Chesapeake Gold Corp. (TSX VENTURE: CKG) ("Chesapeake") is pleased
to announce the results of an updated Preliminary Economic
Assessment ("PEA") on its large 100% owned Metates gold-silver
project located in Durango State, Mexico. The updated NI 43-101
compliant PEA provides new information, operating and costing
estimates as compared to the original PEA filed June 4, 2010 on
SEDAR. The original PEA and the update were prepared by M3
Engineering & Technology of Tucson, Arizona ("M3") with input
from other prominent industry consultants. All costs are in US
Dollars.
Updated PEA Key Findings
-- An increase in the processing rate to 120,000 tonnes per day ("tpd) from
90,000 tpd indicates markedly improved economics and will be the process
rate used in the pre-feasibility study
-- At 120,000 tpd, the average annual production during the first full four
years of operations is 873,000 ounces gold, 33 million ounces silver
(1,533,000 ounces gold equivalent) and 122 million pounds zinc with an
average gold equivalent cash cost of $308 per ounce
-- Over a 20 year mine life ("LOM"), the average annual production is
744,000 ounces gold, 19.4 million ounces silver (1,131,000 ounces gold
equivalent) and 102 million pounds zinc making it one of the largest
gold and silver mines in the world, with an average LOM gold equivalent
cash cost of $436 per ounce
-- An average net cash flow of $905 million in operating years 2-5. Total
LOM net cash flow of $10.4 billion
-- An estimated initial capital cost of $3.16 billion including $725
million in contingency and owner's costs reflecting capital reduction by
outsourcing the dedicated electric power and oxygen plants
-- Unleveraged pre-tax internal rate of return ("IRR") of 16.7%, a payback
period of 4.1 years, and a net present value ("NPV") of $2.88 billion at
a 5% discount rate using base case metal prices of $900 per ounce gold,
$18.00 per ounce silver and $1.00 per pound zinc
Resource Base
The updated PEA uses the same NI 43-101 compliant in-pit mineral
resource estimate as the 2010 study. The resource estimation was
performed by Independent Mining Consultants of Tucson, Arizona
("IMC") at a gold price of US $900 per ounce and a cut off grade of
0.40 g/t gold equivalent and is presented in the following
table:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resource Throughput Gold Silver Gold Eq. (1) Zinc
Class (K tonnes) (g/t) (g/t) (g/t) (%)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured 216,199 0.67 16.5 0.92 0.19
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contained 114,704,000 900,590
Metal 4,658,000 oz oz 6,416,000 oz (Klbs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indicated 729,938 0.54 15.2 0.78 0.16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contained 351,857,000 2,491,187
Metal 12,524,000 oz oz 17,941,000 oz (Klbs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Measured +
Indicated 936,137 0.57 15.5 0.81 0.16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contained 466,571,000 3,391,777
Metal 17,182,000 oz oz 24,357,000 oz (Klbs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inferred 135,315 0.60 14.3 0.82 0.12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contained 357,881
Metal 2,611,000 oz 62,219,000 oz 3,572,000 oz (Klbs)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Gold Equivalent equals Gold plus Silver/65; assumes 85% metal recoveries
Mining Schedule
IMC prepared a mine schedule based on the production rate of
120,000 tpd which results in a 20 year mine life. The mine schedule
includes Inferred mineral resources which are considered to be too
speculative geologically to have economic considerations applied
that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. There
is no certainty that all or any part of the mineral resources will
be converted into mineral reserves. The PEA is an estimate of the
economic viability of the project and there is no certainty that
the results projected will be realized and actual results may vary
substantially. The mine schedule is based on an average gold price
of US$825 per ounce but employs a variable gold equivalent cut off
grade ranging from 0.68 g/t to 0.43 g/t depending on the mining
year to balance mine production capacity with the process plant
capacity and optimize the grades and strip ratio in the early years
of production. The table below provides a summary of the mineral
resources and schedule used in the updated PEA, and illustrates the
higher grades and lower strip ratio achieved early in the mine
life:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Years 2-5 Life of Mine
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Processed Tonnes (1) 175 million 821 million
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold (g/tonne) 0.73 0.65
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silver (g/tonne) 27.7 17.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Equivalent
(g/tonne) (2) 1.16 0.91
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zinc (%) 0.24 0.16
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strip Ratio 1.00 1.85
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Material processed does not meet NI 43-101 requirements for reserves
(2) Gold Equivalent equals Gold plus Silver/65
Development Overview
The updated PEA is based on the same basic mining method and
processing flow sheet as utilized in the original study except
scaled up to the larger mining and processing rate. The processing
plant includes a conventional crushing, grinding and flotation
circuit which utilizes high pressure grinding to feed a sulphide
rougher flotation concentration plant. The sulphide concentrate is
transported downhill via a slurry pipeline to an area referred to
as the Ranchito (formerly Comedero) site which is located about 70
kilometers southwest of the Metates mine site. The Ranchito site is
located near a large limestone resource and close to excellent
infrastructure including available power, water and labour.
At Ranchito the concentrate is treated via pressure oxidation
with subsequent cyandiation and Merrill-Crowe recovery of gold and
silver dore. High purity oxygen to feed the pressure oxidation
plant will be manufactured on site in a dedicated plant. Acidic
solutions from the pressure oxidation will be treated with
limestone and lime produced on-site. Zinc will be recovered from
the pressure oxidation solutions via sulphide precipitation to make
a concentrate which is then shipped to a smelter for final
processing. Electrical power is to be supplied from a dedicated
coal fired power plant which is to be located at the port of
Topolobampo. Overall gold and silver recoveries through dore
production are estimated at 84.7%. Overall zinc recovery is
estimated at 85%.
Comparison of Production Rates, Capital Costs, Metal Prices and
Financial Valuation
The larger 120,000 tpd production rate requires a higher initial
capital cost but results in higher annualized metal production and
lower unit operating costs in most areas while keeping intact the
same operating conditions and metal recovery and pricing estimates
from the earlier PEA. In the table below, the PEA Base Case refers
to the 90,000 tpd production basis used in the 2010 study. The
updated PEA Case 1 is the larger 120,000 tpd production rate
relating to out-sourcing the dedicated 300 MW power plant and the
oxygen plant with a combined initial capital cost of approximately
$1.04 billion. In this case the lower CAPEX trade-off resulted in a
higher cost of power from $0.051 per kwh to $0.079 per kwh and the
cost of oxygen from $2.24 to $4.50 per tonne of material. The
increased oxygen cost also reflects a higher estimated oxygen
demand from the scaled up operation. Out-sourcing these large
capital items results in improved overall economic metrics of the
project except for a measured increase in cash costs per ounce.
The updated PEA Case 2 is the same as Case 1 but uses metal
price assumptions of $900 per ounce gold, $18.00 per ounce silver
and $1.00 per pound zinc. As shown in the table below, Case 2
further improves the project economics relative to the other
cases:
PEA PEA Updated PEA
Base Case Case 1 Case 2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Production Rate (ktonnes/day) 90 120 120
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Mine Life (yrs) 27 20 20
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metal Price Assumptions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold ($/oz.) 900 900 900
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silver ($/oz.) 14 14 18
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zinc ($/lb.) 1.00 1.00 1.00
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Annual Production
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold (oz.) 547,000 744,000 744,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silver (oz.) (000) 14,500 19,400 19,400
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gold Equivalent (oz.) 770,000 1,045,000 1,131,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Zinc (million lbs.) 95 102 102
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOM Revenue ($000) $20,805,000 $20,486,000 $22,031,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average Annual Net Cash Flow
($000) Pre-Tax $408,600 $440,600 $519,200
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOM Total Net Cash Flow ($000)
Pre-Tax $11,032,000 $8,812,000 $10,384,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Initial Capital ($000) $3,196,000 $3,157,000 $3,157,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sustaining Capital ($000) $624,000 $566,000 $566,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
LOM Operating Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mining Cost ($/tonne mined)
/($/tonne throughput) $0.88/$2.42 $0.91/$2.60 $0.91/$2.60
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Process Plants Operating Cost
($/tonne throughput) $7.55 $9.97 $9.97
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Administration ($/tonne
throughput) $0.41 $0.31 $0.31
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other ($/tonne throughput) $0.21 $0.19 $0.19
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Operating Cost ($/ tonne
throughput) $10.59 $13.07 $13.07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cash Cost/ Gold Equivalent oz.
(Zn By-Product Basis) $366 $473 $436
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Tax Economic Indicators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPV @ 5% ($000) $2,500,000 $1,971,000 $2,885,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRR (%) 13.0% 13.3% 16.7%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payback (yrs) 5.7 5.0 4.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
After-Tax Economic Indicators
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
NPV @ 5% ($000) $1,569,494 $1,190,000 $1,845,000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
IRR (%) 10.5% 10.3% 12.9%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Payback (yrs) 6.7 6.2 5.1
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The initial capital cost estimates for the 120,000 tpd cases
have generally been factored from the earlier study at the 90,000
tpd process rate unless otherwise noted. For Case 2, the initial
capital costs include a total of $611 million for contingency along
with $114 million for owner's costs. Sustaining capital amounts to
$566 million. Going forward, Case 2 employs the production rate,
capital cost and metal price assumptions that may updated as
developments occur towards completing a pre-feasibility study
("PFS").
Pre-Feasibility And Opportunities
Chesapeake, M3 and other prominent industry consultants expect
to complete a PFS of the Metates project by the end of the year.
Management believes ongoing extensive testwork and evaluating
certain feasibility trade-off options will further improve the
overall capital and operating costs. Since the completion of the
2010 PEA the following testing or investigations have been
undertaken or are planned.
-- SGS Lakefield has performed a number of flotation tests as well as MFT
and FLEET simulations to better define flotation plant design and
operating conditions.
-- RDI has completed an extensive series of flotation tests evaluating a
wide range of gold and silver grades and host rock types which confirmed
that a coarse grind (200 microns) is optimal for metal recoveries to a
flotation concentrate.
-- Sherritt Technologies has broadly confirmed past pressure oxidation
testing and operating assumptions and will undertake a pilot plant scale
pressure oxidation circuit on the bulk rougher flotation concentrate.
Sherritt will also be responsible for generating the design and capital
and operating cost estimates of the pressure oxidation circuit for the
PFS.
-- Evaluation of the integrated waste disposal options (waste rock and
tailings) at the Metates site to reduce the area impacted and address
potential acid rock drainage issues.
-- Geotechnical investigations (geophysics, trenching, drilling) to
evaluate site specific foundation conditions for the production
facilities (crushing, flotation, tailings, pressure oxidation, leach
tanks, etc.).
-- Expanded baseline environmental and socioeconomic assessments.
-- Continued evaluation of electric power supply options including
discussions with independent power providers operating in Mexico in
regards to long term power supply costs.
-- Discussions with third party oxygen plant providers to determine long
term oxygen supply costs.
-- Evaluation of a shorter alternate road and concentrate pipeline
alignment. The current alignment is about 140 km in length while
alignments under study are about 100 km which could result in
significant capital savings.
-- Evaluating solvent extraction/electrowinning as an alternate zinc
recovery option which would result in the recovery of saleable zinc
metal on site and eliminate processing by a smelter which could result
in a substantial increase in revenue from zinc sales.
2011 Drilling Program
Chesapeake has commenced a 26,000 meter (21,000 meters core,
5,000 meters rotary) drill program at Metates. Currently two core
rigs and one rotary rig are on-site to test and provide the
following into the PFS:
-- Conversion of Inferred resources into the Indicated category to allow
for possible inclusion into the economic model for the PFS
-- Assign metal grades to assumed waste blocks within the PEA open pit
resource which may result in a lower overall strip ratio
-- Drill geotechnical holes targeting specific sectors of the open pit to
allow better definition of recommended pit slope angles
-- Significantly expand the current resource by drilling a series of step
out holes at 100 meters spacing along trend to the northwest and
southeast
-- Complete condemnation drill holes in areas of the proposed waste rock
dump and other site facilities in the Metates area
Drilling activities will be prioritized around the resource
conversion and geotechnical holes so that the results of this work
are available in three to four months to allow for the completion
of the PFS by the end of this year.
Chesapeake currently has 39.8 million shares outstanding (47.5
million fully diluted) and $27 million in cash and liquid
investments.
Mr. Gary Parkison, CPG, Metates Project Manager and a Qualified
Person as defined by NI 43-101 supervised the preparation of the
technical information in this release. Mr. Doug Austin P E , Senior
Vice President with M3 and Mr. Michael Hester F AUS IMM, Vice
President of IMC have also reviewed and approved the data in this
news release.
For more information on Chesapeake and its Metates Project,
please visit our website at www.chesapeakegold.com.
CHESAPEAKE GOLD CORP
P. Randy Reifel, President
CAUTIONARY DISCLAIMER - FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
This news release contains "forward-looking information" within
the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Such
forward-looking statements and information herein include, but are
not limited to, statements regarding prospective gold, silver and
zinc production, timing and expenditures to develop the Metates
property, gold, silver and zinc grades and recoveries, cash costs
per ounce, capital and operating expenditures and sustaining
capital and the ability to fund mine development at Metates. The
Company does not intend to, and does not assume any obligation to
update such forward-looking statements or information, other than
as required by applicable law.
Forward-looking statements or information involve known and
unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the
actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements of
Chesapeake and its operations to be materially different from those
expressed or implied by such statements. Such factors include,
among others: ability to finance mine development, fluctuations in
the prices of gold, silver and zinc, fluctuations in the currency
markets (particularly the Mexican peso, Canadian dollar and U.S.
dollar); changes in national and local governments, legislation,
taxation, controls, regulations and political or economic
developments in Canada and Mexico; operating or technical
difficulties in mineral exploration, development and mining
activities; risks and hazards of mineral exploration, development
and mining (including environmental hazards, industrial accidents,
unusual or unexpected geological conditions, pressures, cave-ins
and flooding); inadequate insurance, or inability to obtain
insurance; availability of and costs associated with mining inputs
and labour; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and
development, diminishing quantities or grades of mineral reserves
as properties are mined; risks in obtaining necessary licenses and
permits, and challenges to the Company's title to properties; as
well as those factors described in the section "risk factors"
contained in the Company's most recent MD&A filed with the
Canadian securities regulatory authorities. Although the Company
has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual
results to differ materially from those contained in
forward-looking statements or information, there may be other
factors that cause results to be materially different from those
anticipated, described, estimated, assessed or intended. There can
be no assurance that any forward-looking statements or information
will prove to be accurate as actual results and future events could
differ materially from those anticipated in such statements or
information. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance
on forward-looking statements or information.
The TSX Venture Exchange does not accept responsibility for the
adequacy or accuracy of this news release.
Contacts: Chesapeake Gold Corp. Investor Relations 604-731-1094
www.chesapeakegold.com
Chesapeake Gold (TSXV:CKG)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 5월(5) 2024 으로 6월(6) 2024
Chesapeake Gold (TSXV:CKG)
과거 데이터 주식 차트
부터 6월(6) 2023 으로 6월(6) 2024
