Agoracom Blog Home

Posts Tagged ‘clean energy’

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

New Age Metals $NAM.ca Positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the River Valley #PGM Project in Sudbury $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 11:31 AM on Thursday, June 27th, 2019
New age large
  • Life of mine (LOM) of 14 years, with 6 million tonnes annually of potential process plant feed at an average grade of 0.88 g/t Palladium Equivalent (PdEq) and process recovery rate of 80%, resulting in an annual average payable Pd production of 119,000 ounces
  • Pre-Production capital requirements: $495 M
  • Undiscounted cash flow before income and mining taxes of $586M
  • Undiscounted cash flow after income and mining taxes of $384M

June 27th, 2019 – Rockport, Canada – New Age Metals Inc. (NAM) (TSX.V: NAM; OTCQB: NMTLF; FSE: P7J.F) Harry Barr, Chairman & CEO, stated; “We are pleased to update our shareholders and interested parties as to the results of the initial Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) for the company’s 100% owned River Valley PGM Project in Sudbury, Ontario Canada. The PEA has been developed by various independent consultants – P&E Mining Consultants Inc. (P&E) was responsible for the open pit mining, surface infrastructure, tailings facility, and project economics; DRA Americas Inc. (“DRA”) was responsible for all metallurgical test work and processing aspects of the Project; and WSP Canada Inc. (“WSP”) was responsible for the Mineral Resource Estimate. The PEA demonstrates positive economics for a large-scale mining open pit operation, with 14 years of Palladium and Platinum production.”

Go-Forward Plan: In order to enhance the Project, the PEA has outlined a phased work approach to completing a Pre-Feasibility study. This includes advanced metallurgical testing to improve / confirm process recoveries and more accurately estimate concentrate grades, geotechnical logging of drill core, with new geotechnical holes to create a 3D geomechanical block model and estimate pit wall angles, hydrogeological studies that will estimate water inflows to the open pits and generate a site water and management plan. The Pre-Feasibility study will update the Project study to a higher level of precision.

NAM plans to continue to improve the River Valley Project’s value proposition by drill testing geophysical anomalies found during the 2018 geophysics campaign, continuing the geophysical program throughout the 16 kilometres of the contact mineralization adding significant potential to find new deposits, drilling near the defined open pit shells to increase the mine life, drilling deeper to test the open-ended Deposit at depth, and re-assaying existing drill core for Rhodium in order that Rhodium may be added to the Project’s metal suite.

Technical Report: For readers to fully understand the information in this news release, they should read the PEA Technical Report in its entirety which the Company expects to file in accordance with NI 43-101 within 45 days from the date of this news release on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and it will also be available at that time on the New Age Metals website, including all qualifications, assumptions and exclusions that relate to the PEA. The Technical Report is intended to be read in its entirety, and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context.

PEA Highlights (CDN$ unless otherwise noted):

  • – Life of mine (LOM) of 14 years, with 6 million tonnes annually of potential process plant feed at an average grade of 0.88 g/t Palladium Equivalent (PdEq) and process recovery rate of 80%, resulting in an annual average payable Pd production of 119,000 ounces
  • – Pre-Production capital requirements: $495 M
  • – Undiscounted cash flow before income and mining taxes of $586M
  • – Undiscounted cash flow after income and mining taxes of $384M
  • – Average unit operating cost of $19.50/tonne over the life-of-mine
  • – LOM average operating cash cost of $971 per ounce (US$709/oz) and all-in sustaining cash cost of $972 per ounce (US$709/oz) at a 1.37 CDN: USD exchange rate.
  • – A mining contractor will be engaged for the open pit mining
  • – Pre-tax NPV (5%): $262M, After-tax NPV (5%): $139 M
  • – Pre-tax IRR: 13%, After-tax IRR: 10%
  • – Assumed metal prices of US$1,200/oz Pd, US$1,050/oz Pt, US$1,350/oz Au, US$3.25/lb Cu, US$8.00/lb Ni, US$35/lb Co
  • – Using a + 20% Pd price sensitivity (to the base case of US$1,200/oz Pd) US$1,440 /oz Pd returns a pre-tax IRR of 19% and an after tax-IRR of 15%. Palladium price as of June 25, 2019 is US$1,510/oz Pd, which would return a pre-tax IRR of 21% and an after-tax IRR of 16%.
  • – River Valley process plant feed will be treated by a conventional sulphide flotation process plant to produce a single saleable PGM concentrate that will be transported to the Sudbury area for smelting/refining
  • – Potential for up to 325 jobs at the peak of production

PEA Summary

The PEA parameters are summarized in Table 1.

(*) Cautionary statement NI 43-101: The PEA was prepared in accordance with National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”). Readers are cautioned that the PEA is preliminary in nature. It includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves, and there is no certainty that the PEA will be realized. Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have demonstrated economic viability. All currency is stated as CDN$ unless stated otherwise.

Table 1: PEA Summary Parameters

Assumptions
Palladium Price (Base case) US$/oz 1,200
Exchange Rate US$:CDN$ 1.37
Production Profile
Total Tonnes Processed 78,100,000
Process Plant Head Grade PdEq g/t 0.88
Mine Life (years) 14
Daily process plant throughput (tpd) 16,440
Palladium Process Plant Recovery 80%
Total Payable Palladium Equivalent Ounces 1,600,000
Average annual Palladium Production Ounces 119,000
Operating Costs
Unit Operating Costs (per tonne processed) 19.50
Mining Costs 10.20
Processing Costs 8.44
G&A 0.90
LOM Average Cash Cost US$/oz 709
Capital Requirements
Pre-Production Capital Cost $495.1 M
Sustaining Capital Cost (Life of Mine) Including Salvage $1.0 M
Project Economics
Royalties 3% (Buy down to 1.5% with $1,500,000 payment)
Royalty Payable After $1.5M Payment $39.7 M
Taxes $202.3 M
Pre-Tax
NPV (5% Discount Rate) $262 M
IRR 13%
Payback (years) 6.6
Cumulative Undiscounted Cash Flows $586 M
After-Tax
NPV (5% Discount Rate) $139 M
IRR 10%
Payback (years) 7.0
Cumulative Undiscounted Cash Flows $384 M

Operating Cost

Table 2: Operating Cost Summary.

OPERATING COST   LOM ($/t)
Mining Cost $/t material 2.28
Mining Cost $/t feed 10.20
Processing Cost $/t feed 8.44
G&A $/t feed 0.90
Unit Operating $/t feed 19.50

Capital Cost

Table 3: Capital Cost Summary

Development Capital Initial (Y-2, Y-1) ($ M) Sustaining ($’ M) Total LOM ($’ M)
Mine Pre-Stripping 17.3   17.3
Process Plant Incl. Indirects 401.3   401.3
TMF 8.0   8.0
Mine Site Infrastructure 10.0   10.0
Office, Warehouse, Shops 10.0   10.0
Owner Cost 5.0   5.0
10% Contingency 43.4   43.4
Initial Project Capital 495.1   495.1
Sustaining Capital    
Closure Bond   26.0 26.0
Salvage Value   -25.0 -25.0
Total Sustaining Capital   1.0 1.0
Total Capital 495.1 1.0 496.1

Project Economics and Sensitivities

The economic results of the PEA are summarized in Table 4 on an after-tax basis. The sensitivities and the impact of cash flows have been calculated for +/- 20% variations against the base case.

Table 4: Project Economics Sensitivity.

Project Sensitivity Analysis         
Pd Price Sensitivity          
% -20% -15% -10% -5% Base Case +5% +10% +15% +20% Spot
US$/oz 960 1,020 1,080 1,140 1,200 1,260 1,320 1,380 1,440 1,510
NPV (CDN$ M) -23 16 59 98 139 179 220 260 300 347
IRR (%) 4 6 7 8 10 11 12 13 15 16
OPEX Sensitivity          
% -20% -15% -10% -5% Base Case +5% +10% +15% +20%  
Cost Per Tonne 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23  
NPV (CDN$ M) 212 194 175 157 139 120 102 83 68  
IRR (%) 14 12 11 10 10 9 8 7 7  
CAPEX Sensitivity          
% -20% -15% -10% -5% Base Case +5% +10% +15% +20%  
CAPEX (CDN$ M) 397 422 446 471 496 521 546 570 595  
NPV (CDN$ M) 284 248 212 175 139 102 64 28 -6  
IRR (%) 14 13 12 11 10 8 7 6 5  

River Valley Project Site Plan

See the image below that shows a site plan from the River Valley PEA. The map shows all of the 14 open pits that have been used in the engineering design of the Project as well as the proposed process plant site, low-grade stockpile, waste rock storage facilities, tailings storage facility and site infrastructure.


Click Image To View Full Size

Mineral Resource

The pit constrained Mineral Resource Estimate which formed the basis of the PEA, is set out in Table 5 and was prepared by WSP under the supervision of Todd McCracken, P. Geo., an “Independent Qualified Person”, as defined in NI 43-101. The effective date of this Mineral Resource Estimate is January 9, 2019. The Mineral Resource database contains 710 boreholes with 106,554 assays records in the database, and 2,642 surface channel samplings. The Mineral Resource Estimate update was completed on the Dana North, Dana South, Pine, Banshee, Lismer, Lismer Extension, Varley, Azen, Razor, and River Valley Extension Zones, using the ordinary kriging (OK) methodology on a capped and composited borehole dataset consistent with industry standards. Validation of the results was conducted thought the use of visual inspection, swath plots and global statistical comparison of the model against inverse distance squared (ID2) and nearest neighbour (NN) models.

Table 5: Pit Constrained Mineral Resource Estimate for River Valley PGM Project – Effective January 9, 2019.


Click Image To View Full Size

Class PGM + Au (oz) PdEq (oz) PtEq (oz)
Measured 1,394,000 1,701,000 1,701,000
Indicated 983,000 1,166,000 1,166,000
Meas +Ind 2,377,000 2,867,000 2,867,000
Inferred 841,000 1,059,000 1,059,000

Notes:

  1. 1.CIM definition standards were followed for the Mineral Resource Estimate.
  2. 2.The 2018 Mineral Resource models used Ordinary Kriging grade estimation within a three-dimensional block model with mineralized zones defined by wireframed solids.
  3. 3.A base cut-off grade of 0.35 g/t PdEq was used for reporting Mineral Resources in a constrained pit and 2.00 g/t PdEq was used for reporting the Mineral Resources under the pit.
  4. 4.Palladium Equivalent (PdEq) calculated using (US$): $950/oz Pd, $950/oz Pt, $1,275/oz Au, $1,500/oz Rh, $2.75/lb Cu, $5.25/lb Ni, $36/lb Co.
  5. 5.Numbers may not add exactly due to rounding.
  6. 6.Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have economic viability

7. The Inferred Mineral Resource in this estimate has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the Inferred Mineral Resource could be upgraded to an Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration.

Mining and Processing

The PEA is preliminary in nature, and includes Inferred Mineral Resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as Mineral Reserves. There is no certainty that the Preliminary Economic Assessment will be realized.

The River Valley Project is expected to be mined by a contractor. Initial mining will occur at the northwest end of the Deposit, close to the proposed process plant site. A series of 14 open pits will be mined, and will progress in a southeasterly direction. Pit numbers 1 to 4 contain the bulk of the mineralized process plant feed.

Annual process plant feed of up to 6 Mtpy (0.5 Mtpm) is planned, at an average strip ratio of 3.6:1 over the life-of-mine. It is anticipated that a fleet of 221 t haul trucks, 29 m3 excavators and 254 mm diameter hole rotary drills will be utilized, following industry standard conventional open pit mining techniques.

The process plant is designed to produce a single saleable PGM concentrate using conventional sulphide flotation techniques. The concentrate will be trucked to a smelter/refinery in the Sudbury area.

The Run-Of-Mine (ROM) feed from the mine will be crushed in a single primary jaw crushing stage prior to the grinding circuit. The crusher discharge will be conveyed to a live stockpile, which will provide an operating buffer between the crushing and grinding circuits.

The grinding circuit will consist of a SAG mill in closed circuit with a pebble crusher and two ball mills in parallel.

The process plant design considers three stages of cleaner flotation and is designed to process 21,920 tpd (6.0 Mtpy) of ROM feed.

The flotation circuit configuration and design are based on the locked cycle tests conducted by SGS Canada in 2013.

Concentrate and tailings products will be dewatered using high-rate thickeners and the concentrate will be further dewatered by conventional plate and frame vacuum filtration.

Process water will be recovered from the concentrate and tailings thickener overflow. Raw water is assumed to be sourced from the local environment and will be used as makeup water. It is assumed that 10% of the raw water requirement will be recycled from the tailings pond.

Conventional tailings deposition techniques will be utilized.

A 230 kV transmission line is located passing through the village of Warren, approximately 22 km from the Project. A 115 kV transmission line passes through the village of Field, located approximately 15 km to the east of the Project. It is assumed that electrical power will be provided by the local utility via either of these overland power lines. Diesel generators will be used to supply emergency power.

Project Enhancement Opportunities

The PEA demonstrates that River Valley has the potential to be economically viable. The PEA also outlines several opportunities to enhance Project value. Additional opportunities include:

Area of Focus Opportunities to Explore Management Target
Geotechnical study – Geotechnical logging of drill core, with new geotechnical holes to create a 3D geomechanical block model and estimate pit wall slope angles – Estimate pit wall slopes
Hydrogeological study – Estimate water in-flows to the open pits and generate a site water management plan – Site water management plan
Increase the Project Mineral Resource base – Additional drilling in the footwall to expand the Mineral Resource. After the ground proofing and surface exploration program conducted in Summer 2018 which followed up on the most recent induced polarization geophysical survey by Abitibi, NAM management has designed a 3-phase 5,000 metre drill program to test the new geophysical anomalies. See the map figure below which shows these new geophysical anomalies and potential targets for the next stage of drilling at River Valley superimposed over the upper 4 kilometres of the project map.
Click Image To View Full Size – Drilling near the defined open pit shells to increase the mine life. – Drilling deeper to test the open-ended deposit at depth. Average drill hole depth is 220 metres below surface. 		– Increase tonnes, grade and mine life of Project – Continue to drill recent footwall discoveries – Add additional Mineral Resources to the Project.
Mineral Resource – In-fill drilling to convert Inferred Mineral Resources to Indicated Mineral Resources – Improve Mineral Resource classification
Mineral Resource – Step-out drilling to increase the Mineral Resource Estimate – Increase the size of the Mineral Resource Estimate
Metallurgical testing – Advanced metallurgical testing to confirm or potentially improve process recoveries and more accurately estimate concentrate grades produced – Achieve a process recovery equal or greater than 80%.
Geophysical surveys – Continue with induced polarization geophysical surveys over the 12.5 kilometres of the contact / footwall that has not been surveyed in the 2017 and 2018 programs conducted on the Project. This work can be carried out in phases as funding is available or until the contact / footwall is covered, see the map figure below that shows a proposed scenario for how to phase the work.
Click Image To View Full Size 		– Outline new targets highlighting new potential footwall discoveries over the entire Project
Advanced sampling for Rhodium – Re-assaying existing core for Rhodium. Rhodium has been identified, however, insufficient assaying in the past has not allowed for Rhodium’s inclusion in the Mineral Resource Estimate. – Quantify the amount of Rhodium in the Project and add this to the existing Mineral Resource Estimate
Pre-Feasibility study – Updated Mineral Resource Estimate, optimize the mine plan, process plant design, and Project economics. Address environmental aspects. – Update the Project study to a higher level of precision

Qualified Persons and NI 43-101 Disclosure

The PEA was prepared under the supervision of Eugene Puritch, P.Eng. of P&E Mining Consultants Inc. The Mineral Resource Estimate was prepared by Todd McCracken, P.Geo. of WSP Canada Inc. Metallurgical testwork and process plant design and cost estimates were prepared by Jim Kambossos, P. Eng. of DRA Americas Inc. All three are independent Qualified Persons in accordance with NI 43-101. Mr. Puritch has reviewed and approved the technical information in this release. Michael Neumann, P.Eng. Managing Director for NAM is the company Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101 and has reviewed and approved the technical content of this news release.

On behalf of the Board of Directors

“Harry Barr”

Harry G. Barr, Chairman and CEO

For further information on New Age Metals, please contact Harry Barr and/or Anthony Ghitter, Business Development at 613-659-2773, or [email protected]

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements: This release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. These statements may differ materially from actual future events or results and are based on current expectations or beliefs. For this purpose, statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements include statements in which the Company uses words such as “continue”, “efforts”, “expect”, “believe”, “anticipate”, “confident”, “intend”, “strategy”, “plan”, “will”, “estimate”, “project”, “goal”, “target”, “prospects”, “optimistic” or similar expressions. These statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially depending on a variety of important factors, including, among others, the Company’s ability and continuation of efforts to timely and completely make available adequate current public information, additional or different regulatory and legal requirements and restrictions that may be imposed, and other factors as may be discussed in the documents filed by the Company on SEDAR (www.sedar.com), including the most recent reports that identify important risk factors that could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation to review or confirm analysts’ expectations or estimates or to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. Investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Featured, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals $NAM.ca Positive Preliminary Economic Assessment for the River Valley #PGM Project in Sudbury $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca

New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – China’s breaking up the #EV #battery monopoly it carefully created $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 10:52 AM on Tuesday, June 25th, 2019

SPONSOR: New Age Metals Inc. The company’s Lithium Division has already made significant acquisitions in Canada and the USA. The company also owns one of North America’s largest primary platinum group metals deposit in Sudbury, Canada. Updated NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate 2,867,000 PdEq Measured and Indicated Ounces, with an additional 1,059,000 PdEq Ounces in the Inferred. Learn More.

NAM: TSX-V

———————

China’s breaking up the EV battery monopoly it carefully created

By Echo Huang

As China phases out subsidies for electric vehicles next year, it’s also ending a related policy that effectively shut out foreign battery makers, creating the domestic monopoly we see today.

China’s Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) announced yesterday (June 25, link in Chinese) it is dropping its practice of publishing lists of battery makers that met technical standards. The policy, put in place in 2015, was meant to help develop the industry. Supplying the information to get on the list was supposedly voluntary (link in Chinese), but in reality, using the batteries on the ministry’s lists made it more likely car makers would qualify for government subsidies. As of 2016, the last time the list was updated, it included a total of 57 companies—none of them foreign firms.

As a result, the top 10 battery makers powering the world’s largest EV market are all Chinese (link in Chinese), according to 2018 data from the China Battery Industry Association. That means China dominates the value-added chain for domestically made electric vehicles, since batteries contribute 40% of the cost of an EV—quite a contrast to the value added when China assembles an iPhone.

Financial newspaper Economic Observer noted (link in Chinese) in April last year that Chinese car makers made their component decisions from the lists, while local governments and investment firms also consulted them. “Associated with subsidies, these became known as the ‘white lists,’” the newspaper said.

The lists included CATL, the world’s largest EV battery maker (Quartz membership), which supplies Chinese and foreign carmakers that include state-owned BJEV, one of the country’s biggest manufacturers, Volkswagen, Daimler, BMW, Honda, and Shanghai-based startu NIO. The world’s biggest EV manufacturer, BYD, is also the country’s second-biggest battery supplier, since it makes the batteries for its own electric cars—last year it sold some 100,000 of them. Both BYD and CATL could supply batteries to Toyota cars soon. In third place is Guoxuan High Tech, a major supplier to state-owned carmaker BAIC Motor, the parent company of BJEV.

This situation isn’t the case everywhere. Tesla, the biggest US EV firm, gets its batteries from Japanese electronic firm Panasonic, France’s Renault sources the batteries for its ZOE electric vehicle from South Korea’s LG Chem.

Taking away the lists could benefit established foreign battery makers. “It’s a gesture of China opening up, along with pressure from G20 and trade,” says Qiu Kaijun, who runs an EV news blog (Quartz membership). Chinese president Xi Jinping is set to discuss US-China trade tensions with US president Donald Trump on the sidelines of the G20 meeting of leaders of top economies, which begins in Japan Friday.

Before the policy was put in place, when China’s EV market was starting to take off, foreign firms like LG and fellow South Korean major Samsung were about to expand (link in Chinese) in China. In 2015, LG had opened a battery factory in China’s eastern city Nanjing that could supply to more than 100,000 EVs (link in Chinese), yet it never got on the white list and the factory ended up being sold to Zhejiang-based carmaker Geely in 2017 (link in Chinese).

“Earlier, all the subsidies went to those using Chinese EV batteries—if you use LG and Samsung, you won’t get subsidies,” said Angus Chan, a Shanghai-based auto analyst at Bocom International, “When 2020 comes, it will be free-market competition. It’s straightforward for carmakers—energy density, safety, and price… Everybody is on the same racing starting point in the post-subsidy era.”

China began reducing its massive subsidies two years ago, and will move to a credit system next year.

The scrapping of the battery lists comes at a time when China has rolled out the welcome mat for foreign EV firms in other ways. China last year said it would phase out foreign investment limits for car manufacturing, a rule that earlier made it impossible for foreign car makers to set up shop in China without a local partner. That reform began with manufacturers of electric vehicles, allowing Tesla to become the first foreign car maker with a wholly-owned plant in China. Located in Shanghai, it is taking orders for the first made-in-China Teslas, which are expected to roll out in the next six months.

Other new rules limiting the number of new factories in a province mean Tesla’s factory has put a spanner in the works for local manufacturers who were also hoping to set up near one of the country’s most important cities for EV sales. It’s clear China’s EV industry is going to put under greater pressure as a result of these moves—which could improve their technologies, or kill off some of the weaker firms.

Already, CATL is looking beyond China, setting up offices in France, Canada, Japan, and Germany (Quartz membership).

“What happens after the typhoon passes?” asked Zeng Yuqun, CATL’s founder, in an internal email (link in Chinese) in 2017. “Can a pig really fly?”

He was referring to a Chinese allegory—“When the typhoon comes, the pig will fly”—comparing the government subsidies to strong winds lifting the company’s fortunes, and warning of a possible heavy landing once those winds die down.

Looking for more in-depth coverage? Sign up to become a member and read more in-depth coverage of China’s electric-car boom in our field guide.

Source: https://qz.com/1651944/china-ends-policy-steering-ev-makers-to-local-battery-firms/

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in All Recent Posts, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – China’s breaking up the #EV #battery monopoly it carefully created $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

CLIENT FEATURE: Iconic Minerals $ICM.ca Bonnie Claire Lithium Property Hosts Inferred Resource of 11.8B Pounds of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 2:48 PM on Wednesday, June 12th, 2019

(TSXV: ICM) (OTC Pink: BVTEF) (FSE: YQGB)

Bonnie Claire Property – Flagship

  • 11.8 Billion pounds of lithium carbonate equivalent (28.5 Million tonnes of LCE) Inferred Resource (43-101).
  • Potential to be the largest lithium resource globally (based on size)
  • Property area is contained within a valley that is 60kms from the only producing lithium mine in North America (Albermarle Silver Peak Mine).
  • Sampling of salt flats within the basin, have found lithium values in salt samples yielding up to 340 ppm.
  • Preliminary NI 43-101 Technical Report completed Read More
  • A total 5,550 feet has been drilled at the Bonnie Claire with an average 963+ppm from four drill holes
  • Great infrastructure
  • Local end-users
  • Recent favourable metallurgical results Read More

FULL DISCLOSURE: Iconic Minerals is an advertising client of AGORA Internet Relations Corp.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in AGORACOM Client Feature, All Recent Posts, Iconic Minerals | Comments Off on CLIENT FEATURE: Iconic Minerals $ICM.ca Bonnie Claire Lithium Property Hosts Inferred Resource of 11.8B Pounds of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – These Mining Superpowers Supply the World’s #Lithium. Now They Want to Make #Batteries, Too. $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 2:00 PM on Wednesday, June 5th, 2019

SPONSOR: New Age Metals Inc. The company’s new Lithium Division has already made significant acquisitions in Canada and the USA. The company also owns one of North America’s largest primary platinum group metals deposit in Sudbury, Canada. Updated NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate 2,867,000 PdEq Measured and Indicated Ounces, with an additional 1,059,000 PdEq Ounces in the Inferred. Learn More.

NAM: TSX-V

———————

These Mining Superpowers Supply the World’s Lithium. Now They Want to Make Batteries, Too.

June 5, 2019 Bloomberg

The race by Tesla Inc., Samsung SDI Co. and other technology giants to secure supplies of lithium — a key ingredient in batteries for electric vehicles and smartphones — is creating a unique chance for two global mining superpowers to reap more value from their natural resources.

Australia and Chile are looking to lithium to help them escape a cycle that for decades has had the two nations digging out minerals such as iron ore and copper, only to see them refined and turned into valuable products abroad.

Almost three-quarters of the world’s lithium raw materials come from mines in Australia or briny lakes in Chile, giving them leverage with customers scrambling to tie-up supplies. The mining nations hope to bring refining and manufacturing plants that could help kickstart domestic technology industries.

The first moves in that plan are beginning to take shape.

Scraping a shovel into a patch of dirt near the Australian port city of Bunbury in March, an executive for U.S.-based lithium leader Albemarle Corp. heralded a A$1bn ($690m) plan to build the world’s biggest processing plant of its type. Meanwhile, in Mejillones, northern Chile, South Korea’s Samsung SDI and Posco are planning to jointly develop a facility to make chemical components used in batteries.

“Chile and Australia have the advantage,” said Daniela Desormeaux, chief executive officer at Santiago-based consulting firm SignumBOX. They have the lithium and “at the same time state incentives, so companies transforming the raw material can set up shop there.”

Mining rock and exporting it is a familiar story for Australia and Chile. Australia, the world’s biggest producer of iron ore, has shipped billions of tons of the steelmaking raw material to mills in Japan and China since the 1960s. Chile, the world’s largest source of copper, exports over half of its shipments as semi-refined concentrate.

“It’s an interesting economic model,” Peter Klinken, chief scientist of Western Australia and an adviser to the state’s government, told a February conference in Perth. “Take a big rock, make a little rock, put it on a ship, and then buy something really expensive back in return.”

The supply of lithium-ion batteries will need to jump more than 10-fold by 2030, BloombergNEF forecasts, with electric vehicles to account for more than 70 percent of that demand. That’s prompting end users to act, and Volkswagen AG and Volvo Cars have both struck long-term supply deals since April.

Where’s the Value?

The first step on the lithium value ladder is refining the raw material, something that’s currently done mostly in China. Ore from mines or lithium-rich saline solution from underground lakes in South America is concentrated into a silvery-gray powder that is sent to be purified and refined into lithium hydroxide and lithium carbonate. Those chemicals in turn are processed with materials such as nickel or cobalt to produce battery electrodes, or with solvents to make electrolytes, the key parts of the cells that are assembled into batteries.

Each step up the ladder affords more opportunity for profit. By 2025, the market for mined lithium raw material may be worth $20bn, compared with $43bn for refined products and $424bn for battery cells, according to a base case scenario outlined in a 2018 study published by the Australia-based Association of Mining and Exploration Companies.

Two major lithium miners operating in Chile, Sociedad Quimica & Minera de Chile SA, or SQM, and Albemarle were only allowed to expand production on condition that they sell a quarter of their output at the lowest market price to companies that will develop the materials within the country. SQM, which already carries out some processing in Chile, is expanding its domestic capacity.

The strategy is “a golden key” to build a higher-value lithium industry in Chile, said Sebastian Sichel, executive vice president of government development agency Corfo, which owns the lithium concessions in the Atacama desert and issues licenses to miners.

Three separate groups — Chile’s Molibdenos y Metales SA, or Molymet, China’s Sichuan Fulin Industrial Group Co., and a consortium of Samsung SDI and Posco — last year pledged to invest a total of about $754m to build lithium-cathode and lithium-cell factories in Chile to win access to Albemarle’s material. A second auction in April offered similar access to SQM’s product, with winners expected to be announced early next year.

New refining and chemical production capacity will offer Chile additional revenue, while earnings from lithium exports are also forecast to rise. The commodity has the potential to become one of the country’s largest exports after copper, salmon and wine, Sichel said.

Australia could generate more than A$50bn ($35bn) in annual revenue and support about 100,000 jobs by developing a battery materials sector, according to a 2018 study for a regional development agency. That compares with about A$1bn currently in annual lithium exports. Australia’s government in April pledged A$25m to support a five-year research program to expand its battery supply chain.

China’s Tianqi Lithium Corp. will later this year begin selling lithium hydroxide from a new processing facility in Kwinana, south of Perth. Tesla, battery maker LG Chem Ltd. and Mitsui & Co. have agreed to supply deals for output from a rival plant nearby that’s being built by Chile’s SQM and an Australian partner.

Efforts by Australia and Chile to wrest more control over refining from China are being helped by trade tensions. “They could definitely challenge China” in the next-step processing of lithium, said James Jeary, an analyst at CRU Group in London. Lithium producers will increasingly integrate mining and refining capacity, he said.

“We are hearing more and more that diversity of supply is critical,” said Phil Thick, Tianqi’s general manager in Australia. The producer’s Kwinana plant will mainly supply customers in North America and Europe, or carmakers in those regions via their suppliers in South Korea and Japan, he said.

China’s in Charge

The producers plan to do more than just first-stage refining. Western Australia has developed a “Lithium Valley” strategy to span the supply chain. Chile also hopes to manufacture battery cells.

But there are major hurdles. Neither country has a major car industry, and the auto sector typically prefers component suppliers to be close to manufacturing hubs. The technical challenge of producing battery components may require imported expertise. Costs and environmental concerns are also factors.

A dispute between Corfo and Albemarle has already delayed progress for Molymet, the Samsung SDI and Posco consortium, and Sichuan Fulin in Chile, prompting concern the groups could opt to invest in battery projects elsewhere. In Australia, lithium producer Neometals Ltd. has delayed a plan to build a refinery, citing higher-than-expected costs. There may only be a brief window for Chile or Australia to get a foothold in the battery industry as rival mining nations join the fray.

Argentina and Bolivia have saline deposits near the border with Chile. Countries from Serbia to Mali are keen to extract deposits in their territory, and Russia, which has been producing lithium products for more than 60 years for its nuclear industry, is already trying to attract higher-value investment by setting up one of the world’s largest lithium-ion battery plants in Novosibirsk with Chinese partner Thunder Sky Group.

Persuading battery makers to set up operations in Australia or Chile will require state incentives, said Vivas Kumar, a principal consultant at industry adviser Benchmark Mineral Intelligence and previously a member of Tesla’s battery supply chain team.

Lowering the cost of battery cells “continues to be the most important focus area across all major companies,” Kumar said. Automakers “are increasingly becoming involved with their cell manufacturing partners’ supply chains in recognition of this.”

Sichel at Corfo believes lithium offers Chile a chance to escape the so-called resources curse, where mineral booms suck in investment at the expense of manufacturing.

If we don’t do this, “there is a gigantic risk that our growth keeps depending on the next hot commodity,” he said. “We remain stuck, unable to make the jump to developed-nation status.”

Source: https://www.supplychainbrain.com/articles/29802-these-mining-superpowers-supply-the-worlds-lithium-now-they-want-to-make-batteries-too

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in All Recent Posts, Lithium, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – These Mining Superpowers Supply the World’s #Lithium. Now They Want to Make #Batteries, Too. $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

CLIENT FEATURE: Iconic Minerals $ICM.ca Bonnie Claire Lithium Property Hosts Inferred Resource of 11.8B Pounds of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 12:26 PM on Friday, May 31st, 2019

(TSXV: ICM) (OTC Pink: BVTEF) (FSE: YQGB)

Bonnie Claire Property – Flagship

  • 11.8 Billion pounds of lithium carbonate equivalent (28.5 Million tonnes of LCE) Inferred Resource (43-101).
  • Potential to be the largest lithium resource globally (based on size)
  • Property area is contained within a valley that is 60kms from the only producing lithium mine in North America (Albermarle Silver Peak Mine).
  • Sampling of salt flats within the basin, have found lithium values in salt samples yielding up to 340 ppm.
  • Preliminary NI 43-101 Technical Report completed Read More
  • A total 5,550 feet has been drilled at the Bonnie Claire with an average 963+ppm from four drill holes
  • Great infrastructure
  • Local end-users
  • Recent favourable metallurgical results Read More

Watch Feature Below!

FULL DISCLOSURE: Iconic Minerals is an advertising client of AGORA Internet Relations Corp.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in AGORACOM Client Feature, All Recent Posts, Iconic Minerals | Comments Off on CLIENT FEATURE: Iconic Minerals $ICM.ca Bonnie Claire Lithium Property Hosts Inferred Resource of 11.8B Pounds of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

New Age Metals $NAM.ca Provides Corporate Update $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca $GLEN $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 9:58 AM on Tuesday, May 28th, 2019
  • The River Valley Project is the largest undeveloped primary Platinum Group Metal (PGM) mineral resource in North America. The Project has excellent infrastructure and is within 100 kilometres of the Sudbury Metallurgical Complex. The Project is 100% owned by New Age Metals.
  • The Project’s first economic study a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) is underway and management plans to release the summary press release by the end of the second quarter.
  • The price of an ounce of Palladium represents a 35% price increase in the last 12 months. As such, for 2019, precious metals consultancy, Metals Focus believes that professional investors will eventually return to palladium, with an annual average price of US$1,490 per oz. in 2019. Rhodium, which is also present at River Valley, has seen a price increase of over 15% this YTD at US$2,860 per oz.
  • For Platinum, a turnaround in investor sentiment stimulated heavy buying of platinum Exchange Traded Funds (ETF’s) in early 2019. Investors were motivated by supply disruption risks and an improving outlook for auto demand.
  • Drill permits for our Lithium Two and Lithium One Projects in Manitoba have been applied for and the company is in the final approval process from the province of Manitoba.
  • The Company is actively seeking a strategic partner for our Genesis PGM/Polymetallic Project in Alaska

May 28th, 2019 / Rockport, Canada – New Age Metals Inc. (TSX.V: NAM; OTCQB: NMTLF; FSE: P7J.F) Harry Barr, Chairman & CEO, stated; “We are pleased to update our shareholders and interested parties as to our ongoing activities in both our PGM and Lithium divisions. Specifically, give a progress update on the River Valley Project Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA). This update will detail our exploration and development plans for both the PGM and Lithium divisions in 2019. Furthermore, we will highlight the current PGM market and particularly Palladium and Platinum price trends.”

Update on the PEA

NAM commissioned both P&E Mining Consultants (P&E) and DRA Americas (DRA) to complete the River Valley Project’s first economic study, a Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA) in August 2018.

The company has been informed by its engineering consultants that the preliminary PEA mine plan, production schedule and financial model is nearing completion, and we plan to release the highlights of the study in a press release before the end of the second quarter this year.

At this stage, the PEA is focused on investigating the mining potential of the project, including the latest discovery, the Pine Zone and other footwall mineralization potential. The study will also help define areas of the project that require additional exploration and development.

The objective of the PEA would be to create a conceptual mine plan, mine schedule, a capital cost estimate, and operating cost estimate incorporated into a financial model to provide total cash flow, net present value (NPV), and internal rate of return (IRR).

River Valley PGM Project Goals & Objectives

During 2019, the company’s exploration & development objectives are as follows:

  1. 1.Complete the re-stated resource calculation (Q1 2019);
  2. 2.Complete the Projects first economic study, PEA (Q2 2019);
  3. 3.Complete surface exploration on additional target areas based on recommendations of the updated 43-101 and the 2017/2018 geophysics (slated for Q3-Q4 2019);
  4. 4.Arrange additional funding for continued development of the project (ongoing);
  5. 5.Conduct a 5000-metre drill program focusing in the northern portion of the Project;
  6. 6.Solicit a strategic partner to aid in further exploration and development of the Project. Potential major partners are waiting for the PEA results to complete additional due diligence on River Valley.

Palladium, Platinum, Rhodium Price & Performance

There are various reasons why the Palladium (Pd) price movement has occurred and more to suggest that Pd price may continue to rise. First, there are continued supply deficits forecasted for Pd and in 2019 alone Johnson Matthey (JM) expects that it could exceed a million ounces (PGM Market Report – May 2019). Emissions standards are increasing worldwide as is the preference for larger vehicles, both of which require more Pd to be used in the catalytic converters.

The PGM’s Platinum, Palladium and Rhodium are extensively used in catalytic converters to convert harmful gasses like hydrocarbon emissions into less harmful substances. The allowable limits of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon (HC) from gasoline passenger vehicles in China will be reduced by 60% by 2025 (SFA Oxford, 2019).

The Chinese emission standard story alone tends itself to the increase in Pd demand to grow by 500,000 ounces by 2021. To summarize, the Palladium fundamentals and forecasts align well with the timeline for development of our River Valley Project.

The platinum market is expected to move into deficit in 2019, with a resurgence in investor activity outweighing modest falls in industrial and jewellery demand. Johnson Matthey also expects a tentative recovery in autocatalyst consumption, as stricter heavy duty emissions legislation is enforced first in China and then in India. JM forecasts a modest increase in primary supplies, but this could be tempered by electricity shortages and, potentially, industrial action in South Africa, while growth in recycling may be dampened by processing capacity constraints in some regions.

Both Platinum and Palladium are considered precious metals, like Gold and are used as a store of value. Rhodium, which is also present at River Valley, has seen a price increase of over 15% this year at US$2,860 per oz.

2019 Mineral Resource Update

On January 9, 2019 NAM filed its latest Mineral Resource Estimate on the River Valley Project. The May 2018 Resource Estimate presented a global mineral inventory. The January 2019 Resource presents a pit constrained mineral resource that shows reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction. The results of the updated Mineral Resource Estimate are tabulated in Table 1 below (0.35 g/t PdEq open pit and 2.0 g.t PdEq underground cut-off). This 43-101 Technical Report is available on SEDAR. See page 4.

Table 1: Results from the January 2019 NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate.


Click Image To View Full Size

Class PGM + Au (oz) PdEq (oz) PtEq (oz)
Measured 1,394,000 1,701,000 1,701,000
Indicated 983,000 1,166,000 1,166,000
Meas +Ind 2,377,000 2,867,000 2,867,000
Inferred 841,000 1,059,000 1,059,000

Notes:

  1. 1.CIM definition standards were followed for the Mineral Resource Estimate.
  2. 2.The 2018 Mineral Resource models used Ordinary Kriging grade estimation within a three-dimensional block model with mineralized zones defined by wireframed solids.
  3. 3.A base cut-off grade of 0.35 g/t PdEq was used for reporting Mineral Resources in a constrained pit and 2.00 g/t PdEq was used for reporting the Mineral Resources under the pit.
  4. 4.Palladium Equivalent (PdEq) calculated using (US$): $950/oz Pd, $950/oz Pt, $1,275/oz Au, $1500/oz Rh, $2.75/lb Cu, $5.25/lb Ni, $36/lb Co.
  5. 5.Numbers may not add exactly due to rounding.
  6. 6.Mineral Resources that are not Mineral Reserves do not have economic viability

7. The Inferred Mineral Resource in this estimate has a lower level of confidence than that applied to an Indicated Mineral Resource and must not be converted to a Mineral Reserve. It is reasonably expected that the majority of the Inferred Mineral Resource could be upgraded to an Indicated Mineral Resource with continued exploration.


Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 1: The Yellow Band represents the footwall potential area of the River Valley Deposit based on the results of the Pine Zone where footwall mineralization was noted to extend 150 metres eastward from the Pine Zone/ T3 main deposit.

At present the only area that has confirmed footwall mineralization is in the Pine Zone (defined from 2015 to 2017 drilling). Geophysics and exploration continues to test other areas of the Deposit. Management’s specific focus is to outline a potentially economic Mineral Resource in the northern portion of the Project that can be subsequently developed as a series of open pits (bulk mining), crushed, and concentrate on site, with concentrate shipped to a smelter in Sudbury.

2019 Exploration Plan – River Valley PGM Project

To date an approximate 160,441 metres (481,323 feet) in 710 drill holes have been conducted by the company as operators on the River Valley Project. Several independent 43-101 compliant resource estimates have previously been generated for the deposit through the exploration and development phases. The River Valley Deposit’s present resource, with approximately 2.9M PdEq ounces in Measured Plus Indicated mineral resources and near-surface mineralization, covers a total of 16 kilometers of strike. The company continues to explore and enhance the River Valley PGM Deposit.

After the ground proofing and surface exploration program conducted in the Summer/Fall of 2018, (which followed up on the most recent induced polarization survey by Abitibi Geophysics) NAM management has designed a 5,000 metre drill programs to test the new geophysical anomalies. See Figure 2 below, which shows these new geophysical anomalies and potential targets for the next stage of drilling at River Valley superimposed over the upper 4 kilometres of the project map.


Click Image To View Full Size

Figure 2: Northern portion of the project with superimposed 2018 merged IP at -100m level. Retrieved from River Valley Geophysical review by Geoscience North (Alan King, P. Geo., M.Sc.)

2019 Exploration Plans for Lithium Division

The Company has eight pegmatite hosted Lithium Projects in the Winnipeg River Pegmatite Field, located in SE Manitoba. In 2018 NAM conducted surface exploration programs on our Lithman East, Lithman North, Lithium One and Lithium Two projects. The programs consisted of reviewing, characterising and sampling the known surface pegmatites. Samples were taken from the Eagle and FD5 pegmatites on Lithium Two and returned results of up to 3.8% Li2O. On Lithium One, samples were taken from the known Silverleaf and Annie pegmatites and returned significant Li20 assays of up to 4.1%.

In 2019, the Company plans to drill the Lithium Two Project first. Drill permits have been applied for and the company is awaiting approval from the province. The application has been accepted by the relevant parties to date and is in the final stages of the approval process. The first drill permit is expected to be issued in June 2019.

Genesis PGM / Polymetallic Project

On April 4th, 2018, NAM signed an agreement with one of Alaska’s top geological consulting companies. The company’s stated objective is to acquire additional PGM and Rare Metal projects in Alaska. On April 18th, 2018, NAM announced the right to purchase 100% of the Genesis PGM/Polymetallic Project, NAM’s first Alaskan PGM acquisition related to the April 4th agreement. The Genesis PGM/Polymetallic Project is a road accessible, under explored, highly prospective and multi-prospect drill ready Palladium (Pd)- Platinum (Pt)- Nickel (Ni)- Copper (Cu) property. A comprehensive report on previous exploration and future phases of work was completed by Avalon Development of Fairbanks Alaska in August 2018 on Genesis. (available here). A 2019 sampling program will be conducted to continue to outline additional mineralization along the 800-metre by 40-metre mineralized zone. Management is actively seeking an option/joint-venture partner for this road accessible PGM and multiple element Project using the Prospector Generator business model.

Opt-in List

If you have not done so already, we encourage you to sign up on our website (www.newagemetals.com) to receive our updated news.

QUALIFIED PERSON

The contents contained herein that relate to Exploration Results or Mineral Resources is based on information compiled, reviewed or prepared by Carey Galeschuk, a consulting geoscientist for New Age Metals. Mr. Galeschuk is the Qualified Person as defined by National Instrument 43-101 and has reviewed and approved the technical content of this news release.

On behalf of the Board of Directors

“Harry Barr”

Harry G. Barr

Chairman and CEO

For further information on New Age Metals, please contact Anthony Ghitter or Cody Hunt, Business Development at 613-659-2773, or [email protected]

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements: This release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. These statements may differ materially from actual future events or results and are based on current expectations or beliefs. For this purpose, statements of historical fact may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements include statements in which the Company uses words such as “continue”, “efforts”, “expect”, “believe”, “anticipate”, “confident”, “intend”, “strategy”, “plan”, “will”, “estimate”, “project”, “goal”, “target”, “prospects”, “optimistic” or similar expressions. These statements by their nature involve risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially depending on a variety of important factors, including, among others, the Company’s ability and continuation of efforts to timely and completely make available adequate current public information, additional or different regulatory and legal requirements and restrictions that may be imposed, and other factors as may be discussed in the documents filed by the Company on SEDAR (www.sedar.com), including the most recent reports that identify important risk factors that could cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. The Company does not undertake any obligation to review or confirm analysts’ expectations or estimates or to release publicly any revisions to any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date hereof or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. Investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals $NAM.ca Provides Corporate Update $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca $GLEN $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – The #lithium industry needs a $17b injection to meet 2025 demand – here come the deals $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 3:16 PM on Monday, May 27th, 2019

SPONSOR: New Age Metals Inc. The company’s new Lithium Division has already made significant acquisitions in Canada and the USA. The company also owns one of North America’s largest primary platinum group metals deposit in Sudbury, Canada. Updated NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate 2,867,000 PdEq Measured and Indicated Ounces, with an additional 1,059,000 PdEq Ounces in the Inferred. Learn More.

NAM: TSX-V

———————

The lithium industry needs a $17b injection to meet 2025 demand – here come the deals

  • One expert says at least US$12 billion ($17.3 billion) needs to be invested in new lithium projects by 2025 if the industry is to have any realistic hope of matching supply with demand

Angela East

Corporate deals in the lithium industry are heating up at a time when there is a predicted multi-billion-dollar cash injection needed to ramp up supply to meet rapidly growing demand.

One expert says at least US$12 billion ($17.3 billion) needs to be invested in new lithium projects by 2025 if the industry is to have any realistic hope of matching supply with demand.

US lithium expert Joe Lowry told delegates at the Latin America Downunder mining conference in Perth that the ‘Big Four’ global lithium producers – SQM, Albemarle, Jiangxi Ganfeng Lithium and Tianqi – could not alone meet 2025 lithium demand.

“Overall, the industry faces a lack of financing and needs to inject more than US$12 billion within five years to have a chance of meeting demand,” he said.

“This requirement is exacerbated further by known and emerging failures in lithium start-ups which have demonstrated a lack of necessary skillsets – high profile failures that have discouraged sector investment.

“There will not be any significant lithium chemical oversupply anytime soon. While there have been many optimistic supply forecasts, recent results speak for themselves.”

Pfft. What lithium glut?

Lowry took aim at Morgan Stanley and other analysts that previously predicted a flood of new lithium supply would hit the market this year causing an oversupply and pushing down the price.

He dismissed the forecasts of oversupply as a myth.

“The ‘myth’ is driven by reports from ‘big bank’ analysts and supported by statements by Chilean regulator, CORFO, after its revised agreements allowing Albemarle and SQM to produce more material from the Atacama brine resource,” Lowry said.

“The reality is increasing production quickly is not so easy.”

Last year there was about 270,000 tonnes of lithium demand and Lowry estimates that will rise to about 1 million tonnes in 2025.

“It’s pretty much not argued anymore that e-mobility is happening — whether it’s EVs or scooters or ferries in Scandinavia, the transition to e-mobility is on,” Lowry said.

“My numbers are actually some of the lower numbers out there.”

Battery-related lithium demand in 2018 accounted for 60 per cent, up from 25 per cent five years earlier.

“So this market is becoming a battery-related market. There’s really no question about that,” Lowry said.

But new lithium supply is hard to bring online and SQM, Albemarle, Jiangxi Ganfeng Lithium and Tianqi are likely only be able to maintain their 68 per cent market share, according to Lowry.

“Almost every lithium project that has ever started with optimism has taken three or four years longer to reach full capacity and that’s what we’re seeing,” he said.

“That means there’s a lot of juniors or smaller companies around the world that need to get financed and need to get moving.”

Deal-making steps up a gear

Close on the heels of Wesfarmers’ seminal $776m bid for Kidman Resources (ASX:KDR), Galaxy Resources (ASX:GXY) has tipped $22.5m into more junior producer Alliance Mineral Assets (ASX:A40) to become its largest shareholder.

The cash injection gives Galaxy a roughly 11.5 per cent interest, and a blocking stake, in Alliance, managing director Mark Calderwood told Stockhead.

Galaxy’s investment was part of a larger $32.5m placement at 20c per share, which also included $10m from a subsidiary of Jiangxi Special Electric Motor Co.

Jiangxi has about a 9.9 per cent stake in Alliance.

“I guess from [Galaxy’s] point of view it’s stopping us from being a target for someone else to come and grab, and we were the cheapest lithium miner in the market,” Calderwood said.

“Both Jiangxi and Galaxy are a lot bigger than we are, they’re both experts in their sectors so that’s good for us and it enables us to be cooperative in the future.

“Both parties have either a blocking stake or almost a blocking stake.”

Australia’s downstream gaining momentum

Right now, Australia has absolutely zero per cent share of the global lithium chemical market, but the Galaxy-Alliance deal is another step towards building the country’s downstream industry.

“I think [Galaxy] has desires to go further downstream as well, and Jiangxi [Ganfeng Lithium] already has that joint venture with Jiangxi Special Electric Motors, which is downstream, but there’s other things we can do as well,” Calderwood said.

The battery supply chain is a $2 trillion market opportunity, and a report released at the start of 2018 gave Australia about 18 months to two years to get cracking on building its downstream industry.

Over a year into that deadline, the federal government has established a new Future Batteries Industries Cooperative Research Centre (FBI CRC) in Western Australia.

The research partnership of 58 industry, academic and government partners will address industry-identified gaps in the battery industries value chain.

The goal is to expand battery minerals and chemicals production and develop opportunities for manufacturing batteries in Australia.

Good time to invest

Lowry says rapidly rising demand and the difficulty in bringing new lithium supply online supports his “thesis” that the market is going to outgrow supply.

“Anyone who is interested in investing in the lithium market has a great opportunity now because share prices are very, very depressed,” he said.

“If you look at the market caps of some of the Australian companies, even the ‘Big Four’ companies, their market caps are very much down from where they were a couple of years ago.

“So if you’re interested in lithium, I would tell you now’s a good time to get in.”

Source: https://stockhead.com.au/resources/the-lithium-industry-needs-a-17b-injection-to-meet-2025-demand-here-come-the-deals/

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in All Recent Posts, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – The #lithium industry needs a $17b injection to meet 2025 demand – here come the deals $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – #EV ‘arms race’ revs up Murkowski’s old minerals bill $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 3:19 PM on Thursday, May 9th, 2019

SPONSOR: New Age Metals Inc. The company’s new Lithium Division has already made significant acquisitions in Canada and the USA. The company also owns one of North America’s largest primary platinum group metals deposit in Sudbury, Canada. Updated NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate 2,867,000 PdEq Measured and Indicated Ounces, with an additional 1,059,000 PdEq Ounces in the Inferred. Learn More.

NAM: TSX-V

———————

EV ‘arms race’ revs up Murkowski’s old minerals bill

E&E News staff Energywire: Thursday, May 9, 2019

The Tesla Model S (left) and Model X charging side by side. Steve Jurvetson/Wikimedia Commons

An old proposal to jump-start American mining has been recharged by a newfound focus on electric vehicles and the elements needed to power them.

Congress has bandied about ideas for mining more “critical minerals” for as long as the United States has been losing ground to other nations, namely China, in supplying elements used in military, energy and emerging technologies.

But a different narrative took center stage when Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) introduced her latest critical minerals bill last week: fixing the EV supply squeeze (Energywire, May 3).

The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee chairwoman advocated helping the United States “compete in growth industries like electric vehicles and energy storage,” while her co-sponsor and committee ranking member, Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), said he was “very much concerned” about lithium-ion batteries.

Sources traced the new emphasis to a recent closed-door summit of automakers, mining companies and federal officials.

Murkowski teased her bill at a Washington, D.C., event organized by Benchmark Minerals, a consulting firm specializing in battery mineral supply chains.

Despite its small size — 26 employees — Benchmark has increasing influence on Capitol Hill.

Reached by phone yesterday, Benchmark founder Simon Moores declined to say who attended the summit, but he said the fact that Murkowski highlighted lithium, cobalt, graphite and nickel was “a reaction” to his testifying to her committee twice in as many years.

“For me, the most important development is that focus on these four

[minerals]

for electric vehicles,” he said. “And that is a big step forward in my eyes because it refines the focus and refines the discussion.”

Robert Mintak, CEO of Canadian mining company Standard Lithium Ltd., also declined to go into detail about the Benchmark summit, only saying it was “well-attended across numerous agencies.”

“The narrative is being curated to make the current state of the nation understand that it isn’t a tree-hugging narrative,” he said. “There’s an opportunity you need to get in front of.”

The strategy

The EV rebranding appears to be a marketing maneuver, said Jim Constantopoulos, a geology professor at Eastern New Mexico University and director of its Miles Mineral Museum.

“Those folks that would be more likely to drive an EV … would normally be opposed to any sort of mining, let alone a bill that would eliminate roadblocks to mining,” Constantopoulos said. “By referring to it as an EV bill, they might garner some support from that sector.”

Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). Energy and Natural Resources Committee

Environmentalists have generally condemned critical minerals legislation as an excuse to slash environmental standards. Murkowski’s bill would task federal agencies with streamlining mine permitting.

President Trump has ordered his administration to do the same. Under an executive order, the U.S. Geological Survey created a list of 35 critical minerals and the Department of Commerce set to work drafting a report of policy recommendations to mine more of each of them.

The report was due in November, but industry advocates expect the White House to publish its findings as soon as next week.

“I know we’re getting close on the strategy, but to my knowledge, the White House is still deciding on a rollout date,” USGS spokesman Alex Demas said.

The White House declined to speculate on any announcement.

‘Barely even in the game’

Benchmark says about 1.7 terawatt-hours’ worth of battery factory projects are in the development pipeline — or roughly the equivalent of 24 million to 26 million EVs, depending on the battery pack.

“We are in the midst of a global battery arms race in which the U.S. is presently a bystander,” Moores told lawmakers in February (E&E Daily, Feb. 6).

Most of the world’s lithium comes from a region in South America crisscrossed by massive salt flats. About 1% of the world’s raw lithium comes from the United States. North America’s only active lithium operation is the Silver Peak mine in Nevada, although the Los Angeles Times reported this week about a battle brewing over a second one in Death Valley.

“Despite significant domestic resources, we’re barely even in the game,” said National Mining Association President and CEO Hal Quinn.

As for cobalt, about 68% comes from the Democratic Republic of Congo, where a small percentage of the mineral is illegally mined using child labor, according to a 2017 Amnesty International report.

The industry is actively looking to cut back on cobalt, but even if they are successful, new battery production will still increase demand.

“There’s no way that entire battery industry can just abandon cobalt as a critical element for their cathode,” Benchmark consultant and former Tesla employee Vivas Kumar said at another recent event in New York.

Where do companies stand?

Automakers have generally supported previous critical minerals bills, and this year is no different.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a powerful trade group that represents Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co., has not changed its stance since testifying in support of the bill in 2014.

“Whether it’s the aluminum in automotive frames, the platinum in catalytic converters, or the lithium and nickel in electric vehicle batteries, minerals are vital components in every automobile on the road today, and future models,” spokesman Wade Newton said in an email.

But Tesla declined to comment, as did Fiat Chrysler Automobiles. A Ford spokeswoman redirected inquiries to the Auto Alliance.

The Electric Drive Transportation Association, which advocates for electric vehicle makers and other companies in the electric and hybrid vehicle industry, said it had yet to thoroughly examine Murkowski’s legislation.

“We appreciate the bipartisan effort to reinforce the supply chain for electric vehicles and are currently reviewing the bill,” spokesman Jake Styacich said.

While the talking point has changed, China remains the foremost national security concern.

In 2015, the Chinese government published a plan for its manufacturing sector, Made in China 2025, which identified battery minerals as a key area in which to seek dominance.

Robbie Diamond, president of Securing America’s Future Energy, a group fighting foreign oil dependence, called it a “wake-up call.”

“We do not want to go from dependence on oil and troubles in the Middle East to dependence on China for batteries,” he said.

Diamond cited Moores’ February testimony as evidence.

He added: “Anybody who takes our security seriously has to ask themselves the question: Can we fall this far behind?”

Reporters Dylan Brown, Kelsey Brugger, Timothy Cama, David Iaconangelo and Maxine Joselow contributed.

Source: https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060299813

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in All Recent Posts, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – #EV ‘arms race’ revs up Murkowski’s old minerals bill $LIC.ca $LIX.ca $LI.ca $ELR.ca $ATL.ca

Iconic $ICM.ca Announces 2019 Exploration Plans Bonnie Claire Lithium Project in Nevada $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 10:38 AM on Tuesday, April 23rd, 2019
  • Finalized plans for its 2019 drilling program at Bonnie Claire
  • Five drill holes averaging 90 meters (300 feet) depth will be drilled in the southern portion of the project area in an area of anomalous surface lithium values and interpreted faults

Vancouver, British Columbia–(April 23, 2019) –  Iconic Minerals Ltd. (TSXV: ICM) (OTC Pink: BVTEF) (FSE: YQGB) (“Company” or “Iconic”) has finalized plans for its 2019 drilling program (the “Drilling Program”) at Bonnie Claire. Five drill holes averaging 90 meters (300 feet) depth will be drilled in the southern portion of the project area in an area of anomalous surface lithium values and interpreted faults. The purpose of the Drilling Program is to define shallow lithium mineralization which the Company can utilize for bulk sampling and extend the resource to the south. If results are favorable, one or more of the shallow holes will be deepened to +600 meters (2,000 feet) to further enlarge the resource. A map of the drilling, surface lithium sampling results and interpreted faults can be found on the Company website (www.iconicmineralsltd.com).

The Drilling Program is located 2-5 kilometers (1.3-3.1 miles) south of drill hole BC1602 (see map). The shallow holes will be drilled using a tracked or buggy reverse circulation (RC) rig suitable for the salt flats being tested. Down-hole sediment samples will be collected continuously in 6 meter (20 feet) intervals and sent to a geochem lab for analysis.

Drilling will be initiated when the wet season has ended and the salt flats dry sufficiently to allow access. This year has seen the fourth wettest season in history.

The Bonnie Claire Lithium Property Characteristics:

The Property is located within Sarcobatus Valley that is approximately 30 km (19 miles) long and 20 km (12 miles) wide. Quartz-rich volcanic tuffs, that contain anomalous amounts of lithium, occur within and adjacent to the valley. Geochemical analysis of the local salt flats has yielded lithium values up to 340 ppm. The gravity low within the valley is 20 km (12 miles) long, and the current estimates of depth to basement rocks range from 600 to 1,200 meters (2,000 to 4,000 feet). Four drill holes have identified an open ended, 43-101 compliant resource of 28.58 billion kilograms of lithium carbonate equivalent. The drilling that defined the current resource only covered an area of 3.0 km2 (1.2mi2), while previously run MT geophysics show a potentially mineralized area of 27.3 km2 (10.5mi2). Drilling to date has shown strong correlation between the MT results and the lithium mineralization. The thickness of the lithium mineralization is unknown, but drilling indicates it is greater than 600 meters (2,000 feet). The current claim block covers an area of 57.5 km2 (22.2mi2). Further drilling has been permitted and metallurgy to determine the most efficient recovery method is currently in progress.

Richard Kern, Certified Professional Geologist (#11494) and CEO of Iconic is the Qualified Person who has prepared and reviewed this press release in accordance with NI 43-101 reporting standards.

On behalf of the Board of Directors

SIGNED: “Richard Kern”

Richard Kern, President and CEO
Contact: Keturah Nathe, VP Corporate Development (604) 336-8614

For further information on ICM, please visit our website at www.iconicmineralsltd.com. The Company’s public documents may be accessed at www.sedar.com

Forward Statement: This news release includes certain forward-looking statements or information. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this release are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Iconic expressly disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise except as otherwise required by applicable securities legislation.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/44232

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Featured, Iconic Minerals | Comments Off on Iconic $ICM.ca Announces 2019 Exploration Plans Bonnie Claire Lithium Project in Nevada $LI.ca $MGG.ca $PAC.ca $CYP.ca $NEV.ca $SX.ca

New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – Supply And Demand Outlook Favors #Palladium Vs. Platinum $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca

Posted by AGORACOM-JC at 12:16 PM on Thursday, April 18th, 2019

SPONSOR: New Age Metals Inc. The company owns one of North America’s largest primary platinum group metals deposit in Sudbury, Canada. Updated NI 43-101 Mineral Resource Estimate 2,867,000 PdEq Measured and Indicated Ounces, with an additional 1,059,000 PdEq Ounces in the Inferred. Learn More.

NAM: TSX-V

———————

Supply And Demand Outlook Favors Palladium Vs. Platinum

  • Palladium has outperformed platinum ever since the fundamentals of supply and demand have changed due to the diesel emissions scandal.
  • The gap between platinum and palladium has shrunk in recent weeks, which would break the current trend of palladium outperforming platinum if it continues.
  • Both the fundamental and technical pictures point to the trend staying in place relative to platinum and palladium despite the recent hiccup.

The biggest source of demand for platinum (PPLT) and palladium (PALL) is the automotive industry where emission standards are becoming increasingly stringent. These standards are driving demand for platinum and palladium due to their ability to help reduce harmful emissions. The result has been a sort of competition between the two of them.

However, the competition has become somewhat one-sided ever since the platinum market was rocked in 2015 by the emissions scandal or “Diesel Gate” involving Volkswagen (OTCPK:VWAGY). The reason is because platinum is heavily used in vehicles with diesel engines. On the other hand, palladium is associated with gasoline engines.

Cars powered by diesel engines have since fallen out of favor, and people are now turning towards cars powered by gasoline engines. This trend does not look to change anytime soon, but it’s set to continue for the foreseeable future. This is bullish for palladium and bearish for platinum. The result can be seen in the supply and demand equation for palladium and platinum.

The market for palladium has a deficit with a surplus for platinum

The emissions scandal has fundamentally altered the landscape for vehicles powered by diesel and gasoline engines and, by extension, platinum and palladium. The former is seeing demand decrease, and the latter is seeing demand increase as there is a shift away from diesel-powered cars towards gasoline-powered cars.

The two tables reveal that the platinum market has a surplus, with supply exceeding net demand. Except for industrial demand, every other segment, including autocatalyst, jewelry, and investment, is in decline. While supplies from mining have stayed roughly the same, platinum recycling is adding to the surplus of platinum in the market. The trend is clearly bearish for platinum.

Platinum supply and demand (Unit: 1000 oz)
Supply 2016 2017 2018
South Africa 4392 4449 4471
Russia 717 703 657
Others 988 953 980
Total supply 6097 6105 6108
Demand
Autocatalyst 3342 3218 3052
Jewelry 2412 2400 2363
Industrial 1806 2022 2321
Investment 620 361 89
Total demand 8180 8001 7825
Recycling -1934 -2072 -2215
Net demand 6246 5929 5610
Surplus/deficit -149 176 498

Source: Johnson Matthey

The opposite is true for palladium. Supply of palladium falls short of net demand and is driven primarily by the increased demand in the autocatalyst segment. Recycling has made more palladium available, but supplies have yet to eliminate the deficit in the market for palladium. Overall, the trend for palladium looks to be a lot better compared to platinum.

Palladium supply and demand (Unit: 1000 oz)
Supply 2016 2017 2018
South Africa 2570 2550 2590
Russia 2773 2406 2840
Others 1417 1405 1450
Total supply 6760 6361 6880
Demand
Autocatalyst 7951 8428 8655
Jewelry 191 173 166
Industrial 1875 1832 1855
Investment -646 -386 -555
Total demand 9371 10047 10121
Recycling -2491 -2899 -3212
Net demand 6880 7148 6909
Surplus/deficit -120 -787 -29

The forecast for 2019 calls for more of the same, assuming there are no unforeseen events that could disrupt the supply and demand equation. Platinum will have a surplus, and palladium, a deficit. The trend established in recent years as shown in the two tables is not expected to change. That is bullish for palladium, but bearish for platinum.

Divergence in prices for platinum and palladium

As a result of a favorable outlook, palladium prices have vastly outperformed platinum. While platinum used to command a much higher price than palladium, the roles have now been reversed, and palladium is now worth more. The chart below tracks the relationship between platinum and palladium prices.

Notice that at its peak in March, a troy ounce of palladium was worth almost two ounces of platinum. That ratio has now come down, and palladium is now worth 1.5 ounces of platinum. A significant change, but still far removed from the days when platinum was more expensive than palladium.

However, the fact remains that the gap between platinum and palladium has shrunk with platinum outperforming palladium during this time frame. The gap could continue to shrink, but it could also begin to widen as before. Which of the two is more likely to happen will depend on a few factors that should be taken into consideration.

Can platinum and palladium be substituted for one another in the manufacture of an autocatalyst?

The short answer is yes, but only to a certain extent. While platinum and palladium are more suitable and preferred in diesel and gasoline vehicles, respectively, it is not absolutely necessary. The more expensive palladium becomes relative to platinum, the more manufacturers may be inclined to look into replacing palladium with platinum in the manufacture of an autocatalyst. Not necessarily completely, but at least partially.

In theory, this should act as a cap on palladium relative to platinum. If the gap in prices between the two becomes too extreme, precious metal substitution could force the ratio between palladium and platinum to reverse and narrow. There would be less demand for palladium and demand for platinum would increase under these conditions. However, in practice, it is difficult to replace more expensive palladium with cheaper platinum.

The two precious metals are only needed in trace amounts, and the price difference would have to be very severe to make a noticeable difference in the final cost of a vehicle. It also takes a lot of time and expense to test that changes in precious metal composition in an autocatalyst meet desired specifications. In a nutshell, while it’s possible, it’s almost certainly not worth the trouble to replace platinum with palladium or vice versa.

Why gold prices affect platinum more than palladium

Unlike palladium, platinum prices are more prone to being influenced by the price of gold (GLD). The reason is because platinum is heavily used in jewelry, much more than palladium. Because of this, platinum is in direct competition with gold. In fact, people often have to decide which of the two, gold or platinum, they will select in a purchase.

People will more often than not pick gold, but they may be tempted to go for platinum if the former is much more expensive than the latter. Rising gold prices are, therefore, good for platinum because it makes platinum a more attractive substitute. But if gold prices fall, then there is less need for platinum because most people tend to prefer gold.

It’s, therefore, necessary that we look at gold when considering where platinum will go relative to palladium. The ratio between gold and platinum prices has changed recently as gold prices have gone down. A previous article discussing why gold is likely to face pressure can be found here.

The chart above tracks the relationship between platinum and gold prices. Notice that while an ounce of platinum was roughly equal to 60% of gold at its low, the ratio has gone up and is now at almost 70%. What this basically means is that platinum’s appeal as an alternative has declined versus gold. This should be seen as a negative for platinum demand, which could put downward pressure on the price of platinum.

Palladium looks to be priming itself for a big move

Palladium prices have been going sideways after a big drop from their recent highs. In fact, the chart pattern for palladium resembles that of a symmetrical triangle or a coil. If this technical analysis is correct, then a big move may be coming once consolidation is done. The triangle could resolve to the downside, but it’s more likely to continue the long-term trend, which is up.

Both the fundamental and technical pictures suggest that a move to the upside is the most probable outcome. In contrast, platinum is being held back by a number of issues as a previous article explains here. This would reverse the narrowing of the spread between platinum and palladium and, instead, widen the gap that exists.

The ratio between palladium and platinum has been stuck at around 1.5, as previous charts reveal. This ratio could decrease further, but the most likely path is for the ratio to resume its previous uptrend after the time it has spent consolidating. This would be consistent with the price of palladium outperforming that of platinum.

Palladium will outperform platinum

It’s important to mention that the long-term picture for platinum and palladium in terms of demand is not a good one. Recent research suggests that it will one day be possible to make an autocatalyst without the need for any precious metals such as platinum and palladium. If this happens, then both metals will be left without their biggest source of demand.

Furthermore, electrical vehicles are on the rise, and they do not emit the harmful emissions that platinum and palladium are tasked with reducing. The challenge for platinum and palladium will be to find new applications where they can be used. Otherwise, the future of platinum and palladium does not look all that bright.

Having said that, palladium is most likely to outperform platinum with both charts and supply and demand in its favor. There is still a shortage of palladium that the market will not be able to resolve in the short term. The supply deficit, combined with the recent consolidation in prices after a major correction, will most likely result in palladium rising again.

On the other hand, gold is under pressure, and it’s hard to see platinum doing well when gold is struggling. There is also a surplus of platinum that will not go away anytime soon. Therefore, barring a major supply disruption, such as a major strike that drastically reduces supplies, platinum is highly unlikely to do as well as palladium. Platinum may have outperformed palladium in recent weeks, but that should soon reverse.

Source: https://seekingalpha.com/article/4255191-supply-demand-outlook-favors-palladium-vs-platinum

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in All Recent Posts, New Age Metals | Comments Off on New Age Metals Inc. $NAM.ca – Supply And Demand Outlook Favors #Palladium Vs. Platinum $WG.ca $XTM.ca $WM.ca $PDL.ca

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »