Copler Resource estimate increases by 27% or 2.2 million ounces
TORONTO, Sept. 10, 2012 /CNW/ – Alacer Gold Corp. (“Alacer Gold” or the “Corporation”) [TSX: ASR and ASX: AQG] today announces an updated Mineral Resource estimate for the Ã‡Ã¶pler
gold-silver-copper deposit in Turkey. The significant growth potential
of Ã‡Ã¶pler has been confirmed by a total of 2.2 million gold ounces
(Measured, Indicated + Inferred Resources) being added in the past six
months. This updated Mineral Resource will be used to update the
Ã‡Ã¶pler Mineral Reserve estimate in conjunction with the Ã‡Ã¶pler Sulfide
Feasibility Study which is planned to be completed in late 2012.
The updated Ã‡Ã¶pler resource estimate has resulted in Measured and
Indicated (“M+I”) Resources increasing to 182.6 million tonnes at a
grade of 1.4 grams per tonne (“g/t”) gold, containing a total of 8.0
million ounces (inclusive of reserves) as at June 30, 2012. This
represents a 900,000 ounce (11%) increase on the contained ounces in
the previous M+I Resource, prior to mining depletion of approximately
176,000 ounces between December 31, 2011 and June 30, 2012.
________________________________________________________________________________ | Mineral Resource for the Ã‡Ã¶pler Deposit (100%) as at June 30, 2012 | |________________________________________________________________________________| | Gold |Mineralization|Resource | Tonnes |Gold |Contained|Silver|Copper|Sulfur| |Cut-off | Type |Category |(million)|Grade| Gold |Grade |Grade |Grade | | Grade | | | |(g/t)|(million |(g/t) | (%) | (%) | | (g/t) | | | | | ounces) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |________|______________|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Measured | 16.8 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 4.5 | 0.1 | 0.4 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Indicated| 37.0 | 0.8 | 0.9 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.2 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | 0.3 | Oxide |Measured | | | | | | | | | |+ | 53.8 | 1.2 | 2.0 | 2.3 | 0.1 | 0.3 | | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Inferred | 25.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 0.1 | 0.4 | |________|______________|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Measured | 64.7 | 1.7 | 3.6 | 5.2 | 0.1 | 4.1 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Indicated| 51.6 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 3.9 | 0.1 | 4.1 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | 0.8 | Sulfide |Measured | | | | | | | | | |+ | 116.4 | 1.6 | 5.9 | 4.6 | 0.1 | 4.1 | | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Inferred | 25.7 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 2.8 | 0.1 | 3.0 | |________|______________|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| |Variable| Stockpiles |Measured | 12.5 | 0.2 | 0.1 | | | | |________|______________|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Measured | 94.0 | 1.6 | 4.8 | 5.1 | 0.1 | 3.3 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Indicated| 88.7 | 1.1 | 3.2 | 2.8 | 0.1 | 2.5 | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| |Variable| Total |Measured | | | | | | | | | |+ | 182.6 | 1.4 | 8.0 | 3.9 | 0.1 | 2.9 | | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______| | | |Inferred | 51.5 | 0.9 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 0.1 | 1.7 | |________|______________|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|______|______|
Note: Resources are quoted after mining depletion and are inclusive of
reserves. Resources are shown on a 100% basis, of which Alacer Gold
owns 80%. Resource methodology is summarised in the Technical
Procedural Section of this announcement. Stockpiles consist of a ROM
stockpile of 38kt at 3.6g/t and a leach pad stockpile estimated at
12.4Mt at 0.18g/t of recoverable gold as of 30 June, 2012. Silver,
copper and sulfur grades are not included for stockpiles. Rounding
errors will occur.
Mr. David Quinlivan, President and CEO of Alacer Gold, stated “Drilling over the past two years has enabled our exploration team to
quickly add nearly four million ounces of gold to the Ã‡Ã¶pler resource.
This new resource estimate confirms that the Ã‡Ã¶pler deposit contained
more than 10 million ounces of gold prior to mining commencing in late
2010. The conservative nature of this new resource estimate is
evidenced by the 18% positive reconciliation in ounces mined since
operations began at Ã‡Ã¶pler. In addition, the deposit remains open in
most directions and several near-surface, well mineralized areas such
as the old Ã‡Ã¶pler village area are not yet fully included in the
resource. A further 10 kilometers of drilling has been completed since
the June resource cut-off date with eight drill rigs continuing on
This new resource is reported as at June 30, 2012 and includes mining
depletion and drilling assay results received since the previous
resource that was reported as at December 31, 2011 (released February
A total of 2.2 million ounces of new Resources (Measured, Indicated and
Inferred) have been added in the past six months and this growth trend
can be seen in Figure 1 below.
The increase in contained ounces in the updated Mineral Resource
estimate is the result of:
-- Data from additional infill and extensional drilling completed between September 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012; and -- Further drilling and mining of the Manganese, Main and Marble Pits enabling a better understanding of the controls to gold mineralization.
Ã‡Ã¶pler Mineral Resources Comparison
A pre-mining comparison of the previous Ã‡Ã¶pler Mineral Resource estimate
(released February 27, 2012) with the new Ã‡Ã¶pler Mineral Resource
estimate is provided in the table below. The comparison shows that the
total M+I Resource has increased by 0.9 million ounces or 11% for
contained gold. Including Inferred Resources, the total increase is 2.2
million ounces or a 27% increase in contained gold.
____________________________________________________________________________________________ | Ã‡Ã¶pler - Mineral Resources Comparison (100% ownership basis) | |____________________________________________________________________________________________| | | | Previous Resource* | New Resource Pre-mining | Change | | | | Pre-mining | | | |_______|_________|_________________________|_________________________|______________________| | | | Tonnes |Gold |Contained| Tonnes |Gold |Contained|Tonnes|Gold |Contained| | |Category |(million)|Grade| Gold |(million)|Grade| Gold | (%) |Grade| Gold | | | | |(g/t)|(million | |(g/t)|(million | | (%) | (%) | | | | | | ounces) | | | ounces) | | | | |_______|_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Measured | 22.9 | 2.5 | 1.8 | 20.7 | 2.2 | 1.5 | -10% | -9% | -18% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Indicated| 26.0 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 42.3 | 0.7 | 1.0 | 63% | -9% | 48% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | Oxide |Measured | | | | | | | | | | | |+ | 48.9 | 1.6 | 2.5 | 63.0 | 1.2 | 2.5 | 29% |-22% | 0% | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Inferred | 5.8 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 26.3 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 354% |-10% | 295% | |_______|_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Measured | 71.6 | 1.7 | 3.9 | 65.5 | 1.7 | 3.7 | -8% | 4% | -5% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Indicated| 26.7 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 51.8 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 94% | -6% | 82% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| |Sulfide|Measured | | | | | | | | | | | |+ | 98.3 | 1.6 | 5.2 | 117.3 | 1.6 | 6.0 | 19% | -2% | 17% | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Inferred | 3.4 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 25.7 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 657% | 3% | 680% | |_______|_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Measured | 94.5 | 1.9 | 5.7 | 86.2 | 1.9 | 5.2 | -9% | -1% | -9% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Indicated| 52.7 | 1.2 | 2 | 94.1 | 1.1 | 3.3 | 79% | -4% | 71% | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | Total |Measured | | | | | | | | | | | |+ | 147.2 | 1.6 | 7.6 | 180.4 | 1.5 | 8.5 | 23% | -9% | 11% | | |Indicated| | | | | | | | | | | |_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________| | |Inferred | 9.2 | 0.9 | 0.3 | 52.1 | 0.9 | 1.6 | 466% | 9% | 502% | |_______|_________|_________|_____|_________|_________|_____|_________|______|_____|_________|
Notes: * The previous Mineral Resource estimate was announced by Alacer
Gold on February 27, 2012. Resources are quoted before mining
depletion and are inclusive of reserves. Cut-off grades for the
previous resource are >= 0.3g/t gold for oxide and >= 0.6g/t gold for
sulfide and for the new resource are >= 0.3g/t gold for oxide and >=
0.8g/t gold for sulfide.
Grade-tonnage curves for the Ã‡Ã¶pler Mineral Resource in the “Technical
Procedural Information” section of this announcement show how the
resource varies with assumed cut-off grades. The new resource estimate
is reported at a sulfide cut-off grade of 0.8g/t gold, compared with
the 0.6g/t gold cut-off grade used for sulfide mineralization in the
previous resource estimates. By way of comparison, the total new
Measured and Indicated Resource (inclusive of reserves) reported at a
0.8g/t gold cut-off grade for sulfide is 116.4 million tonnes at 1.6g/t
gold for 5.9 million ounces compared to 155.2 million tonnes at 1.4g/t
gold for 6.8 million ounces at a 0.6g/t cut-off grade.
___________________________________________________________________ | Sulfide Mineral Resource for the Ã‡Ã¶pler Deposit (100%) as at June | | 30, 2012 | |___________________________________________________________________| | | Sulfide Cut-Off Grade | Sulfide Cut-Off Grade 0.6g/t | | | 0.8g/t | | |_________|__________________________|______________________________| | | | Gold |Contained| | |Contained| |Resource | Tonnes |Grade | Gold | Tonnes |Gold Grade| Gold | |Category |(million)|(g/t) |(million |(million)| (g/t) |(million | | | | | ounces) | | | ounces) | |_________|_________|______|_________|_________|__________|_________| |Measured | 64.7 | 1.7 | 3.6 | 81.3 | 1.5 | 4.0 | |_________|_________|______|_________|_________|__________|_________| |Indicated| 51.6 | 1.4 | 2.3 | 73.8 | 1.2 | 2.8 | |_________|_________|______|_________|_________|__________|_________| |Measured | | | | | | | |+ | 116.4 | 1.6 | 5.9 | 155.2 | 1.4 | 6.8 | |Indicated| | | | | | | |_________|_________|______|_________|_________|__________|_________| |Inferred | 25.7 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 43.0 | 1.1 | 1.5 | |_________|_________|______|_________|_________|__________|_________|
Note: Comparison of the June 30, 2012 Sulfide Resource at 0.6g/t gold
and 0.8g/t gold cut-off grades. Resources are quoted after mining
depletion and are inclusive of reserves.
For the volume mined up until June 30, 2012, this new resource model
estimates 508,000 ounces of contained gold versus estimated mine
production of 599,000 ounces of contained gold. This indicates that
the new resource model is under-estimating the gold contained in the
mined part of the Ã‡Ã¶pler deposit with 18% more gold mined to June 30,
2012 than estimated by the new resource model.
The scale and complexity of the Main Zone mineralization has not allowed
high-grade areas to be domained in detail. The resource model is
considered likely to include more tonnes at a lower gold grade than
that expected to be mined. Infill grade control drilling will enable
mineralized zones to be better defined than is possible with the
current drilling density.
Resources in the Inferred category have increased substantially due to
areas of gold mineralization being intersected in deeper drilling at
relatively wide spacing. This deeper drilling confirms geological
continuity but the spacing is not sufficient to estimate the grade with
greater confidence for a higher classification.
An overview of the distribution of gold mineralization contained in the
new resource model is provided in the long section below in Figure 2.
In addition, Figure 3 below provides an overview of the typical
resource classification on cross section across the new resource model
in Main Zone.
In addition to the potential upside in the resource estimate,
significant upside exists to grow the Ã‡Ã¶pler resource with 8 drill rigs
remaining on site. Drilling is continuing to test for resource
extensions to the north within the old Ã‡Ã¶pler village area and resource
extensions at depth between the Manganese Zone and Main Zone.
About Alacer Gold
Alacer Gold Corp. is a leading intermediate gold mining company with
interests in multiple mines which provide ore to three processing
facilities in Australia and Turkey:
-- 80% interest in the Ã‡Ã¶pler Gold Mine; -- 100% interest in the Higginsville Gold Operations; -- 100% interest in the South Kalgoorlie Gold Operations; and -- 49% interest in the Frog's Leg Gold Mine.
Alacer Gold’s operations produced a total of 421,204 ounces of gold
Alacer Gold is executing a growth strategy through the use of cash flows
to grow production and cash margins to generate strong capital returns.
While the primary objective is organic growth, the Corporation also
identifies and evaluates strategic transactions that will add
The information in this report which relates to Mineral Resources is
based on information prepared by Lisa Bascombe, a full-time employee of
Alacer and a Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists.
The information in this report which relates to Mineral Resources has
been reviewed by Chris Newman, a full-time employee of Alacer, who is a
Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy and a
Member of the Australian Institute of Geoscientists.
Ms Bascombe and Mr Newman have sufficient experience which is relevant
to the style of mineralization and type of deposit under consideration
and to the activity which is being undertaken to qualify as a Competent
Person as defined in the 2004 Edition of the “Australasian Code for
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”
and a qualified person pursuant to National Instrument 43-101 of the
Canadian Securities Administrators. Ms Bascombe and Mr Newman consent
to the inclusion in this release of the matters based on this
information in the form and context in which it appears.
Technical Procedural Information
Ã‡Ã¶pler Resource Estimation Methodology
Current Mineral Resource estimates are stated as at June 30, 2012 and
take account of mining depletion to that date. Resources are shown on a
100% basis, of which Alacer Gold owns 80%. All resource numbers quoted
in this announcement are reported inclusive of reserves.
Drillhole data used in the Ã‡Ã¶pler resource was comprised of surface
reverse circulation (“RC”) and surface diamond drillholes. The
majority of drillhole collar locations were surveyed by contract mine
surveyors. Drillholes were routinely downhole surveyed using Eastman
single-shot and Reflex multi-shot cameras. Drillhole spacing varies
across the deposit, with the majority of the resource drilled at 40m x
40m spacing, however infill drilling has been completed down to 20m x
20m in the Manganese and Marble Zones of the resource.
Drill core and RC chips were logged in detail for lithology, alteration,
mineralization, structure and veining. All data is stored and
validated within an electronic database. Following logging, the
samples are submitted for assaying. Drill core is sawn in half and
sampled (or split into half core for clay ores); whereas RC chip
samples are routinely collected in calico bags at 1m increments for
assay. Sample lengths were constrained by geology, alteration,
mineralization or structural boundaries and may vary in different areas
of the resource. The samples range in downhole lengths from 0.2m to
Gold analyses were undertaken by ALS-Chemex in Vancouver, BC, Canada
using a 30g Fire Assay analysis method. Multi-element analyses of
silver, copper and sulfur were undertaken by four acid digestion
ICP-AES. Industry standard reference materials and blanks were
utilized in order to check laboratory assay quality control. A
laboratory visit and audit was undertaken in June 2012.
Detailed geological and mineralization wire-frames have been built
utilizing data collected during the logging of drillholes in the
resource area. Surface mapping and pit mapping collected from within
the Manganese Pit have been integrated into the geological wireframes.
A total of 39 mineralization domains have been defined for the resource
estimate, with 13% of ounces in the resource estimate outside of these
Assays were composited to 3m intervals and assessed for appropriate
top-cuts by area. The top-cuts applied to each element by area are
detailed in the table below.
____________________________________________ | Area |Au g/t|Ag g/t|Cu% | Mn% |As% | |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| | Marble | 30 | 85 |1.30|1.00 |1.00| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| |Main Zone East| 10 | 20 |0.80|0.90 |1.00| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| | Manganese | 16 | 85 |1.00|11.50|1.00| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| |Main Zone West| 3 | 10 |0.90|0.60 |0.21| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| | Main Zone | 25 | 90 |1.50|4.50 |1.00| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____| | West Zone | 6 | 15 |0.70|0.35 |0.14| |______________|______|______|____|_____|____|
A detailed review of 2,409 bulk density measurements collected from
diamond drillholes within the resource area has identified the presence
of surficial weathering within several of the rock types. This results
in a reduction of the bulk density of diorite and metasediments with
proximity to the surface. The bulk densities utilized within the
resource are detailed in the table below.
_________________________________________________________ | Geology |Vertical depth from surface|Bulk Density| |________________|___________________________|____________| | Diorite | 0 to 20 | 2.20 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Diorite | 20 to 40 | 2.36 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Diorite | 40 to 60 | 2.48 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Diorite | 60+ | 2.56 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Metasediments | 0 to 20 | 2.37 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Metasediments | 20 to 40 | 2.48 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Metasediments | 40 to 60 | 2.55 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Metasediments | 60+ | 2.66 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Gossan | all | 2.54 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Marble | all | 2.62 | |________________|___________________________|____________| |Massive Sulphide| all | 2.71 | |________________|___________________________|____________| | Manganese-rich | all | 2.67 | |________________|___________________________|____________|
The grade estimation method utilized to estimate the Ã‡Ã¶pler resource was
Ordinary Kriging. Parent block sizes were set at 10m (X), 10m (Y) and
5m (Z) in the Manganese and Marble Zones of the resource, where
drilling is closer spaced; whereas the parent block sizes in all other
areas were set at 20m (X), 20m (Y) and 5m (Z). The minimum sub-block
size was set to 2.5m (X), 2.5m (Y) and 2.5m (Z) in all areas.
A nominal cut-off grade of 0.3g/t gold was applied to the oxide portion
of the resource and 0.8g/t gold to the sulfide portion of the resource
to reflect likely mining and processing scenarios. The resource
estimate has been classified based on data density, data quality,
confidence in the geological interpretation and grade continuity, and
the confidence in the estimation. The resource has been reported prior
to any recovery factors.
The major differences between the previous resource (released February
27, 2012) and this resource are detailed below.
-- A reduction in the block sizes used in the resource model from 15m (X) 15m (Y) 10m (Z) to 10m (X) 10m (Y) 5m (Z) in the Manganese and Marble areas; and from 30m (X) 30m (Y) and 10m (Z) to 20m (X) 20m (Y) 5m (Z) in all other areas. -- Drillholes were composited to 3m intervals due to the significant increase in data density. A detailed analysis of the impact of compositing to a 3m length was undertaken on the data prior to the estimation being run and identified no material impact on the grade of the composites available for estimation. -- The minimum and maximum numbers of samples used to estimate the resource were reduced to four and 12 respectively, in order to reflect the change in composite length. -- The 3m composites were imported into the variography files from the previous model. Minor decreases in the nugget effect were evident in less than 50% of the ore domains, a function of the increased composite length. The variography in the remaining domains changed a minor amount. -- The Main Zone was wire-framed with an epithermal dome geometry which was unfolded in Vulcan 8.1.3 using the tetra modeling function, enabling the estimation of the dome as a whole. -- Sulfur was estimated separately from the other elements using an Indicator Kriging method. An indicator of 3% sulfur was selected and blocks with a likelihood of 35% or higher being equal to or above the 3% sulfur indicator were selected for estimation in a high-grade sulfur domain. Wire-frames of the high-grade sulfur domain were generated and blocks and samples coded for use in the resource estimation. A variographic analysis of the high-grade and low-grade sulfur domains was undertaken and the sulfur domains estimated using Ordinary Kriging. -- The topographic surface used for the estimation was produced using 5m contours, rather than the previous topographic surface, which was produced from 10m contours. -- Arsenic and manganese were estimated for metallurgical characterization purposes. -- The reported cut-off grade was increased from 0.6g/t to 0.8g/t for sulfide ore.
The graphs below provide grade-tonnage curves for oxide and sulfide M+I
Resources at various cut-off grades.
Certain statements contained in this news release constitute
forward-looking information, future oriented financial information, or
financial outlooks (collectively “forward-looking information”) within
the meaning of Canadian securities laws. Forward-looking information
may relate to this news release and other matters identified in
Alacer’s public filings, Alacer’s future outlook and anticipated events
or results and, in some cases, can be identified by terminology such as
“may”, “will”, “could”, “should”, “expect”, “plan”, “anticipate”,
“believe”, “intend”, “estimate”, “forecast”, “projects”, “predict”,
“potential”, “continue” or other similar expressions concerning matters
that are not historical facts and include, but are not limited in any
manner to, those with respect to proposed exploration, communications
with local stakeholders and community relations, status of negotiations
of joint ventures, commodity prices, mineral resources, mineral
reserves, realization of mineral reserves, existence or realization of
mineral resource estimates, the timing and amount of future production,
timing of studies and analysis, the timing of construction of proposed
mines and process facilities, capital and operating expenditures,
economic conditions, availability of sufficient financing, exploration
plans and any and all other timing, exploration, development,
operational, production, financial, economic, legal, social, regulatory
and, political factors that may influence, or be influenced by, future
events or conditions. Such forward-looking statements are based on a
number of material factors and assumptions, including, but not limited
in any manner, those disclosed in any other Alacer filings, and include
exploration results and the ability to explore, the ultimate
determination of mineral reserves, availability and final receipt of
required approvals, titles, licenses and permits, sufficient working
capital to develop and operate the mines, access to adequate services
and supplies, commodity prices, ability to meet production targets,
foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates, access to capital
markets and associated cost of funds, availability of a qualified work
force, ability to negotiate, finalize and execute relevant agreements,
lack of social opposition to the mines, lack of legal challenges with
respect to any the property or the Company and the ultimate ability to
mine, process and sell mineral products on economically favourable
terms. While we consider these assumptions to be reasonable based on
information currently available to us, they may prove to be incorrect.
Actual results may vary from such forward-looking information for a
variety of reasons, including but not limited to risks and
uncertainties disclosed in other Alacer filings at www.sedar.com and
other unforeseen events or circumstances. Other than as required by
law, Alacer does not intend, and undertakes no obligation to update any
forward-looking information to reflect, among other things, new
information or future events.
SOURCE ALACER GOLD CORP.