powered by diesel?!

by Laurie Veska, (Click to contact Laurie), May 2013

Following on from my previous article, what are some practical and cost-effective approaches to encourage the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) in your company or organisation?

One approach is to purchase some or all of your GIS licences as floating network licences if possible, this means that you must decide on the maximum number of concurrent users you can afford. You then augment this with free stripped-down versions of the GIS software for view-only users, providing basic access to your company’s GIS layers. Whilst this model may suit the requirements of many small resource companies, I personally favour a model employing the additional use of Open Source GIS software, this has been termed by others as the Hybrid GIS approach.

 The Hybrid GIS model I propose in this article is:

1. Retain a minimum licence holding in your GIS of preference – even just a single licence if possible, shared between your power-users’ machines – but whatever you do, don’t get offside with this group!
2. Install Quantum GIS (QGIS) on all users’ machines: power-users, standard-users and occasional or view-only users
3. Encourage the use of QGIS in your organisation, possibly also pay for commercial support and/or training for your workers

 You will likely find that many if not all of your GIS business requirements can be accomplished by using free open-source GIS software such as the GRASS/Quantum GIS combination, and any remaining tasks covered with your preferred commercial GIS product.

Screen shot showing exploration data over a geophysical image using Quantum GIS software

Examples of plug-ins for Quantum GIS

Below is a table showing a basic comparison of some of the main features of QGIS compared to MapInfo and ArcView products. It is not intended as an exhaustive or even an in-depth comparison as many features in these three products are implemented using third party plug-ins, so ultimate functionality depends on these external tools. This comparison is provided to hopefully entice you to investigate and consider the use of open source GIS tools in your organisation.

I don’t preach that one piece of software can be the ultimate solution for every need, but nonetheless, QGIS is a great tool, and it proudly occupies the top tray in my geology tool chest.

by Laurie Veska.

Given the high licensing costs for proprietary desktop Geographic Information System (GIS) software suitable for common geological tasks, and the inherent complexity of this type of product, time spent analysing your usage and requirements can pay good dividends.

The first thing is to look honestly and objectively at your potential and current GIS software users. It is normally possible to subdivide your users into four groups: power-users, standard-users , occasional or view-only users, and finally conscientious objectors or luddites – those that have no interest at all in this type of software.

It is no surprise that the power-user has the greatest demands and requirements from their GIS software. These users regularly perform detailed tasks including creation and import of spatial data, perform spatial analysis, coordinate system transforms and create complex plot-files for hard copy. They may even undertake small GIS programming tasks.

The next group is the standard user, into which most employees with a scientific background will fall. A distinguishing feature of this group is that members often find that periods of 3-6 months or more may go by between tasks where they use their GIS software. This means that a lot of the more complex tasks power-users perform regularly must be virtually re-learnt each time by the normal user, and it is often the power-users who end up tutoring them.

The third group includes personnel with little scientific background, and also senior management who just want to view summary spatial information, perhaps in a form that you often see printed in a prospectus, announcement or annual report. It is often the ‘standard’ users who find themselves regularly tutoring the view-only users.

What this all means is that if, for example, you have 10 employees with at least some interest in having GIS software on their machines, chances are only one or two of them actually require a fully-featured product. You may also find that the other six or seven employees will still want access to a full feature GIS, with all the bells and whistles even if it is unlikely that the full feature set will ever be utilised by them.

The typical scenario then, is that in a given organisation, the chosen GIS software is used 90% of the time for just viewing data or performing relatively simple operations.

What to do then if your organisation has a limited IT budget?

This is the subject of my next article where I will discuss some practical approaches and solutions to this question..

To find out more or to contact Laurie at www.lveska.com (or click here)

Schoer, Reed and Associates (SRA) is a new company formed by Tony Schoer and Alistair Reed. SRA focuses on managing resource projects and on linking projects companies and capital markets. The company combines expertise in capital and resource management and exploration.

Tony Schoer and Alistair Reed are a proven team. They were founding and executive directors of Pluton Resources in 2006, taking Pluton from a company with a market capitalisation of $16m to more than $250m in less than 12 months.

This page expands on that showing mineralisation throughout Tasmania (click here) to describe the Mount Read Volcanics in more detail as well as attempt to put a current value on selected mines and mineral deposits.

Geology of the Mount Read Volcanics

The most important metallogenic event in Tasmania coincided with the deposition of the Mount Read Volcanics (MRV). Mineralisation was concentrated in a short time interval in the late Middle Cambrian. Major alteration zones are dominantly of quartz-sericite mineralogy.

The main mineralised belt of the MRV between Mount Darwin and Hellyer is the Central Volcanic Complex (CVC), which is dominated by proximal volcanic rocks (rhyolitic to dacitic composition with rare basalt) deposited in a marine environment.

The CVC is flanked to the west by the coeval WesternVolcano-Sedimentary Sequence (WVS) of turbidite, mudstone, siltstone, shale with lesser intrusive (commonly andesitic) rocks and lavas.

The CVC and WVS are overlain by the Tyndall Group, a unit of quartz-bearing volcaniclastic sandstone and conglomerate of mixed felsic and andesitic provenance. Considerable erosion took place locally before deposition of the Tyndall Group. Clasts of granite and altered volcanic rocks occur in the basal Tyndall Group.

Flanking the CVC to the east and abutting the basement rocks of Tasmania is the Eastern Quartz-phyric Sequence (EQPS). The EQPS comprises quartz-feldspar-phyric lavas, intrusive porphyries and volcaniclastic sandstone, intruded by magnetite series granites. There is some controversy about the EQPS. Some consider that it is a time equivalent of the CVC, while others consider that it could be part of the Tyndall Group.

The geology of the MRV is complicated by varying degrees of rock alteration, folding and faulting.

The Henty Fault constitutes a fundamental tectonic divide within the MRV. To the northwest, polymetallic Zn-Pb-Au-Ag-Cu massive sulfide deposits dominate (Hellyer, Que River, Rosebery, Hercules) together with disseminated deposits with lower base metal, but relatively high Au and Ag tenor (Mount Charter, South Hercules). Southeast of the Henty Fault copper-gold and gold deposits dominate, exemplified by the Mount Lyell field and the Henty gold deposit. The most economically important deposits in the Mount Lyell field are disseminated chalcopyrite-pyrite orebodies in alteration assemblages dominated by quartz-sericite or quartz-chlorite-sericite.

Values of selected mineral deposits from the Mount Read Volcanics

Table 1. Estimated deposit size and pre-mining (in-ground) value (Based on metal prices current as of April 2012). Deposit data have been collected from a number of sources including company and government reports and should be treated as estimates only. Values are based on figures published in April 2012.

This page presents an overview of the pre-mining resources for the non-alluvial deposits of Tasmania. The deposits are grouped according to their age and style of mineralisation.

The Cambrian age Mount Read Volcanic (MRV) rocks are the economically most important rocks in Tasmania. These are included below but are also discussed separately (click here), along with 2012 estimates of in-ground value based on pre-mining resource and current reserves.

From oldest to youngest….

Precambrian deposits in the Arthur Lineament

The term Arthur Lineament strictly refers to a narrow (110 km long by up to 10 km wide) tectonic feature which transects northwest Tasmania from the west coast to the north coast. The Arthur Lineament hosts economically important iron ore and magnesite deposits (below).

The Savage River magnetite mine consists of sub-vertical, concordant lenses of massive magnetite ore with varying amounts of pyrite and trace chalcopyrite in a sequence of tholeiitic amphibolite of extrusive and intrusive origin, carbonates and serpentinite. Magnesite deposits of high purity and substantial size are known at Arthur River, Lyons River, and Main Creek.

• Savage River 371 Mt @ 31.9% Fe
• Arthur River 29 Mt @ 42.8% Mg
• Main Creek 42.8 Mt @ 42.4% Mg

Cambrian gabbro-hosted deposits

Ultamafic complexes across much of cenral northern and western tasmania are the product of ancient oceanic crust that has been faulted and thrust. This crust now forms a disaggregated and folded sheet. Like ultramafic complexes elsewhere in the world, those in Tasmania host metals. In places these mineralised rocks have been intruded by granites which appear to have upgraded and/or introduced mineralisation.

• Nickel Reward (Cuni field) 0.03 Mt @ 3% Ni
• North Cuni–Genets Winze 0.95 Mt @ 0.76% Ni, 0.94% Cu

Cambrian deposits in the Mount Read Volcanics

The most important metallogenic event in Tasmania coincided with the deposition of the Mount Read Volcanics (MRV). Mineralisation was concentrated in a short time interval in the late Middle Cambrian. Major alteration zones are dominantly of quartz-sericite mineralogy.

The Henty Fault constitutes a fundamental tectonic divide within the MRV. To the northwest, polymetallic Zn-Pb-Au-Ag-Cu massive sulfide deposits dominate (Hellyer, Que River, Rosebery, Hercules) together with disseminated deposits with lower base metal, but relatively high Au and Ag tenor (Mount Charter, South Hercules). Southeast of the Henty Fault copper-gold and gold deposits dominate, exemplified by the Mount Lyell field and the Henty gold deposit. The most economically important deposits in the Mount Lyell field are disseminated chalcopyrite-pyrite orebodies in alteration assemblages dominated by quartz-sericite or quartz-chlorite-sericite.

Historically, most mineralisation within the MRV has been associated with sea floor volcanism (VHMS-style). This model has driven much of the exploration, with programs strongly biased toward locating strata-parallel mineralisation. More recent discovery of the fault-related henty gold deposit and a shift toward Mt Lyell being of a hybrid VHMS-porphyry style has opened new opportunities to reassess earlier results.

Paragon Resources Elliott Bay tenement in the southern MRV is another example of gold mineralisation that was originally unexplained using a VHMS model but has more recently been attributed to shear-zones. Shear-zone style of mineralisation is common to the WA goldfields where it is similarly associated with VHMS depsoits.

• Hellyer 16.5 Mt @ 13.9% Zn, 7.2% Pb, 0.38% Cu, 169 g/t Ag, 2.55 g/t Au
• Que River 3.3 Mt @ 13.3% Zn, 7.4% Pb, 0.7% Cu, 195 g/t Ag, 3.3 g/t Au
• Mount Charter 6.1 Mt @ 0.5% Zn, 25.5 g/t Ag, 1.22 g/t Au, 9.7% Ba
• Rosebery 34.03 Mt @ 13.8% Zn, 4.1% Pb, 0.57% Cu, 143 g/t Ag, 2.2 g/t Au
• Hercules 3.33 Mt @ 17.3% Zn, 5.5% Pb, 0.4% Cu, 171 g/t Ag, 2.8 g/t Au
• South Hercules 0.56 Mt @ 3.7% Zn, 1.9% Pb, 0.1% Cu, 157 g/t Ag, 3.0 g/t Au
• Henty–Mt Julia 2.83 Mt @ 12.5 g/t Au
• Tasman & Crown Lyell 0.138 Mt @ 10.0% Zn, 8.9% Pb, 0.54% Cu, 212 g/t Ag, 0.35 g/t Au
• Mount Lyell 311 Mt @ 0.97% Cu, 0.31 g/t Au
• Garfield 12 Mt @ 0.3% Cu

Ordovician carbonate-hosted deposits

• Oceana 2.6 Mt @ 7.7% Pb, 2.5% Zn, 55 g/t Ag
• Grieves Siding ~0.7 Mt @ 8% Zn (primary); 0.15 Mt @ 5% Zn (secondary)

Devonian orogenic gold deposits

Deformation-related , vein-style gold depsoits are common to NE Tasmania where they are hosted mainly by the Mathinna Supergroup turbidite rocks. These deposits are similar to those of Bendigo and Ballarat in Victoria, with host rocks in NE Tasmania similarly correlated with those in Victoria (most likely the Melbourne Zone). The largest Devonian age vein style depsoit is the Tasmania Reef at Beaconsfield. This is Australia’s largest single gold reef. For the most part, however, these Devonian vein-style depsoits tend to be small size, and varying (nuggety) grade.

• Beaconsfield 3.25 Mt @ 19.0 g/t Au
• New Golden Gate 0.51 Mt @ 15.6 g/t Au
• Pinafore Reef (Lefroy) 0.974 Mt @ 10.1 g/t Au

Devonian granite-related tin deposits

Grantie intrusion during the Devonian was widespread across Tasmania. Styles of mineralisation vary and reflect the variable and complex pre-intrusion geology.

Sulfide skarns

• Renison Bell 24.54 Mt @ 1.41% Sn
• Mount Bischoff 10.54 Mt @ 1.1% Sn
• Cleveland 12.4 Mt @ 0.61% Sn, 0.25% Cu
• Foley zone 3.8 Mt @ 0.28% WO3, 0.02% MoS₂, 0.05% Sn
• Razorback 0.34 Mt @ 0.9% Sn
•  Queen Hill 3.6 Mt @ 1.2% Sn

Silicate skarns

• St Dizier ~2.6 Mt @ 0.5% Sn, 0.05% WO3

Vein deposits

• Aberfoyle 2.1 Mt @ 0.91% Sn, 0.28% WO3
•  Pieman vein (East Renison) 0.43 Mt @ 1.0% Sn

Greisen deposits

• Anchor 2.39 Mt @ 0.28% Sn

Other Devonian granite-related deposits

Skarns

• King Island field 23.8 Mt @ 0.66% WO3
• Kara 5.2 Mt @ >30% Fe, by-product WO3
• Avebury 10.04 Mt @ 1.14% Ni
• Moina 18 Mt @ 26% CaF, 0.1% Sn, 0.1% WO3
• Hugo (Moina area) 0.25 Mt @ 5.5% Zn, 1 g/t Au, 0.1% Bi
• Stormont (Moina area) 0.135 Mt @ 3.44 g/t Au, 0.21% Bi

Vein deposits

• Storeys Creek 1.1 Mt @ 1.09% WO3, 0.18% Sn
• Magnet 0.63 Mt @ 7.3% Zn, 7.3% Pb, 427 g/t Ag
• Salmons Vein (East Renison) 0.83 Mt @ 3.2% Pb, 2.2% Zn, 104 g/t Ag, 0.19% Sn, 0.61% Cu
• New North Mount Farrell and North Mount Farrell 0.908 Mt @ 12.5% Pb, 2.5% Zn, 408 g/t Ag
• Lakeside 0.75 Mt @ 0.2% Sn, 0.2% Cu, 4.0% As, 2.1 g/t Au, 20 g/t Ag

The figures are estimates only based on historical information and are not JORC-compliant.

 (Source: MRT 2007)

Despite its small size, Tasmania has a remarkable geological diversity and abundance of mineral deposits. Rocks from every period of the Earth’s history from the Middle Proterozoic are present and there have been at least four major episodes of economic mineralisation.

Significant mineral deposits include Proterozoic iron ore, silica, dolomite and magnesite; Cambrian VHMS base metal-gold and ultramafic-related platinum group minerals (PGM) and chromite; Devonian slate-belt gold deposits; Devonian granite-related tin, tungsten, fluorite, magnetite, silver-lead-zinc and possibly nickel deposits; Triassic and Tertiary coal deposits; and Cainozoic alluvial gold, tin and PGMs, and residual iron oxide, silica and clay.

Simlified geology of Tasmania (source: modified from MRT 2007)

The mining feasibility study is a document which encapsulates all of the data relevant to the development of a mining project, including:

A review of the geology
JORC compliant Resources and Reserves
The ‘Mineability’ of the deposit
The mining schedule
The metallurgy of the deposit
Environmental impacts, waste management and rehabilitation
The process and plant required
Infrastructure and services
Management
Operations
Social impact
Taxes and royalties, including to indigenous peoples
Risks, including sovereign risk, technical risk, operational risk, etc.
Financial analysis

Is not often that you get to experience the two extremes of service I’ve experienced in the one day.

The good. Tasmanian Farm Equipment. I’ve been organising a ripper from Tasmanian Farm Equipment for some rehabilitation works. The sales person has been prompt in returning calls, knowledgable, and they even offered to deliver the goods on their way home after hours and at no charge to me. What a great service. Highly recommended! 10/10.

The bad. TNT Express. I wanted t know where to pick up a missed delivery. After being on hold for a lifetime, their automated consignment voice recognition software then failed to recognise the consignment number. Their online redelivery form similarly failed. I finally got through via phone to a real person (after yelling ‘help’ several times at the automated answering service that told me to say ‘help’ but obviously failed to recognise the word when it was said), only for that persons screen to lock, and subsequently their computer to crash. That’s not the end of it, but you get the idea …… I still don’t have my consignment……. 0/10!