TIDMHZM
RNS Number : 1657K
Horizonte Minerals PLC
12 December 2018
NEWS RELEASE
12 December 2018
FILING OF NI 43-101 FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR THE ARAGUAIA NICKEL
PROJECT INCLUDING OPPORTUNITY FOR A STAGE 2 EXPANSION TO DOUBLE
NICKEL PRODUCTION
Horizonte Minerals Plc, (AIM/TSX: HZM) ('Horizonte' or 'the
Company') the nickel development company focused in Brazil, is
pleased to announce that it has filed the Feasibility Study ('FS'
or the 'Study') for the Araguaia Ferronickel Project ('Araguaia',
or 'the Project') in Brazil's ParĂ¡ State on SEDAR. The Study has
been prepared in accordance with the National Instrument 43-101 -
standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ('NI 43-101') and was
previously announced on the 29(th) October 2018.
The Study confirms Araguaia as a Tier 1 project with a large
high-grade scalable resource, a long mine life and a low-cost
source of ferronickel for the stainless-steel industry. The Stage 1
FS design allows for future construction of a second Rotary Kiln
Electric Furnace ('RKEF') process line ('Stage 2 expansion' or
'Stage 2'), with potential to double Araguaia's production capacity
from 14,500 tonnes per annum ('t/a') nickel up to 29,000 t/a
nickel. The results of this Stage 2 expansion study are included as
an opportunity in Section 25 of the NI 43-101 Technical Report with
the economics highlighted below.
Stage 1 - FS Highlights:
-- Initial 28-year mine life generates cash flows after taxation
of US$1.6 billion with sufficient mineral resources to extend
beyond 28 years;
-- Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[1] ('NPV') of US$401
million[2] and Internal Rate of Return ('IRR') of 20.1% using the
base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000 per tonne(3)
('/t');
-- Upon development, the Project is expected to produce an
average of 14,500 tonnes of nickel contained within approximately
52,000 tonnes ferronickel per annum, utilising the proven RKEF
technology currently used at over 40 mines around the world;
-- The base case FS economics assume a flat nickel price of
US$14,000/t for the entire 28-year mine life based on Wood
Mackenzie's short-term forecast;
-- C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to year 10 of US$3.08 per
pound ('/lb') of nickel (US$6,794/t), making Araguaia a low-cost
producer;
-- Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the
post-tax NPV increases to US$740 million with an IRR of 28.1%,
reflecting the significant leverage that the Project returns have
to any future increase in nickel prices; and
-- Capital cost estimate of US$443 million (AACE class 3),
including US$65.3 million of contingencies equating to 17.2% of
total capex budget.
Stage 2 - Second Line Expansion Highlights:
A key part of the FS Stage 1 Project design was that the RKEF
plant and associated infrastructure was designed to accommodate the
addition of a second RKEF process line (Stage 2 expansion), with
potential to double Araguaia's production capacity from 14,500 t/a
nickel up to 29,000 t/a nickel. The Project Mineral Resource
inventory has the grade and scale to support the increase in plant
throughput from 900 kt/pa (Stage 1) to the Stage 2 rate of 1.8 Mt/a
supporting the twin line RKEF flow sheet. The Stage 2 expansion
assumes operating at Stage 1 production rate of 900 kt/pa for three
years, after which free cash flows would be reinvested to expand
the plant to 1.8 Mt/pa by the addition of a second line. All
figures below represent this combined production of stage 1 for 3
years followed by the enlarged production for the remainder of the
Life of Mine.
-- The Stage 2 expansion, assumed in year 3, supports a 26-year
mine life generating cash flows after taxation of US$2.6
billion;
-- No increase in upfront capital cost which remains at the same
level at the FS Stage 1 of US$443 million, the Stage 2 expansion is
financed through operational cash flow;
-- Estimated post-tax Net Present Value[3] ('NPV') of US$741
million[4] and Internal Rate of Return ('IRR') of 23.8% using the
base case nickel price forecast of US$14,000/t[5];
-- Using a nickel price of US$11,000/t generates cash flows
after taxation and payback of capital of US$1.0 billion;
-- Nickel grade of 1.82% for the first 10 years of the Stage 2 operation;
-- Annual nickel production of 29,000 t/a;
-- C1 (Brook Hunt) cash cost year 1 to Year 10 of US$3.00 per
pound ('/lb') of nickel (US$6,613/t), making Araguaia a low-cost
producer. Life of mine C1 cash cost of US$3.51 per pound ('/lb') of
nickel (US$7,737/t); and
-- Using the consensus mid-term nickel price of US$16,800/t, the
post-tax NPV(8) for the Stage 2 option increases to US$1,264
million with an IRR of 31.8%.
Horizonte CEO, Jeremy Martin, commented;
"Following on from the successful completion of the Feasibility
Study for the Araguaia ferronickel project, we are very pleased to
file the 43-101 Feasibility Technical Report which includes as an
opportunity the Stage 2 expansion to add a second RKEF line to the
Project. The Stage 2 expansion would potentially increase annual
nickel production from 14,500 tonnes per annum to 29,000 tonnes per
annum whilst demonstrating economies of scale for both operating
and capital costs. For this scenario the upfront pre-production
capital cost remains unchanged at US$443 million and the
incremental capital expenditure to build the stage 2 expansion, is
anticipated to be financed out of operational free cash flow. The
FS design of the RKEF plant and all associated infrastructure was
configured to allow a second RKEF line to be added at a future
time, as such the Stage 2 expansion benefits from the existing
utilities and infrastructure expenditure. Significant items such as
the powerline, water pipeline, overall process plant site,
utilities, and slag storage facility already have sufficient
capacity built in during the Stage 1 planning to meet the desired
production increase.
The economics of the Stage 2 expansion in year 3 are compelling
with the Base Case NPV(8) of US$741 million and IRR of 23.8%,
increasing to an IRR of 31.8% when applying consensus nickel price
assuming no change in the upfront capital investment for the Stage
1 single line RKEF plant as shown in the FS. If we apply a nickel
price of US$11,000 per tonne nickel, the enlarged twin line plant
generates cash flows after taxation and pay back of capital of
US$1.0 billion.
We have always maintained that Araguaia has a high grade
scalable mineral resource with only a small part utilised for the
single line plant. As demonstrated in the Stage 2 expansion the
resource can comfortably support the increased capacity for over 26
years with the first 10 years averaging 1.82% nickel which places
Araguaia on the upper range of the global grade curve even with the
increased mining rate.
The recent weakness in nickel prices appears to be reflection of
macroeconomics and does not appear to have impacted wider consensus
of the positive future potential of the nickel market. Demand
versus supply deficits remain forecast for the short term.
Inventories on the LME continue to fall with significant new supply
required for the stainless-steel market which is growing at 5%[6]
year on year, with new demand driven from the EV battery sector.
Araguaia is anticipated to come online in 2021 and be placed in the
lower quartile[7] on the laterite C1 cost curve (year 1 to year 10
of US$3.08 per pound of nickel (US$6,794/t)[8] making it one of the
lower cost new nickel projects. Meanwhile the forward C1 cost curve
is expected to consistently rise due to the rising costs of inputs
as well as the reducing global grade profile across existing
mines.
The successful completion of the Feasibility Study and the
positive economics from the Stage 2 expansion all confirm that
Araguaia is a tier 1 asset demonstrating flexibility and
scalability with compelling economics.
The Company is well funded as we work to advance Araguaia to the
construction stage and start to advance our second 100% owned
Vermelho Nickel Cobalt project as part of the company's strategy to
become a leading nickel development Company. I look forward to
updating the market on progress as we move into 2019."
Stage 2 Second Line Expansion Details:
The FS plant ore feed rate of 900kt/a is based on a single line
RKEF plant (Stage 1). This size plant represents the optimal
capacity for an achievable capital cost for project financing for a
single project junior development company. However, the Stage 1
plant capacity underutilises the significant Mineral Resource that
HZM has within the project area (119Mt Measured and Indicated
Mineral Resources at 1.27% Ni). In the FS, the cut-off grade is
1.4% Ni and represents a "high-grade" option. The marginal cut-off
grade for the Project is closer to 1.0% Ni. This means that there
is a significant quantity of potentially economic material that is
not mined or processed in the current Stage 1 FS schedule.
Accordingly, the opportunity contemplated here is that the Stage 1
production scenario (the FS Base Case) is built and produces at an
initial production level 14,500 t/a of Nickel, and that the Stage
2, expansion in year 3 is implemented as the project starts
generating cash flows, thereby increasing total production to
29,000 t/a Nickel.
To explore the potential value of increasing the production rate
at Araguaia, a Stage 2 expansion to 1,800kt/a plant feed in Year 3
was contemplated at a scoping level. In this Stage 2 scenario,
Snowden completed pit optimisations based on the FS costs and
modifying factors. The pit optimisations targeted any material
determined to be economic, rather than the elevated Ni cut-off
grade applied in the FS. Only Measured and Indicated Mineral
Resources were considered in this scenario. Overall, the target was
to achieve a similar mine life to the FS schedule (28 years). This
was achieved by selecting a revenue factor pit shell equivalent to
a nickel price of US$11,200/t Ni which yields 44.0Mt of ore
feed.
The Stage 1 FS plant layout was designed to allow for the future
construction of a second RKEF line. A significant portion of the
Stage 1 RKEF plant and associated infrastructure has sufficient
capacity to support the Stage 2 expansion, resulting in
substantially lower capital costs to implement the second RKEF
line. The Stage 1 equipment and infrastructure that does not
require upgrading for Stage 2 includes;
-- The main power line to the plant;
-- The principle road and bridge infrastructure in-bound and outbound to the mine site;
-- Overall plant site layout, plant road / offices / stores / workshops;
-- Refinery facility;
-- The slag storage facility; and
-- Water abstraction pipeline.
As part of the preparation of the Stage 2 expansion, HZM has
completed a scoping level estimate of the costs associated with
implementing a second RKEF line after Year 3 of the mine life using
the FS capex as a basis and locating the additional equipment in
the areas within the existing FS plant layout. A summary of the
estimated direct equipment costs along with associated civil works
and installation costs for the Stage 2 expansion are shown in Table
1.
Table 1 Stage 1 and Stage 2 capex
WBS Area Stage Stage Equipment
1 2 Additions
FS - for
Pre- Second Stage
production RKEF 2
Capex line
(US$ Pre-
million) production
Capex
(US$
million)
1000 Mine 6.0 - NA
Ore
3000 Preparation 39.0 25.2 Dryer
Kiln,
4000 Pyrometallurgy 137.5 109.2 Furnace
Material Coal
5000 Supply 21.4 8.6 pulverisation
Substation,
water
pumping,
cooling
dam
lift,
Utilities water
and cooling
6000 Infrastructure 106.9 18.5 pipe
-------- ---------------- ------------ ------------ ---------------
Admin,
change
house,
7000 Buildings 9.1 0.6 canteen
-------- ---------------- ------------ ------------ ---------------
EPCM,
Owners,
Construction
Indirect Camp,
8000 Costs 82.4 22.0 engineering
Contingency 41.0 15.6 Contingency
-------- ---------------- ------------ ------------ ---------------
Total
capex 443.1 199.7
-------- ---------------- ------------ ------------ ---------------
The additional costs for the Stage 2 - Second RKEF line shown in
Table 1 above, represent sustaining capital expenditure which would
be financed once the Stage 1 operation is cash flow positive.
Therefore, the pre-production capital costs would remain the same
as the FS at US$443.1 million.
Key additional items required within the plant area for Phase 2
are included in Table 1; ore preparation dryer, kiln and furnace.
Items outside of the plant area include additional pumping capacity
for the water abstraction pipeline, a second plant cooling water
pipeline and an increase in the cooling water dam capacity.
The operating costs after the Stage 2 RKEF line becomes fully
operational were estimated based on the FS operating cost estimate.
A comparison of the physicals and the economics of the FS and the
expansion opportunity are shown Table 2 below.
Table 2 Comparison of physicals and financial KPI's for the FS
case and the Stage 2 Expansion[9]
Item FS Stage 1 Stage 2 - Second Line RKEF Expansion
----------------------------------------
Base Case Consensus case Base Case Consensus case
Unit (US$14,00/t Ni) (US$16,800/t Ni) (US$ 14,000/t Ni) (US$16,800/t Ni)
-------------------- ------------------- -------------------
Physicals
LOM plant feed[10] Mt 27.3 27.3 44.1 44.1
Process rate kt/a 900 900 1,800[11] 1,800(11)
Year 1- 10 Ni grade % 1.91 1.91 1.82 1.82
LOM Ni grade % 1.69 1.69 1.53 1.53
LOM Nickel
production kt 426 426 624 624
Strip ratio w:o 2.1 2.1 1.9 1.9
Mine life years 28[12] 28(12) 26[13] 26(13)
-------------------- ---------- -------------------- -------------------- ------------------- -------------------
Economics
Pre-production
Capital US$ M 443 443 443 443
LOM Sustaining
Capital cost US$ M 143 143 396 396
Capital Intensity -
Initial capex/t
Nickel US$/t Ni 1,041 1,041 710 710
C1 Cost (Brook
Hunt) US$/t Ni 8,193 8,193 7,737 7,737
C1 Cost (Brook
Hunt) Years 1- 10 US$/t Ni 6,794 6,794 6,613 6,613
Breakeven (NPV(8) )
Ni price US$/t 10,766 10,766 10,105 10,105
Total Revenue US$ M 5,970 7,164 8,742 10,490
Total cost US$ M 3,811 3,995 5,351 5,617
Operating cash flow US$ M 2,159 3,169 3,391 4,876
Net cash flow US$ M 1,572 2,582 2,552 4,033
NPV(8) US$ M 401 740 741 1,264
IRR % 20.1 28.1 23.8 31.8
-------------------- ---------- -------------------- -------------------- ------------------- -------------------
Report Filing
A technical report on this FS, prepared in accordance with the
NI 43-101 reporting requirements, has been filed on SEDAR at
www.sedar.com and at www.horizonteminerals.com
Qualified Persons
Mr Frank Blanchfield, B.Eng, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant,
Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;
Mr Andrew Ross, BSc (Hons), MSc, FAusIMM, Principal Consultant,
Snowden Mining Industry Consultants Pty Ltd;
Mr Francis Roger Billington, BSc (Hons), P.Geo. (APGO),
Consultant;
Dr Nicholas Barcza, BSc (Eng.), MSc (Eng.), PhD, Pr.Eng. (ECSA),
HLFSAIMM, Metallurgical Engineering Consultant;
Mr. David Haughton, B. Sc, MIMM, C Eng, Senior Process Engineer
on behalf of Canadian Engineering Associates Ltd; and
Mr Robin Kalanchey, BASc.(Metals and Materials Engineering),
P.Eng., Director, Minerals and Metals Western Canada, Ausenco
Engineering Canada Inc (Ausenco);
are the Qualified Persons under NI 43-101, and have reviewed,
approved and verified the technical content of this press release,
related to their area of expertise.
For further information visit www.horizonteminerals.com or
contact:
Horizonte Minerals plc
Jeremy Martin (CEO) +44 (0) 203 356 2901
Numis Securities Ltd (NOMAD & Joint Broker)
John Prior
Paul Gillam +44 (0) 207 260 1000
Shard Capital (Joint Broker)
Damon Heath
Erik Woolgar +44 (0) 20 186 9952
Tavistock (Financial PR)
Emily Fenton
Gareth Tredway +44 (0) 207 920 3150
About Horizonte Minerals:
Horizonte Minerals plc is an AIM and TSX-listed nickel
development company focused in Brazil. The Company is developing
the Araguaia project, as the next major ferronickel mine in Brazil,
and the Vermelho nickel-cobalt project, with the aim of being able
to supply nickel and cobalt to the EV battery market. Both projects
are 100% owned.
Horizonte shareholders include: Teck Resources Limited,
Canaccord Genuity Group, JP Morgan, Lombard Odier Asset Management
(Europe) Limited, City Financial, Richard Griffiths and
Glencore.
Glossary of technical terms
AACE Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering
AACE Class 3 +-10% +15% accuracy
Agglomerated Made into small lumps
Al2O3 Aluminium Oxide
ANN Araguaia Nickel North (the Northern deposit)
ANS Araguaia Nickel South (the Southern deposits)
C1 C1 cash cost as defined by Brook Hunt
Calcine Output from the kiln which is ore that is
reduced by heating in the presence of oxygen
and coal
Capex Capital cost
Co Cobalt
Cut-off grade Lowest grade of mineralisation material considered
economic, used in the calculation of ore
resources
Cr2O3 Chromium Oxide
Dilution Waste or low-grade material accidently mined
with the ore
EPC Engineering Procurement and Construction
EPCM Engineering Procurement and Construction
Management
EV Electric Vehicles
Fe Iron
FeNi30 Ferronickel with 30% Nickel and 70% Iron
Ferronickel or FeNi An alloy that contains approximately 30%
nickel and 70% iron and is the produced by
the project as an ingot
HZM, Horizonte or Horizonte Minerals plc
the Company
IFC International Finance Corporation
IRR Internal Rate of Return
Kt Thousand Tonnes (metric)
LME London Metal Exchange
LOM Life of mine
Loss Ore that is unintentionally left behind or
mined as waste
MgO Magnesium Oxide
MT Million Tonnes (metric)
Ni Nickel
NPV(8) Net present value at an 8% discount rate
Opex Operating cost
Ore A naturally occurring solid material from
which a metal or valuable mineral can be
extracted profitably
PEA Preliminary Economic Assessment
Reverse Circulation A rock drilling system that circulates drill
Drilling cuttings through the centre of the drill
rod so that they can be collected and assayed
without contamination
RKEF Rotating Kiln Electric Furnace is the process
by which nickel laterite ore is reduced and
then melted in so that metal is separated
from the slag to produce ferronickel
ROM Run of mine stockpile
Shotted Formation of small pellets from molten material
SiO2 Silicon Dioxide
Tpa Tonnes (metric) per annum
US$ United States Dollar
WM Wood Mackenzie
Mineral Reserves Mineral Reserves are sub-divided into 2 categories.
The highest level of Reserves or the level
with the most confidence is the `Proven'
category and the lower level of confidence
of the Reserves is the `Probable' category.
Reserves are distinguished from resources
as all of the technical and economic parameters
have been applied and the estimated grade
and tonnage of the resources should closely
approximate the actual results of mining.
The guidelines state "Mineral Reserves are
inclusive of the diluting material that will
be mined in conjunction with the Mineral
Reserve and delivered to the treatment plant
or equivalent facility." The guidelines also
state that, "The term `Mineral Reserve' need
not necessarily signify that extraction facilities
are in place or operative or that all government
approvals have been received. It does signify
that there are reasonable expectations of
such approvals.
Proven Mineral Reserves A `Proven Mineral Reserve' is the economically
mineable part of a Measured Mineral Resource
demonstrated by at least a Preliminary Feasibility
Study. This study must include adequate information
on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic,
and other relevant factors that demonstrate,
at the time of reporting, that economic extraction
is justified.
Probable Mineral A `Probable Mineral Reserve' is the economically
Reserves mineable part of an Indicated and in some
circumstances a Measured Mineral Resource
demonstrated by a least a Preliminary Feasibility
Study. This study must include adequate information
on mining, processing, metallurgical, economic,
and other relevant factors that demonstrate,
at the time of reporting, that economic extraction
can be justified.
Minerals Resource Mineral Resources are sub-divided into 3
categories depending on the geological confidence.
The highest level with the most confidence
is the `Measured' category. The next level
of confidence is the `Indicated' category
and the lowest level, or the resource with
the least confidence, is the `Inferred' category.
Indicated Mineral An `Indicated Mineral Resource' is that part
Resource of a Mineral Resource for which quantity,
grade or quality, densities, shape and physical
characteristics, can be estimated with a
level of confidence sufficient to allow the
appropriate application of technical and
economic parameters, to support mine planning
and evaluation of the economic viability
of the deposit. The estimate is based on
detailed and reliable exploration and testing
information gathered through appropriate
techniques from locations such as outcrops,
trenches, pits, workings and drill holes
that are spaced closely enough for geological
and grade continuity to be reasonably assumed.
Measured Mineral A `Measured Mineral Resource' is that part
Resource of a Mineral resource for which quantity,
grade or quality, densities, shape and physical
characteristics are so well established that
they can be estimated with confidence sufficient
to allow the appropriate application of technical
and economic parameters, to support production
planning and evaluation of the economic viability
of the deposit. The estimate is based on
detailed and reliable exploration, sampling
and testing information gathered through
appropriate techniques from locations such
as outcrops, trenches, pits, workings and
drill holes that are spaced closely enough
to confirm both geological and grade continuity.
Inferred Mineral An `Inferred Mineral Resource' is that part
Resource of a Mineral Resource for which quantity
and grade or quality can be estimated on
the basis of geological evidence and limited
sampling and reasonably assumed, but not
verified, geological and grade continuity.
The estimate is based on limited information
and sampling, gathered through appropriate
techniques from locations such as outcrops,
trenches, pits, workings and drill holes.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING INFORMATION
Except for statements of historical fact relating to the
Company, certain information contained in this press release
constitutes "forward-looking information" under Canadian securities
legislation. Forward-looking information includes, but is not
limited to, the ability of the Company to complete the Acquisition
as described herein, statements with respect to the potential of
the Company's current or future property mineral projects; the
success of exploration and mining activities; cost and timing of
future exploration, production and development; the estimation of
mineral resources and reserves and the ability of the Company to
achieve its goals in respect of growing its mineral resources; the
ability of the Company to complete the Placing as described herein,
and the realization of mineral resource and reserve estimates.
Generally, forward-looking information can be identified by the use
of forward-looking terminology such as "plans", "expects" or "does
not expect", "is expected", "budget", "scheduled", "estimates",
"forecasts", "intends", "anticipates" or "does not anticipate", or
"believes", or variations of such words and phrases or statements
that certain actions, events or results "may", "could", "would",
"might" or "will be taken", "occur" or "be achieved".
Forward-looking information is based on the reasonable assumptions,
estimates, analysis and opinions of management made in light of its
experience and its perception of trends, current conditions and
expected developments, as well as other factors that management
believes to be relevant and reasonable in the circumstances at the
date that such statements are made, and are inherently subject to
known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may
cause the actual results, level of activity, performance or
achievements of the Company to be materially different from those
expressed or implied by such forward-looking information, including
but not limited to risks related to: the inability of the Company
to complete the Acquisition as described herein, exploration and
mining risks, competition from competitors with greater capital;
the Company's lack of experience with respect to development-stage
mining operations; fluctuations in metal prices; uninsured risks;
environmental and other regulatory requirements; exploration,
mining and other licences; the Company's future payment
obligations; potential disputes with respect to the Company's title
to, and the area of, its mining concessions; the Company's
dependence on its ability to obtain sufficient financing in the
future; the Company's dependence on its relationships with third
parties; the Company's joint ventures; the potential of currency
fluctuations and political or economic instability in countries in
which the Company operates; currency exchange fluctuations; the
Company's ability to manage its growth effectively; the trading
market for the ordinary shares of the Company; uncertainty with
respect to the Company's plans to continue to develop its
operations and new projects; the Company's dependence on key
personnel; possible conflicts of interest of directors and officers
of the Company, the inability of the Company to complete the
Placing on the terms as described herein, and various risks
associated with the legal and regulatory framework within which the
Company operates. Although management of the Company has attempted
to identify important factors that could cause actual results to
differ materially from those contained in forward-looking
information, there may be other factors that cause results not to
be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance
that such statements will prove to be accurate, as actual results
and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in
such statements.
[1] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate
[2] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine
[3] NPV calculated using 8% discount rate
[4] USD/BRL 1/3.5 exchange rate applied for life-of-mine
[5] Wood Mackenzie Short term forecast - see market section of
NI 43 -101
[6] Source: Glencore
[7] Data from Wood Mackenzie cost curve
[8] Stage 1 only, C1 cash costs as per FS
[9] The physicals and cashflow assessment presented as Stage 2
in the table are preliminary in nature and are based on a mine
schedule and an estimate of the additional plant and equipment
needed to achieve the additional capacity. The capital costs for
the additional plant and equipment are based on the FS costs, and
the cost of installation and civil engineering are factored from
the FS costs. Operating costs at the increased capacity are
factored based on the FS operating cost estimate.
[10] Includes low grade stockpiles processed at the end of the
schedule
[11] Increased process rate commences after year 3
[12] 28 years mining following by 3 years of low grade stockpile
processing
[13] 26 years mining followed by 2 years of low grade stockpile
processing
This information is provided by RNS, the news service of the
London Stock Exchange. RNS is approved by the Financial Conduct
Authority to act as a Primary Information Provider in the United
Kingdom. Terms and conditions relating to the use and distribution
of this information may apply. For further information, please
contact rns@lseg.com or visit www.rns.com.
END
MSCDMMMZVMDGRZM
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 12, 2018 02:01 ET (07:01 GMT)
Horizonte Minerals (LSE:HZM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Mar 2024 to Apr 2024
Horizonte Minerals (LSE:HZM)
Historical Stock Chart
From Apr 2023 to Apr 2024