|
|
Post by John on Feb 26, 2014 16:35:57 GMT -5
I'm still doubting this project will get off the ground. Now they have scrapped plans for the pipeline and are going via conveyors in driven tunnels. At the depths they are stating, I'd say they will be hitting old ironstone mines...Sirius
|
|
|
|
Post by garryo on Feb 27, 2014 9:12:04 GMT -5
John
Read about Sirius's latest proposal ie conveyor tunnel instead of pipeline and agree with what they say about reducing visual impact but at what cost?
The plan as per Sirius statement states a reception area for the ore plus crushing and stacking at or near Wilton and agree with you that the proposed tunnel would be in the Ironstone measures or just below as the Cleveland Main seam Ironstone crops out along the north side of the Cleveland Hills just above the Parkway Road A184?.The Cleveland Ironstone beds are in the Middle Lias of the Lower Jurrasic. Just below this bed is the Lower Lias which also contain Ironstone beds including the Pecten seam which is quite thin. As these rocks are shaley Tunneling may or may not be difficult, probaly easy to mine with TBMs or Heliminers etc but roof support may be a problem. The other interesting point is that the Cleveland Ironstone mines were classified as 'gassy'. The deepest of the old Ironstone mines was North Skelton which was sunk into the base of a syncline to depth of over 700ft or about 200mts in new money. If you draw a straight line fom the proposed mine site to Wilton the conveyor tunnel will pass near to this area (depending on route).Also there are some decent faults as well. Should (if & maybe)the mine goes ahead it will be interesting times ahead.
On the issue of transport from the mine I wonder if rail was considered. For an example U/G conveyor from mine to Esk Valley then rail loading point, maybe volumes or rail line capacity were the problem
Regards
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Feb 28, 2014 9:26:28 GMT -5
Yeah the Sirious link I posted was about the tunnel Garry.
I wonder what they have in mind??? Multi flight standard 42 high speed belts, or one variable speed Cable Belt like Selby installed in it's main drift..
The other big problem I see is the fact that the whole tunnel will be in Ironstone measures where dozens of old ironstone mines have been worked, all gaseous too!!
If you recall, Boulby's shafts intersected the old Boulby ironstone mine, our rescue team went down that mine, as the adit wasn't far away and did some Proto training down there.
From memory, the Cleveland ironstone mines were all safety lamp mines, some pretty gassy, others not so.
I had a labourer at Boulby who had worked in one of the ironstone mines when they were working, he lived near Skelton, so that mine could have been one of several in the area, his was a gassy mine.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 23, 2014 11:45:00 GMT -5
Is this the final nail in the coffin for Yorkshire Potash???Whitby Gazette.
|
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Apr 23, 2014 12:10:20 GMT -5
Just show`s the bull nuts Boulby were spouting a while back,no market for the product,
Polyhalite also has Magnesium in the product,a mineral very beneficial to livestock farmers.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 23, 2014 13:08:58 GMT -5
Just show`s the bull nuts Boulby were spouting a while back,no market for the product, Polyhalite also has Magnesium in the product,a mineral very beneficial to livestock farmers.
But I can't see them gaining planning permits now, and the other major problem of raising cash for the project will start to dry up.
Just a guess, but I bet they put the project in "mothballs" now, like the previous companies did in the 70's...They can "sit" on it indefinitely, probably increase in value over the years. |
|
|
|
Post by Minutor on Apr 24, 2014 6:02:09 GMT -5
The SOP (polyhalite is a potential source) market is only about 6 million tonnes a year compared to MOP (KCl) which is around 55 million tonnes. MOP is better suited to use on carbohydrate crops and MOP on fruit, vegetables and green leafed plants. There are however reasons why I think the polyhalite sourced SOP market will increase, it is a slow release fertilizer and contains other minerals such as Mg and Ca which make it ideal for leached soils such as those in the tropics and sub-tropics. There is also an issue with Cl build-up using MOP in more temperate soils which SOP could help to mitigate.
SOP sources are currently mainly from brines (around 3 million tonnes) and secondary sourced by the treatment of MOP with acid / sulphates (around 3 million tonnes), th e latter is very expensive at around $600 per tonne and this will probably get priced out of the market by polyhalite sourced SOP.
In short I am not pessimistic about the international market and mineable polyhalite is not that common worldwide, but there is no doubt CPL / ICL have stolen a march on their rivals.
I still think Sirius' biggest problem is finding the money to build the mine and I am not convinced they can build it for the number in the feasibility study or come straight out of the blocks at the tonnages they are projecting! They will need a big partner and given the reluctance for major miners to invest in anything right now it is going to be a hard task. Perhaps the Chinese might be interested, who knows, but they have also had their fingers burnt with the mining crash.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 24, 2014 9:21:26 GMT -5
I'm still pessimistic about this project, just been searching, and so far they have only raised 53 million in cash... How much will two shafts, the equipment for them etc cost??? Then a Joy miner? another mill??
To even start the project they will need a couple of hundred million, then there's the tunnel to Teesdside, the equipment to handle the ore, conveyors.
But the biggest unknown, mining conditions, they seem so over confident everything will be perfect, no problems, straight out from pit bottom and making immediate profits.
I think they and their investors are going to be in for a financial shock.
First I don't get any information on shaft designs, CPL have had three major shaft refits since sinking, the last one was the most expensive.
Yorkshire Potash's shafts will be far deeper, what will the problems in an efficient shaft design cost??? The problems CPL has had, we never had with coal mining shafts.
When CPL was set up by ICI and their partner, they had no illusions it was going to be difficult and very costly, they were pouring money into the project up until the early 1980s. During the 70's we could NEVER hit projected production targets. I was involved in a shift change at the face experiment, which gave us overtime, but It wasn't a success, it was dropped after a couple of months.
Things started improving with the changeover from the undercut/fire, and mucking out with LHD's to continuous miners and shuttle cars.
Now I see Boulby are having serious roof problems.
Back to Yorkshire Potash's potential problems, they could be exposed to strata "creep", they won't have a salt seam to drive roads through, as they will be well below the salt seam, it will be a lot hotter at the depth they will be mining, roof conditions could well be hazardous and they may have to spend mega bucks on better roof control, steelwork, props and bars as well as bolting.
There could also be gas problems, both as blowouts and flammable..
The last, or first hurdle, is planning permits, my guess is they will be turned down now CPL is going to mine the same mineral.
I wouldn't invest my money in this venture, not without finding an insurance company that would pay me back if/when this falls through.
|
|
|
|
Post by Minutor on Apr 24, 2014 10:14:25 GMT -5
I'm still pessimistic about this project, just been searching, and so far they have only raised 53 million in cash... How much will two shafts, the equipment for them etc cost??? Then a Joy miner? another mill??
To even start the project they will need a couple of hundred million, then there's the tunnel to Teesdside, the equipment to handle the ore, conveyors.
But the biggest unknown, mining conditions, they seem so over confident everything will be perfect, no problems, straight out from pit bottom and making immediate profits.
I think they and their investors are going to be in for a financial shock.
First I don't get any information on shaft designs, CPL have had three major shaft refits since sinking, the last one was the most expensive.
Yorkshire Potash's shafts will be far deeper, what will the problems in an efficient shaft design cost??? The problems CPL has had, we never had with coal mining shafts.
When CPL was set up by ICI and their partner, they had no illusions it was going to be difficult and very costly, they were pouring money into the project up until the early 1980s. During the 70's we could NEVER hit projected production targets. I was involved in a shift change at the face experiment, which gave us overtime, but It wasn't a success, it was dropped after a couple of months.
Things started improving with the changeover from the undercut/fire, and mucking out with LHD's to continuous miners and shuttle cars.
Now I see Boulby are having serious roof problems.
Back to Yorkshire Potash's potential problems, they could be exposed to strata "creep", they won't have a salt seam to drive roads through, as they will be well below the salt seam, it will be a lot hotter at the depth they will be mining, roof conditions could well be hazardous and they may have to spend mega bucks on better roof control, steelwork, props and bars as well as bolting.
There could also be gas problems, both as blowouts and flammable..
The last, or first hurdle, is planning permits, my guess is they will be turned down now CPL is going to mine the same mineral.
I wouldn't invest my money in this venture, not without finding an insurance company that would pay me back if/when this falls through. I think the technical issues you highlight can be solved, shaft design for example, I am sure the Boulby experience will be taken into account. Polyhalite is a more competent rock than the sylvinite mined at Boulby, it is less prone to plastic creep does not have the shale and rotten marl sitting above it which caused so many of Boulby's roof problems. There wont be any carnallite either which caused the recent falls. There still might be some gas but given the polyhalite carries very little shale blowouts shouldn't be a problem. Although I believe it can be done technically every new mine I have been involved with the capex was higher than estimated and the production build-up slower and this will be no different! Would I invest? No! |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 24, 2014 10:38:04 GMT -5
I'm still pessimistic about this project, just been searching, and so far they have only raised 53 million in cash... How much will two shafts, the equipment for them etc cost??? Then a Joy miner? another mill??
To even start the project they will need a couple of hundred million, then there's the tunnel to Teesdside, the equipment to handle the ore, conveyors.
But the biggest unknown, mining conditions, they seem so over confident everything will be perfect, no problems, straight out from pit bottom and making immediate profits.
I think they and their investors are going to be in for a financial shock.
First I don't get any information on shaft designs, CPL have had three major shaft refits since sinking, the last one was the most expensive.
Yorkshire Potash's shafts will be far deeper, what will the problems in an efficient shaft design cost??? The problems CPL has had, we never had with coal mining shafts.
When CPL was set up by ICI and their partner, they had no illusions it was going to be difficult and very costly, they were pouring money into the project up until the early 1980s. During the 70's we could NEVER hit projected production targets. I was involved in a shift change at the face experiment, which gave us overtime, but It wasn't a success, it was dropped after a couple of months.
Things started improving with the changeover from the undercut/fire, and mucking out with LHD's to continuous miners and shuttle cars.
Now I see Boulby are having serious roof problems.
Back to Yorkshire Potash's potential problems, they could be exposed to strata "creep", they won't have a salt seam to drive roads through, as they will be well below the salt seam, it will be a lot hotter at the depth they will be mining, roof conditions could well be hazardous and they may have to spend mega bucks on better roof control, steelwork, props and bars as well as bolting.
There could also be gas problems, both as blowouts and flammable..
The last, or first hurdle, is planning permits, my guess is they will be turned down now CPL is going to mine the same mineral.
I wouldn't invest my money in this venture, not without finding an insurance company that would pay me back if/when this falls through. I think the technical issues you highlight can be solved, shaft design for example, I am sure the Boulby experience will be taken into account. Polyhalite is a more competent rock than the sylvinite mined at Boulby, it is less prone to plastic creep does not have the shale and rotten marl sitting above it which caused so many of Boulby's roof problems. There wont be any carnallite either which caused the recent falls. There still might be some gas but given the polyhalite carries very little shale blowouts shouldn't be a problem. Although I believe it can be done technically every new mine I have been involved with the capex was higher than estimated and the production build-up slower and this will be no different! Would I invest? No! Do I spot a tad of pessimism in that last content.....LOL Not being familiar for polyhalite, I can't really comment, I just recall all the problems CPL had, and they are still experiencing many.. The shaft linings problem will be an ongoing one throughout the life of Boulby, there was a good paper written by a lady who was hired from Nottingham University, she studied the problems and wrote her PHD thesis on a longer term solution for the next shaft repair, which I think has been completed. But her thesis, although in many places is way out of my league of understanding, looks like it will be an ongoing geological problem caused by the "plastic" nature of the orebody around the shaft linings, plus the Sherwood sandstone/water layer 600 feet up from pit bottom bearing down on the strata. Not sure if I posted a link to that thesis, you may have read it, I know you'll understand it far better than me in your field of experience...I'm just a dumb electrician, so geology is not a subject I've had too much to do with, bar the very basics I was taught in mining tech a thousand years back, well it seems that long these days....LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Minutor on Apr 24, 2014 13:17:09 GMT -5
I have been consistently pessimistic! lol
Not for technical or SOP market reasons but for the magnitude of the funding, if I was funding this I would be concerned about the inherent risks of capex overspend and production build-up. Sirius need a major partner to do the heavy lifting otherwise I fear it wont happen.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Aug 6, 2014 9:29:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Nov 12, 2014 16:43:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Apr 21, 2015 5:24:20 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Apr 23, 2015 16:34:08 GMT -5
The local councils have passed planning on the Sirus project,so a step nearer reality,and of course will help with inward investment.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 23, 2015 17:44:25 GMT -5
The local councils have passed planning on the Sirus project,so a step nearer reality,and of course will help with inward investment.
Right up until I migrated in August of 79, the electrical staff was still understaffed by at least a dozen electricians, hence all the overtime I put in there. I don't think they had enough skilled fitters either.
Looks like there could be a "pay war" IF the project gets under way. Never know, they might just attract ex coal mining staff. |
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Apr 24, 2015 10:50:36 GMT -5
It would`nt surprise me if Boulby are pessimistic at this point as well,
The future expansion area is possibly sterilized to them,the fear of key staff being poached,as is`nt one of Sirus`s top men ex Boulby?
Your mention of a possible amalgamation of both companies makes sense,or even a good pay off as a take over by Boulby,as Sirus now hold some important cards in their hands.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 24, 2015 13:41:43 GMT -5
It would`nt surprise me if Boulby are pessimistic at this point as well, The future expansion area is possibly sterilized to them,the fear of key staff being poached,as is`nt one of Sirus`s top men ex Boulby? Your mention of a possible amalgamation of both companies makes sense,or even a good pay off as a take over by Boulby,as Sirus now hold some important cards in their hands.
I tend to think they will approach CPL for a buyout, or joint venture, it's alright boasting they have the market, but these times are hard, where's all the millions coming from to sink the shafts, drive the trunk conveyor tunnel to Teeside, develop the mine??? They are no where near on target for raising those funds.
Lets say they have enough to start sinking the shafts, what about equipping the shafts??? Almost as much as the actual sinking costs, then several Joy miners, shuttle cars conveyors, ore bins, mine infrastructure, ie cables transformers, air pipes, water lines..List goes on.
I saw it at Boulby, they were only just producing their first potash when I arrived there, to operate one shaft was used for everything, the rock shaft wasn't completed until around August/September of 1975.
The company were working in unknown territory, much the same as Yorks Potash will be doing. They could also end up having problems Boulby never encountered due to the extra depths, and like Boulby, they could end up years before a first profit is realized.
CPL had wealthy backers, ICI and Anglo American, Yorks Potash has neither. |
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Apr 25, 2015 15:08:57 GMT -5
I tend to think they will approach CPL for a buyout, or joint venture, it's alright boasting they have the market, but these times are hard, where's all the millions coming from to sink the shafts, drive the trunk conveyor tunnel to Teeside, develop the mine??? They are no where near on target for raising those funds. Read more: coalmine.proboards.com/thread/733/new-potash-mine-planned?page=2#ixzz3YN3AcvzpPersonally i tend to think its CPL will do the approaching,its them that have most to lose,and by their comments from the start of the planning applications,firstly that there was no market for Polyhalite and now the fear of losing trained personnel,they are really rattled. Raising capital for this venture was always going to be tough,but with the full planning passed,there seems to be a better chance of achieving this,and i presume CPL realize this. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 25, 2015 15:40:36 GMT -5
I tend to think they will approach CPL for a buyout, or joint venture, it's alright boasting they have the market, but these times are hard, where's all the millions coming from to sink the shafts, drive the trunk conveyor tunnel to Teeside, develop the mine??? They are no where near on target for raising those funds. Read more: coalmine.proboards.com/thread/733/new-potash-mine-planned?page=2#ixzz3YN3AcvzpPersonally i tend to think its CPL will do the approaching,its them that have most to lose,and by their comments from the start of the planning applications,firstly that there was no market for Polyhalite and now the fear of losing trained personnel,they are really rattled. Raising capital for this venture was always going to be tough,but with the full planning passed,there seems to be a better chance of achieving this,and i presume CPL realize this.
One of the main overheads will be labour costs, CPL only have to raise the base pay or better, a new better bonus scheme, or one other thing left up their sleeve, offer a share system to it's workforce.
I recall when the original Yorkshire Potash was getting ready to sink their mine, plus two other companies, many of us were rubbing our hands and seeing pound notes, we knew it would make the local job market lucrative and probably much better paid than CPL were paying. Back then though, CPL weren't in any position to raise pay scales, but I'm sure other prospective companies were, to get their investments off the ground.
I'm not going to hold my breath, I still doubt it will materialize and will end up the same way as the original Yorkshire Potash, selling the mining leases to the highest bidder.
I'm sure the big Canadian and American potash mining/producers are watching this venture, as they too will see lower potash prices hurting their huge investments. They are in positions to scuttle Yorkshire Potash if the need arises.
I'll sit back and watch what happens over the next few months, could get interesting, one way or another. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Apr 26, 2015 7:39:15 GMT -5
Looking at the worlds producers in percentage of potash reserves, the UK doesn't even get a mention, Germany has 2% of world reserves, Canada is the biggest with 46% followed by Russia, with 35%.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 12, 2015 14:08:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by fortythreesflyer on Jun 30, 2015 13:35:58 GMT -5
Planning granted as approx 18.45 gmt
|
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Jun 30, 2015 14:05:27 GMT -5
Planning granted as approx 18.45 gmt That`s really good news,following the Colliery closures of this month, And this planning approval will boost the share price,and most likely pull in the investors, And will definitely have them Shylock`s pulling their hair out. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jun 30, 2015 16:24:58 GMT -5
Now comes the hard part.
1/ Raising the capital.
2/ Sinking the shafts.
3/ Finding out what's waiting for them nearly a mile down.
Probably No1 and No3 are going to be the hardest.
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 3, 2015 8:17:28 GMT -5
The more I read up on this the more pessimistic I become.
I just cannot see this project moving beyond the planning and wishful thinking stage, how on earth are they going to raise the cash to drive a tunnel to Teeside, sink two deep shafts, build the process plant and purchase extremely expensive machinery??
Lets take a look at some history, CPL was formed by ICI with Anglo American, they both had "deep pockets" and could use a tax write off if things didn't go well.
They even formed their own shaft sinking/mining contract company MCC to carry out all the preliminary work.
Even at that, it took several years before the company even showed accounts ledgers with black ink!
Then encountered numerous problems, biggest was getting skilled labour, then being able to mine enough product just to cover day to day costs let alone make a profit. They had some of the worlds most experienced mining engineers in deep mining for Managers and Undermanagers, they were also working in the unknown and had to change mining practices several times before tonnages started going up.
Over the years, shafts had to be repaired, a very expensive project, not once, but twice, No1 tower replaced, and No2 showing stress cracks, probably due to be replaced in the next two years.
Lets see what Sirius has, no experience in local mining conditions, so they will have to go through several years of similar or new mining problems CPL didn't see. Skilled labour, well they may hire the last colliery closures Elec and Mech Engineers and tradesmen, so that hurdle may have been overcome, same with miners.
Now where are they going to get the money??? It could be three to four years before the mine even starts covering costs, let alone paying dividends. Maybe they could get a large wealthy mining company to buy 49% of the stock?? I doubt it, but it's worth a thought.
There's some major problems, now lets say they sink the shafts, they are in the "unknown", way deeper than Boulby, so the ambient rock temperature could force them to install air conditioning, another very costly item of equipment, which is also expensive to run!
Will they be able to drive the main roads on the orebody??? They may take the risk, as Boulby did, then have to resort to driving in the salt bed above the seam, meaning profits won't be so high. Will convergence be worse at these depths??
Why did Sirius decide to go it alone??? Seems a silly business decision to me in such an expensive project.
To sum it up, I cannot see them being able to raise the capital on the stock market, my guess is they will pull out and sell the leases.
I saw this in the 70's when I worked at Boulby, there were about four companies planning mines in the Whitby area, all had planning permits approved, and all were huge international companies. My guess is they saw the problems CPL were having with Boulby and decided it was too risky to proceed. Yorkshire Potash was one of those, bought by Sirius.
No, sorry, I don't even think a single sod will be turned over on the mining site, I see it shelved for a few more years, maybe CPL will end up buying the leases??? We'll just have to wait and see.
|
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Jul 3, 2015 16:28:04 GMT -5
Out of interest,how many year`s have Boulby left in their take,and is there another take available to them?
|
|
|
|
Post by dazbt on Jul 3, 2015 16:39:49 GMT -5
The more I read up on this the more pessimistic I become.
I just cannot see this project moving beyond the planning and wishful thinking stage, how on earth are they going to raise the cash to drive a tunnel to Teeside, sink two deep shafts, build the process plant and purchase extremely expensive machinery??
Lets take a look at some history, CPL was formed by ICI with Anglo American, they both had "deep pockets" and could use a tax write off if things didn't go well.
They even formed their own shaft sinking/mining contract company MCC to carry out all the preliminary work.
Even at that, it took several years before the company even showed accounts ledgers with black ink!
Then encountered numerous problems, biggest was getting skilled labour, then being able to mine enough product just to cover day to day costs let alone make a profit. They had some of the worlds most experienced mining engineers in deep mining for Managers and Undermanagers, they were also working in the unknown and had to change mining practices several times before tonnages started going up.
Over the years, shafts had to be repaired, a very expensive project, not once, but twice, No1 tower replaced, and No2 showing stress cracks, probably due to be replaced in the next two years.
Lets see what Sirius has, no experience in local mining conditions, so they will have to go through several years of similar or new mining problems CPL didn't see. Skilled labour, well they may hire the last colliery closures Elec and Mech Engineers and tradesmen, so that hurdle may have been overcome, same with miners.
Now where are they going to get the money??? It could be three to four years before the mine even starts covering costs, let alone paying dividends. Maybe they could get a large wealthy mining company to buy 49% of the stock?? I doubt it, but it's worth a thought.
There's some major problems, now lets say they sink the shafts, they are in the "unknown", way deeper than Boulby, so the ambient rock temperature could force them to install air conditioning, another very costly item of equipment, which is also expensive to run!
Will they be able to drive the main roads on the orebody??? They may take the risk, as Boulby did, then have to resort to driving in the salt bed above the seam, meaning profits won't be so high. Will convergence be worse at these depths??
Why did Sirius decide to go it alone??? Seems a silly business decision to me in such an expensive project.
To sum it up, I cannot see them being able to raise the capital on the stock market, my guess is they will pull out and sell the leases.
I saw this in the 70's when I worked at Boulby, there were about four companies planning mines in the Whitby area, all had planning permits approved, and all were huge international companies. My guess is they saw the problems CPL were having with Boulby and decided it was too risky to proceed. Yorkshire Potash was one of those, bought by Sirius.
No, sorry, I don't even think a single sod will be turned over on the mining site, I see it shelved for a few more years, maybe CPL will end up buying the leases??? We'll just have to wait and see. Renmimbi the "International Polyfiller" might just be the solution to all those potential problems. |
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 3, 2015 17:04:56 GMT -5
Out of interest,how many year`s have Boulby left in their take,and is there another take available to them?
I can't see them working south again due to water problems. No idea what happened to cause it, but 600 feet above the potash seam is the Sherwood sandstone strata, a water bearing strata of heavy brine at high pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by tygwyn on Aug 19, 2015 11:23:30 GMT -5
|
|
