The Honeymoon
Project: On the Brink of Realisation:Martin Ackland
| Table 3: Comparison of characteristics of the Honeymoon project with those of a typical operation in the USA | ||||
|
|
||||
| US operations | Honeymoon | |||
|
|
||||
| Deposit description | ||||
|
|
||||
| Area size | 0.1-5.0 | 0.24 | ||
| Subsurface depth (m) | 100-300 | 110 | ||
| U3O8 reserves (t) | 2 000-25 000 | 3 360 | ||
| Average grade U3O8 (%) | 0.08-0.15 | 0.16 | ||
| Permeability |
Low-moderate 500-4 000 |
High-very
high 15 000-18 000 |
||
| Aquifer TDS (ppm) | Suitable for stock and domestic purposes | Very saline, unsuitable for stock or domestic purposes | ||
| Leach system | Carbonate | Sulphate | ||
| Oxidant | O2 | Fe2(SO4)3 and O2 | ||
| Pregnant liquor U3O8 | 60-80 | 150 | ||
| Preflush or pretreatment | Not required | Planned - to reduce TDS | ||
| Recovery method | Resin - IX | Pilot plant is SX IX | ||
| Groundwater end use | As before | Remains unstable | ||
|
|
||||
| Infrastructure | ||||
|
|
||||
| Operational mode | Near established towns and workforce | Near Broken Hill - Fly-in/Fly-out; semi desert location | ||
| Housing/accommodation | Not required | Transportable camp | ||
| Electricity | Local grid | On-site diesel | ||
| Airstrip | Not required | Required | ||
| Access roads | Sealed and unsealed | Unsealed | ||
| Water supply | Potable quality (domestic/camp) aquifers | Treated water | ||
|
|
||||
The Honeymoon
Project: On the Brink of Realisation: