Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Dumont Project Site & Pilot Plant Visit19 January 2011
www.royalnickel.com 1
Disclaimer
Cautionary Statements Concerning Forward-Looking Statements
This presentation contains “forward-looking information” which may include, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the future financial or operating performance
of the Company and its projects, the future price of metals, the estimation of mineral reserves and mineral resources, the conversion of mineral resource estimates to
mineral reserve estimates, the realization of mineral reserve and mineral resources estimates, the timing and amount of estimated future production, costs of production,
capital, operating and exploration expenditures, costs and timing of the development of new deposits, costs and timing of future exploration, requirements for additional
capital, government regulation of mining operations, environmental risks, reclamation expenses, title disputes or claims, limitations of insurance coverage and the timing
and possible outcomes of pending litigation and/or regulatory matters. Often, but not always, forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as
“plans”, “expects”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates”, or “does not anticipate” or “believes” or variations (including
negative variations) of such words and phrases, or state that certain actions, events or results “may”, “could”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved.
Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the
Company and/or its subsidiaries to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.
Such factors include, among others: the actual results of current exploration and development activities; project delays; funding needs; general business, economic,
competitive, political and social uncertainties; future prices of metals; availability of alternative nickel sources or substitutions; actual results of reclamation activities;
conclusions of economic evaluations; changes in project parameters as plans continue to be refined; the future cost of capital to the Company; possible variations of ore
grade or recovery rates; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry; political
instability, terrorism, insurrection or war; delays in obtaining governmental approvals, necessary permitting or in the completion of development or construction activities,
as well as those factors discussed in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in the prospectus of the Company dated December 9, 2010 (the "Prospectus") and available at
www.sedar.com. Such forward-looking statements are based on a number of material factors and assumptions identified in the Prospectus.
Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events or results to differ materially from those described in forward-
looking statements, there may be other factors that cause actions, events or results to differ from those anticipated, estimated or intended. Forward-looking statements
contained herein are made as of the date of this prospectus and the Company disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of
new information, future events or results or otherwise, except as required by applicable securities laws. There can be no assurance that forward-looking statements will
prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue
reliance on forward-looking statements.
Statement of Qualified Person
Preparation of this presentation has been supervised by Alger St. Jean, P.Geo., Vice-President, Exploration of Royal Nickel and a “Qualified Person” as defined in NI
43-101. For more information on the Dumont Nickel Project, please refer to Royal Nickel’s NI 43-101 compliant technical report “Preliminary Assessment of the Dumont
Property Launay and Trecesson Township, Quebec, Canada” dated as of September 30,2010 and available on Royal Nickel’s website and on SEDAR at
www.sedar.com.
www.royalnickel.com
Presentation Overview
• Location & Infrastructure
• Property
• Deposit Overview
• Development of Geometallurgical Modeling
• Pre-Feasibility Study Work to be Completed
• Community
2
www.royalnickel.com 3
Location –
One of World’s Best Mining Jurisdictions(1)
• Québec – a mining-friendly province
• Established mining district and proximity to local communities minimizes infrastructure costs
• Rail / road links facilitate access
• Grid power available at Quebec rate of C$0.05/kWh
• Well-defined permitting process
Malartic
Source: Technical Report
(1) According to the Fraser Institute’s Survey of Mining Companies 2009-2010 mid-year report
Dumont Nickel Project Location
www.royalnickel.com
Regional Rail Network
www.royalnickel.com
Regional Natural Gas Network
5
www.royalnickel.com
Local Situation
• Dumont
Project
located 25
km west of
Amos.
• Road, rail on
site.
• Power and
Natural gas
in Amos.
• Strong Local
Support
Villemontel
Royal Nickel
Dumont Project
AmosHWY 111
Municipal
Airport
HW
Y 1
09
HW
Y1
09
Launay
RNC Office
www.royalnickel.com
Dumont Mineral Rights
Residual Interests
Marbaw
3% NSR reducible to
1.5% for $10M
Sheridan-Ferderber &
Frigon
2% NSR reducible to
1% for $1M
Griffis & RNC
No residual interest
www.royalnickel.com 8
Large Resource – Large Option Value
Dumont Resource Estimate
Resources (k tonnes)
Grade(%)
Contained Metals
(mm lbs)
Contained Metals
(k tonnes)
Measured 155,680 0.29% 985 447
Indicated 1,003,487 0.27% 5,967 2,707
Measured + Indicated 1,159,167 0.27% 6,952 3,154
Inferred 581,405 0.25% 3,198 1,451
3.75km
1.2 km
Source: Technical Report
• Resource open at depth over entire strike length.
• Current drilling (4 holes) confirms extension of
mineralization below current resource extent.
www.royalnickel.com
Dumont Geology
Zoned / Layered Mafic-Ultramafic Intrusion
Ni Mineralization Hosted in Dunite
Orebody drilled at 100 X100 m centers with 50 X 50 m drilling locally proving continuity
Claim area provides space for mining & processing infrastructure.
www.royalnickel.com 10
Mineralogy Drives Low Strip & Bulk Mining
• Mineralization extending hundreds of metres in width
• Low strip ratio 1.24
• High tenor nickel minerals yield high grade concentrates
– Sulphide:Pentlandite (33% Ni), Heazlewoodite (73% Ni)
– Alloy: Awaruite (72% Ni)+Fe
• Detailed mineralogicaltesting to fully define ore characteristics
• Waste rock and tailings non-acid generating due to absence of pyrrhotite and pyrite
• Additional explorationpotential at depth
Dumont Cross Section 8100E: Surface 310m el
Source: Technical Report
>0.2%
outline
resource
Scoping
Study
Pit
Shell
Deposit
Remains
Open
at Depth
www.royalnickel.com
Dumont Ore Mineralogy
Core Photo
Qemscan Image
Mineral Mean Max Min Std dev
Serpentine* 89 % 95 58 6
Magnetite 4 % 16 0 3
Brucite 3 % 10 1 2
Olivine 2 % 32 0 6
Pentlandite 0.3 % 3.6 0 0.4
Heazlewoodite 0.1% 1.9 0 0.2
Awaruite 0.1% 0.6 0 0.1
Serpentinized Dunite
195 Qemscan (Explomin) Samples
* Includes chrysotile
Olivine
Histogram
www.royalnickel.com
• Geology and Deposit Modeling– Drilling : Resource Defintion (>90,000m), Geotechnical
– Surface Mapping, geophysics
– Structural Modeling
– Resource Estimation
– Geometallurgical modeling
• Metallurgical Process Development– Identification of critical metallurgical parameters
– Development of standard process flowsheet
– Domain Composite drilling & variability testing
– Sampling for Pilot Plant
• Mine Engineering– Preliminary Geotechnical Studies
» Rock Mechanics – Slope determination
» Overburden Characterization
» Hydrogeology
Work Supporting Scoping Study
www.royalnickel.com
• Environmental Baseline study.– Water, fauna, flora, archeology.
– No major issues
– Laying groundwork for environmental impact study.
• Preliminary Environmental geochemistry study– Acid Rock Drainage potential
– Leaching potential
– Tailings and Waste rock will be non acid-generating
– Simplifies tailings and waste management.
• Surface Rights acquisition– Purchase and options to purchase critical private surface rights
Exploration and Development Work
www.royalnickel.com
Exploration Data Collection
Drilling Logging
Sample PreparationSample Analysis
Secure
DATABASE
www.royalnickel.com
Geometallurgical Modeling
Key to predicting recovery in any given portion of the deposit is
knowing the nickel mineralogy (Nickel in Sulphide vs Awaruite vs
Silicates).
Use correlation between Mineralogy Data (restricted) and Assay
Data(distributed) to develop a predictive model for nickel mineralogy
over the entire deposit.
Function (ASSAY DATA) = MINERALOGY
Recovery equations derived from metallurgical variability testing
(Domain Composites) used to calculate recovery for each block.
Recovery is a function of mineralogy.
Recovery,TCs applied to each block to yield an NSR model.
www.royalnickel.com
Assay Data (in all drill holes)
Distributed
Dataset
51,974 samples
in 213 holes
Factor Analysis
Au Pt PdAg Al
As B Ba Be Bi
Ca Cd Co Cr
Cu Fe Ga Hg K
La Mg Mn Mo
Na Ni P Pb S
Sb Sc Sr Th Ti
Tl U V W Zn
SG MS
www.royalnickel.com
Mineralogical Data (Explomin)
Restricted Dataset
195 samples
(now 588)
Abundance of
Awaruite,
Pentlandite,
Heazlewoodite,
Magnetite,
Olivine, etc.
Establish
correlation
between factors
from assay data
and mineral
abundances.
Develop
Regression.
Geometallurgical Model (Mineralization Type – by mineral abundance)
Sulphide
Alloy
Mixed
Sulphide: (Pn+Hz)/AW>5.5
Mixed: (Pn+Hz)/AW in between 5.5 and 0.85
Alloy: (Pn+Hz)/AW<0.85
Fields in Model:
SG, NI, CU, CO, PT, PD, AU, AWA, PEN, HZL, MAG, SUL_AW
www.royalnickel.com
Metallurgical Data (Domain Variability Composites)
2008
32 tests from 5
holes
(70 from 9 holes
planned)
Used to develop
recovery
functions based
on mineral
abundances
predicted in
geomet model
Developed
independently
for
•Domain 4+5
•Domain 3
www.royalnickel.com
Domain Variability Composites
www.royalnickel.com
D3
D4D5
Recovery Model
www.royalnickel.com
NSR Model
www.royalnickel.com
Scoping Study
Layout at end of mine life (yr20)
www.royalnickel.com 24
Proposed PFS Work Program
• Resource Definition• Increase confidence of resource in pit-shell
• Add tonnage within pit-shell (convert waste to mill-feed)
• 46 holes; 17,500 metres;
• Collect comminution data
• Augment, Refine and Audit Geomet Model
• Geotechnical
– Rock Mechanics / Slope Stability• 10 holes; 5200metres;
– Overburden Characterization -Pit & Infrastructure• 64 sonic holes (27 monitored); 30 CPT
– Hydrogeology / Hydrology
• Environmental Geochemistry – Tailings and Waste Characterization• 90 samples across all rock types and entire deposit
• Begin in-situ characterization cells for waste & tailings
• Community Relations• Define Communications Strategy
• Begin formal consultation
www.royalnickel.com 25
Proposed PFS Work Program
Current Data Points
Existing Holes
Outcrop
Planned Data Points
Resource
Rock Mech.
Overburden
www.royalnickel.com 26
Proposed PFS Work Program
Current Data Points
Existing Holes
Outcrop
Planned Data Points
Resource
Rock Mech.
Overburden
www.royalnickel.com 27
Addressing Community Issues
Community relations
• Stakeholders matrix and risk analysis – social acceptance strategy. Working with TransfertEnvironnement.
• Discussing the basis of an eventual IBA (employment opportunities, job training, business opportunities) with Abitibiwinni First Nation (ongoing).
Environmental Geochemistry:
• Initiating Phase 2 of tailings and waste rock characterization program ABA, ARD, Leaching;
• Designing on-site experimental cells using Pilot Plant tailings to study:
– Neutral contaminated drainage potential
– Long term carbon sequestration (offsetting GHG footprint)
– Chrysotile management
Hydrogeology / Hydrology
• Geochemical characterization of groundwater (with UQAT);
• Modelling of the open pit impact on local water table (planning stage);
• Characterization of the Launay water-bearing esker and modelling of the potential impact of the Dumont infrastructure on the water quality/quantity (propose joint-venture with UQAT, planning stage).
www.royalnickel.com
Carbon Sequestration
• Mineral Carbonation
– A Spontaneous reaction between carbon dioxide (CO2) and silicate
rocks containing magnesium (serpentine) leading to the formation of
carbonate minerals that are geologically stable and harmless to the
environment (magnesite), thereby permitting the storage of CO2 in a
stable, inert and solid form.
+ Atmospheric
CO2 Serpentine Magnesite
Spontaneous mineral carbonation of Dumont tailings may offset the carbon footprint of
the Dumont mining and processing operations.
This rapid reaction also converts chrysotile to magnesite thereby reducing the risk of
airborne chrysotile.
www.royalnickel.com
Proposed Social Integration Strategy - PFS
29
www.royalnickel.com 30
Scoping/43-101
Pilot Plant Testing
Pre-Feasibility
Feasibility
Permitting
Long Lead Items
Construction
Commissioning & Ramp Up
Timeline
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
• The following milestones provide material additional information which further de-risks and increases the value of the project:
– Completion of 1st run pilot plant testing Q1 2011
– Completing of Pre-feasibility Study Q3 2011
– Feasibility study Mid 2012
Metallurgical Overview
January 19th, 2011
www.royalnickel.com
Presentation Overview
• Rougher Recovery Testing
• Miniplant Operation
• Optimization Opportunities
– Reagents
– Grind size
– Primary Grinding Circuit
• 2011 Prefeasibility Study Plan
www.royalnickel.com
Rougher Recovery Equations
• Rougher recovery basis for
scoping study was 32 lab
scale tests from 5 drill holes
• An additional 38 tests have
been completed (total 70)
• Results show that the
scoping study equations
continue to adequately
predict performance
• Equations are being
updated for the PFS to
include Ni in silicates and
other factors that effect
recovery
y = 0.9514xR² = 0.4981
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
30.0 35.0 40.0 45.0 50.0 55.0 60.0 65.0 70.0 75.0 80.0
Act
ual
Ro
ugh
er R
ecov
ery
Predicted Rougher Recovery
Predicted Recovery Vs. Actual for Additional Domain Samples
www.royalnickel.com
Miniplant Operation
• Miniplant circuit defibering, wet ball
milling, desliming, rougher flotation (40
min residence time), magnetic separation
• Goals
– Confirm STP laboratory rougher
results achieved in scoping study
• Done, analysis in progress
• Optimize flowsheet (in progress)
• Reagents, grind size
• Cleaning circuits
– Define concentrate grade/recovery
curve
– Provide engineering design criteria for
PFS
www.royalnickel.com
Grind Size Optimization
• Scoping Standard Test Procedure
– Initial grind 100 Mesh (150 microns)
– Secondary Grind 200 Mesh (74 microns)
• Current laboratory work is investigating the optimum grind size
– Testing 48 Mesh (297 microns) and 65 Mesh (210 microns)
• If results are positive, potential for:
– operating savings from energy reduction
– reduction in sliming and viscosity issues
www.royalnickel.com
Reagent Optimization
• In the scoping study, reagent cost was 70% of the consumables
operating budget and 50% of the total mill budget
• The largest single cost to the mill opex is CMC which acts as a
dispersant and MgO depressant at a cost of $US1.78/tonne
• Preliminary results show that a significant reduction in this use may
be possible with a slightly coarser grind
• In addition, other reagents are being tested that may provide
metallurgical benefit
www.royalnickel.com
Grinding Circuit Optimization
• The scoping study used a 2 step wet & dry crushing process using
Vertical Shaft impact crushers for fine crushing to allow dry size
reduction and fiber removal
• PFS is looking at utilizing either a dry or wet SAG options in a single
crushing stage
– Potential for significant capex, opex, and sustaining capex
reductions
• Ausenco Minerals and Metals has been awarded an engineering
contract to assess the various primary comminution alternatives
– This study will provide capital and operating costs for each
option along with an analysis of technical risk
• The results from this study will be used to choose the best
comminution circuit for the PFS concentrator design.
www.royalnickel.com
2011 Work Plan
• Identify flowsheet and reagent regime
– Primary grind circuit
– Primary grind size, desliming/defibering, fines recovery, cleaning circuits and regrind
– Reagent optimization
• Establish recovery figures and concentrate quality with higher degree of confidence
– Pilot plant
• Study variability of metallurgical performance across orebody
– Additional STP testing, grindability tests
• Establish preliminary concentrator design factors
– Lab
– Pilot plant
• Complete PFS concentrator design
