02 May 2024
Savannah Resources
Plc
(AIM: SAV, FWB: SAV and SWB:
SAV) ('Savannah', or the
'Company')
NOA JORC Resource Upgrade and
Further Broad Lithium Intersections at Reservatório and
Grandão
Savannah Resources Plc, the
developer of the Barroso Lithium Project (the 'Project') in
Portugal, Europe's largest spodumene lithium deposit, is pleased to
announce as part of its ongoing work towards a Definitive
Feasibility Study ('DFS') on the Project, an upgrade to the JORC
2012 compliant Resource for the NOA orebody together with further
results from the current drilling programme.
Highlights:
NOA
Resource Upgrade:
·
NOA resource upgrade completed following recent
drilling with 93% of the total
resource now in the Indicated category (previously 67%),
increasing the overall geological confidence in the resource and
meeting the requirements for inclusion in the DFS.
·
JORC 2012 Compliant Resource now 661,000 tonnes at
1.03% Li2O, containing 6,800 tonnes of
Li2O.
·
The size of the resource has increased by 3% due
to extending the mineralisation on the western
pegmatite.
·
Further exploration potential outlined to the
west, as the pegmatite is still open along strike to the west and
at depth to the north.
Reservatório and Grandão Significant Drill
Results:
·
Assays from 7 diamond drill holes at the
Reservatório orebody have
now been received, which confirm the lithium mineralisation at
depth and the potential for further resource expansions.
·
The best results received, with key lithium
intersections include:
o 36.48m @ 1.34%
Li2O from 31.05m in 23RESDD009
o 36m @ 1.28% Li2O
from 151m in 23RESRC039
o 21.8m @ 1.37% Li2O
from 132.3m plus 9.2m @
1.08% Li2O from 157m in 23RESRC041
·
Results received from two Reverse Circulation
holes drilled at Grandão at
the margins of the pegmatite confirm the continuity of the lithium
mineralisation to the north. The best
result recorded was:
o 18m @ 0.93% Li2O
from 35m in 24GRARC132.
Dale Ferguson, Savannah's Technical
Director, said, "We are very pleased to
have completed the first of the upgraded JORC Resource estimates
for the orebodies at our Project, which are a key part of the work
we are doing towards the DFS. There were no expectations to
significantly increase the overall tonnage at NOA through this
drilling programme, our primary objective being to upgrade as much
of the tonnage as we can into the Indicated category, which we have
achieved. This is particularly important as only resources in the
Indicated and higher, Measured, categories can be used under the
relevant guidelines in the Project's maiden JORC Reserve estimate,
which will be the extractable tonnage of ore that will underpin all
other technical aspects of the DFS. With 93% of the ore now in the
Indicated category, the vast majority of the currently defined
orebody can be considered in the future reserve estimation work.
However, it is equally important to note that this orebody remains
open along strike and at depth for the definition of additional ore
in the future.
Away from NOA, we have also received
further assays from holes previously drilled at the Reservatório
and Grandão orebodies. These have demonstrated further lithium
mineralisation, above the average grade for the Project at depth at
Reservatório, and to the north along strike at Grandão.
Looking ahead we will have further
assays to release over the next couple of months from both
Reservatório and Pinheiro, where we are targeting further
extensions of the high-grade mineralisation noted in our 12 March
2024 RNS as we work towards resource upgrades for the other
deposits by the end of Q3 2024".
Further Information
With the completion of
resource-related drilling in phase 1 of the current drill programme
at the Project, an updated JORC 2012 compliant Mineral Resource
Estimation could be made for the NOA deposit (Figure 1). The purpose of the drill
programme was to infill the Project's geological database to
classify the resources in the Indicated or Measured categories and
to fulfill requirements for the DFS.
In addition, further assay results
from the recent drilling at Reservatório (7 diamond drill core
holes) and Grandão (2 Reverse Circulation ('RC') drill holes) have
been received and confirm that the lithium mineralisation is
continuing at depth and along strike.
NOA
From the results of the drilling at
NOA, Savannah's resource consultant has been able to increase the
geological confidence of the resource. Now 93% of the total
resource has been classified in the Indicated category (previously
67%). The remaining 7% of the new estimate represents extra tonnes
identified in extensions of the pegmatite bodies, particularly at
the western end of the deposit area, and is classified in the
Inferred category.
Figure 1. Barroso Lithium
Project summary map showing deposits and drill hole
locations.
The Mineral Resource Estimate at NOA
has been classified as Indicated or Inferred in accordance with the
JORC code, 2012 edition and is summarised in Table 1 and Appendix 1 and 4.
Table 1 Updated 2024 Resource
Estimation Summary for the NOA Deposit at 0.5% Li2O
Cut-off
|
Indicated
|
Inferred
|
Total
|
Mineralisation
Type
|
Tonnes
(t)
|
Li2O
(%)
|
Fe2O3
(%)
|
Tonnes
(t)
|
Li2O
(%)
|
Fe2O3
(%)
|
Tonnes
(t)
|
Li2O
(%)
|
Fe2O3
(%)
|
Li2O
Tonnes
|
Transitional
|
52,000
|
1.03
|
0.97
|
100
|
0.89
|
0.85
|
52,000
|
1.03
|
0.97
|
500
|
Primary
|
563,000
|
1.03
|
0.83
|
46,000
|
0.95
|
0.45
|
609,000
|
1.03
|
0.80
|
6,300
|
Total
|
614,000
|
1.03
|
0.84
|
46,000
|
0.95
|
0.45
|
661,000
|
1.03
|
0.82
|
6,800
|
Note: Minor errors occur in final
resource figures due to rounding
Reservatório
Preliminary indications are that the
dip of the pegmatite is becoming shallower at depth and confirms
the extension of the Reservatório mineralisation at least a further
100m down dip, pointing towards a potential extension of the
resource. Key lithium intersections returned in the latest batch of
assays include:
·
36.5m @ 1.34% Li2O from 31.05m in
23RESDD009
·
36m @ 1.28% Li2O from 151m in
23RESRC039
·
26m @ 0.85% Li2O from 155m in
23RESRC040
·
21.8m @ 1.37% Li2O from 132.3m
plus 9.2m @ 1.08%
Li2O from 157m in 23RESRC041
Drill hole 23RESDD009 was drilled in
an area that is representative of the first phase of mining and the
samples will also be used for metallurgical testing
purposes.
Figure 2. Location of Phase 1
drilling at Reservatório with latest significant
intercepts.
Figure 3. A-A' cross section of
Reservatório showing latest significant assays.
Figure 4. B-B' cross section
showing latest significant assays at Reservatório.
Grandão
At Grandão, the results of two RC
drill holes have been received. The holes were planned to test the
southern and northern margins of the main pegmatite with only the
northern hole (24GRARC132) containing significant lithium
mineralisation. The key lithium intersection returned in the latest
batch of assays was 18m @ 0.93%
Li2O from 35m in 24GRARC132.
Future
Drilling
The second phase of the current
drilling programme will target Reservatório, Pinheiro and Grandão
to further upgrade the resources at these deposits
by the end of Q3 2024.
Details for the second phase of the programme will be finalised
once all results from the first phase have been received and
reviewed.
Figure 5. Map of Grandão
drilling showing location of Phase 1 drilling and significant
intercepts
Competent Person and Regulatory Information
The information in this release that
relates to Mineral Resources is based on information compiled by Mr
Shaun Searle who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of
Geoscientists. Mr Searle is an employee of Ashmore Advisory Pty Ltd
and an independent consultant to Savannah Resources Plc. Mr Searle
has sufficient experience, which is relevant to the style of
mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the
activity which he has undertaken to qualify as a Competent Person
as defined in the 2012 Edition of the 'Australasian Code for the
Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore
Reserves'. Mr Searle consents to the inclusion in this report of
the matters based on this information in the form and context in
which it appears.
The information in this announcement
that relates to exploration results is based upon information
compiled by Mr Dale Ferguson, Technical Director of Savannah
Resources Limited. Mr Ferguson is a Member of the Australasian
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (AusIMM) and has sufficient
experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and
type of deposit under consideration and to the activity which he is
undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the
December 2012 edition of the "Australasian Code for Reporting of
Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves" (JORC
Code). Mr Ferguson consents to the inclusion in the report of the
matters based upon the information in the form and context in which
it appears.
Regulatory Information
This Announcement contains inside
information for the purposes of the UK version of the market abuse
regulation (EU No. 596/2014) as it forms part of United Kingdom
domestic law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018
("UK MAR").
Savannah - Enabling Europe's energy
transition.
**ENDS**
Follow @SavannahRes on X (Formerly
known as Twitter)
Follow
Savannah Resources on LinkedIn
For further information please
visit www.savannahresources.com
or contact:
Savannah Resources PLC
Emanuel Proença, CEO
|
Tel: +44 20 7117 2489
|
SP
Angel Corporate Finance LLP (Nominated Advisor & Joint
Broker)
David Hignell/ Charlie Bouverat
(Corporate Finance)
Grant Barker/Abigail Wayne (Sales
& Broking)
|
Tel: +44 20 3470 0470
|
SCP
Resource Finance (Joint Broker)
|
Tel: +44 204 548 1765
|
Filipe Martins/Chris
Tonkin
|
|
|
|
Camarco (Financial PR)
Gordon Poole/ Emily Hall / Nuthara
Bandara
|
Tel: +44 20 3757 4980
|
|
|
LPM
(Portugal Media Relations)
Herminio Santos/ Jorge Coelho/
Margarida Pinheiro
|
Tel: +351 218 508 110
|
About Savannah
Savannah Resources is a mineral
resource development company and the sole owner of the Barroso
Lithium Project in northern Portugal, the largest battery grade
spodumene lithium resource outlined to date in Europe.
Through the Barroso Lithium Project
(the 'Project'), Savannah will help Portugal to play an important
role in providing a long-term, locally sourced, lithium raw
material supply for Europe's rapidly developing lithium battery
value chain. After the Environmental Licence was granted in May
2023 and the Scoping Study confirmed the economic potential of the
Project in June 2023, production is now targeted and on track to
begin in 2026. At that stage, Savannah will start producing enough
lithium for approximately half a million vehicle battery packs per
year, equal to a significant portion of the European Commission's
Critical Raw Material Act goal of a minimum 10% of European
endogenous lithium production set for 2030. Savannah is focused on
the responsible development and operation of the Barroso Lithium
Project so that its impact on the environment is minimised and the
socio-economic benefits that it can bring to all its stakeholders
are maximised.
The Company is listed and regulated
on the London Stock Exchange's Alternative Investment Market (AIM)
and the Company's ordinary shares are also available on the
Quotation Board of the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (FWB) under the
symbol FWB: SAV, and the Börse Stuttgart (SWB) under the ticker
"SAV".
Appendix 1: Key Resource
Calculation Information
Geology and Geological
Interpretation
At the Barroso Lithium Project,
lithium mineralisation occurs predominantly in the form of
spodumene-bearing pegmatites which are hosted in metapelitic and
mica schists, and occasionally carbonate schists of upper
Ordovician to lower Devonian age. Lithium is present in most
pegmatite compositions and laboratory test work confirms that the
lithium is almost exclusively within spodumene. Distinct lithium
grade zonation occurs within the pegmatites, with weakly
mineralised zones often evident at the margins of the intrusions.
Minor xenoliths and inliers of schist are observed on
occasions.
At the NOA deposit, the host
pegmatite is a steeply dipping, northwest trending body which is
5m-10m in true width. It has been mapped in outcrop over much of
the interpreted 440m strike length of the Mineral
Resource.
The weathering profile comprises a
shallow, surficial zone of weak to moderate oxidation, particularly
of the schistose country rock.
Sampling and Sub-Sampling
Techniques
RC drilling by Savannah was carried
out using a face sampling hammer (120mm). Savannah reported that
drilling conditions were good, samples were generally dry and
measured sample recoveries were good other than some recorded
sample loss near the hole collar in some holes.
Samples were collected at 1m
intervals from pegmatite zones. For the 2017 drilling, composite
sampling of typically 4m was conducted in the surrounding schists.
For drilling conducted since 2018, schist was only sampled for 5m
each side of the pegmatites. The 1m samples were collected through
a rig-mounted riffle splitter and were 4-6kg in weight.
Diamond drilling commenced in PQ
diameter and reduced to HQ diameter when competent rock was
intersected. Core recovery was excellent. For sampling, core was
aligned then marked with a centre line. Core was cut with a saw
with half-core taken for bulk metallurgical samples. The remaining
half core was cut again to produce quarter core samples for
analysis. Samples were to geological boundaries then typically at
1m intervals.
Drilling
Techniques
RC drilling used a 120mm bit
diameter. Diamond core drilling was carried out using PQ core
diameter and reduced to HQ triple tube core barrel when competent
rock was intersected.
Classification
Criteria
Mineral Resource classification was
considered on the basis of drill hole spacing, continuity of
mineralisation and data quality. At NOA, the continuity of the
controlling pegmatite appears to be good. Where the pegmatite is
exposed, the interpretation is supported by mapped contacts at
surface and within the small pit being mined.
The portion of the NOA pegmatite
defined by 20m to 40m spaced drill holes and showing good
continuity of pegmatite and Li2O distribution has been
classified as Indicated Mineral Resource. The Indicated portion was
extended for the full length of the pegmatite which had been
exposed and mapped in the pit and was extrapolated up to 20m past
drill hole intersections. Inferred Mineral Resource was assigned to
those areas of the NOA deposit defined by a drill hole spacing of
greater than 40m.
Sample Analysis
Method
The samples were analysed using ALS
Laboratories ME-MS89L Super Trace method which combines a sodium
peroxide fusion with ICP-MS instrumentation utilising
collision/reaction cell technologies to provide the lowest
detection limits available.
A prepared sample (0.2g) is added to
sodium peroxide flux, mixed well and then fused in at 670°C. The
resulting melt is cooled and then dissolved in 30% hydrochloric
acid. This solution is then analysed by ICP-MS and the results are
corrected for spectral inter-element interferences.
The final solution is then analysed
by ICP-MS, with results corrected for spectral inter-element
interferences.
Estimation
Methodology
The Mineral Resource was estimated
within wireframes prepared using nominal 0.35%
Li2O
envelopes within the broader pegmatites. The pegmatites at both the
NOA deposit were estimated using ordinary kriging ("OK") grade
interpolation with interpolation parameters based on the geometry
of each zone. No high-grade cuts were applied to
Li2O due
to the uniformly low coefficient of variation ("CV") of the data. A
high grade cut of 100ppm was applied to Ta values.
The block dimensions used in the
model were based on deposit geometry and drill hole spacing and
confirmed with Kriging Neighbourhood Analysis ("KNA"). Parent block
sizes used at the NOA deposit were 5m NS by 10m EW by 5m with
sub-celling to 1.25m by 2.5m by 1.25m.
Bulk density values applied to the
NOA estimate were based on values used at the Grandão deposit which
were derived from a substantial number of drill core samples, as
well as some samples obtained from NOA. Densities applied were
2.5t/m3 for oxide lithologies, 2.65t/m3 for
unoxidised pegmatite and 2.67t/m3 for unoxidised
schist.
Cut-off
Grade
The Statement of Mineral Resources
has been constrained by the mineralisation solids and reported
above a cut-off grade of 0.5% Li2O. The cut-off grade is
supported by previous mining studies.
Mining and Metallurgical
Methods and Parameters
Previous high-level mining
optimisation work indicates the vast majority of the NOA Mineral
Resource can be mined using open pit techniques as part of the
larger operation at the Project.
Metallurgical test work has been
conducted by Savannah on representative mineralisation at the
Grandão deposit. The work was completed by Nagrom Metallurgical in
Australia and confirmed that high grade lithium, low grade iron
concentrate can be generated from the mineralisation using
conventional processing technology. Microscopy confirmed that the
concentrate was almost entirely spodumene.
This test work indicates that the
material can be utilised in the plant feed to generate a spodumene
concentrate of >5.5% Li2O. To achieve this, the
composite samples were ground to a particle size of P80
150µm, which demonstrated an average Li2O processing
recovery of 75.3%.
Additional metallurgical test work
is underway and there is no reason to consider that the NOA
mineralisation will behave any differently to the Grandão
deposit.
APPENDIX 2 - Drill hole locations of Phase 1 RC and Diamond Resource
Holes.
Hole_ID
|
Prospect
|
Hole Type
|
Total Depth
|
East (mE)
|
North (mN)
|
Elevation
(mASL)
|
Dip
|
Azimuth
|
23NOARC026
|
NOA
|
RC
|
111
|
599104
|
4609510
|
677
|
-60
|
198
|
23NOARC027
|
NOA
|
RC
|
40
|
599015
|
4609572
|
689
|
-60
|
198
|
23NOARC028
|
NOA
|
RC
|
40
|
599047
|
4609565
|
692
|
-60
|
198
|
23NOARC029
|
NOA
|
RC
|
42
|
599025
|
4609498
|
693
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC030
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
598992
|
4609575
|
686
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC031
|
NOA
|
RC
|
30
|
598988
|
4609559
|
687
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC032
|
NOA
|
RC
|
123
|
599086
|
4609555
|
691
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC033
|
NOA
|
RC
|
20
|
598985
|
4609540
|
688
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC034
|
NOA
|
RC
|
40
|
598894
|
4609584
|
687
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC035
|
NOA
|
RC
|
43
|
598900
|
4609610
|
683
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC036
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
598916
|
4609606
|
679
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC037
|
NOA
|
RC
|
67
|
598916
|
4609589
|
678
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC038
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
599205
|
4609406
|
691
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC039
|
NOA
|
RC
|
61
|
599238
|
4609389
|
687
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC040
|
NOA
|
RC
|
45
|
599174
|
4609436
|
687
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC041
|
NOA
|
RC
|
60
|
599135
|
4609470
|
681
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC042
|
NOA
|
RC
|
85
|
599190
|
4609491
|
673
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC043
|
NOA
|
RC
|
130
|
599074
|
4609531
|
689
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC044
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
599100
|
4609457
|
674
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC045
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
599112
|
4609440
|
674
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC046
|
NOA
|
RC
|
35
|
598943
|
4609589
|
678
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC047
|
NOA
|
RC
|
25
|
598938
|
4609573
|
679
|
-60
|
200
|
23NOARC048
|
NOA
|
RC
|
105
|
599157
|
4609520
|
666
|
-60
|
200
|
23RESRC038
|
Reservatório
|
RC
|
207
|
599510
|
4609249
|
655
|
-90
|
0
|
23RESRC039
|
Reservatório
|
RCDD
|
135
|
599511
|
4609246
|
655
|
-70
|
150
|
23RESRC040
|
Reservatório
|
RCDD
|
120
|
599557
|
4609245
|
649
|
-90
|
0
|
23RESRC041
|
Reservatório
|
RCDD
|
120
|
599559
|
4609241
|
649
|
-70
|
150
|
23RESRC042
|
Reservatório
|
RC
|
12
|
599650
|
4609094
|
594
|
-60
|
150
|
23RESRC043
|
Reservatório
|
RC
|
9
|
599687
|
4609109
|
591
|
-60
|
150
|
23RESRC044
|
Reservatório
|
RC
|
18
|
599618
|
4609011
|
599
|
-60
|
150
|
23RESRC045
|
Reservatório
|
RC
|
130
|
599679
|
4609231
|
619
|
-90
|
0
|
23RESDD009
|
Reservatório
|
DD
|
90.5
|
599764
|
4609176
|
611
|
-60
|
150
|
24RESDD010
|
Reservatório
|
DD
|
40
|
599688
|
4609110
|
590
|
-60
|
150
|
24RESDD011
|
Reservatório
|
DD
|
50
|
599617
|
4609016
|
599
|
-60
|
150
|
24RESDD012
|
Reservatório
|
DD
|
50
|
599661
|
4609070
|
590
|
-60
|
150
|
24PNRRC020
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
110
|
601380
|
4606960
|
542
|
-60
|
270
|
24PNRRC021
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
113
|
601402
|
4606933
|
543
|
-60
|
220
|
24PNRRC022
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
100
|
601401
|
4606936
|
543
|
-60
|
265
|
24PNRRC023
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
138
|
601408
|
4606892
|
547
|
-60
|
190
|
24PNRRC024
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
144
|
601406
|
4606893
|
547
|
-65
|
220
|
24PNRRC025
|
Pinheiro
|
RC
|
100
|
601402
|
4606931
|
543
|
-55
|
290
|
24GRARC132
|
Grandão
|
RC
|
90
|
601743
|
4608177
|
521
|
-90
|
0
|
24GRARC133
|
Grandão
|
RC
|
39
|
601919
|
4607864
|
563
|
-90
|
0
|
APPENDIX 3 - Summary of Recent Significant Intercepts using a 0.5%
Li2O Cutoff.
Hole_ID
|
Prospect
|
From (m)
|
To (m)
|
Interval
(m)
|
Grade
Li2O%
|
24PNRRC025
|
Pinheiro
|
No
Significant Assays
|
24GRARC132
|
Grandão
|
35
|
53
|
18
|
0.93
|
24GRARC133
|
Grandão
|
No
Significant Assays
|
23RESRC039
|
Reservatório
|
151
|
187
|
36
|
1.28
|
23RESRC040
|
Reservatório
|
155
|
181
|
26
|
0.85
|
23RESRC040
|
Reservatório
|
184
|
186.25
|
2.25
|
0.6
|
23RESRC041
|
Reservatório
|
132.3
|
154.1
|
21.8
|
1.37
|
23RESRC041
|
Reservatório
|
157
|
166.2
|
9.2
|
1.08
|
23RESDD009
|
Reservatório
|
31.05
|
67.53
|
36.48
|
1.34
|
24RESDD010
|
Reservatório
|
8.2
|
12.7
|
4.5
|
0.41
|
24RESDD010
|
Reservatório
|
15.85
|
23.6
|
7.75
|
0.83
|
24RESDD010
|
Reservatório
|
26.9
|
31.24
|
4.34
|
0.83
|
24RESDD011
|
Reservatório
|
No
Significant Assays
|
24RESDD012
|
Reservatório
|
No
Significant Assays
|
APPENDIX 4 - JORC 2012 Table 1 -DFS
Infill Drilling
JORC Table 1 Section 1
Sampling Techniques and Data
Criteria
|
JORC Code
Explanation
|
Commentary
|
Sampling
techniques
|
·
Nature and
quality of sampling (e.g. cut channels, random chips, or specific
specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the
minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or
handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken
as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.
·
Include
reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the
appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems
used.
·
Aspects of the
determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public
Report. In cases where 'industry standard' work has been done this
would be relatively simple (e.g. 'reverse circulation drilling was
used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to
produce a 30 g charge for fire assay'). In other cases more
explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold
that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or
mineralisation types (e.g. submarine nodules) may warrant
disclosure of detailed information.
|
· The
majority of holes were reverse circulation, sampled at 1m
intervals. RC samples were collected in large plastic bags from an
onboard rig splitter and a 4-6kg representative sample taken for
analysis.
· A
small number of diamond holes were also completed. Core was HQ
size, sampled at 1m intervals in the pegmatite, with boundaries
sampled to geological boundaries. Half core samples were collected
for analysis.
· Drilling was predominantly on a nominal 25m by 20m spacing,
out to 40m by 40m.
· Collar
surveys are carried using differential GPS with an accuracy to
within 0.2m.
· A down
hole survey for each hole was completed using gyro
equipment.
· The
lithium mineralisation is predominantly in the form of
Spodumene-bearing pegmatites, the pegmatites are unzoned and vary
in thickness from 10m-20m.
|
Drilling
techniques
|
·
Drill type (e.g.
core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast,
auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (e.g. core diameter, triple
or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or
other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method,
etc).
|
· RC
drilling used a 120mm bit diameter.
· Core
drilling was carried out using an HQ triple tube core
barrel.
|
Drill sample
recovery
|
·
Method of
recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results
assessed.
·
Measures taken
to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the
samples.
·
Whether a
relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether
sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of
fine/coarse material.
|
· RC
drilling sample weights were monitored to ensure samples were
maximised. Samples were carefully loaded into a splitter and split
in the same manner ensuring that the sample split to be sent to the
assay laboratories were in the range of 4-6kg.
· Core
recovery was measured and was found to be generally
excellent.
· No
obvious relationships between sample recovery and grade.
|
Logging
|
·
Whether core and
chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a
level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation,
mining studies and metallurgical studies.
·
Whether logging
is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean,
channel, etc) photography.
·
The total length
and percentage of the relevant intersections
logged.
|
· RC
holes were logged in the field at the time of sampling. Core was
logged in detail in a logging yard.
· Each
1m sample interval was carefully homogenised and assessed for
lithology, colour, grainsize, structure and
mineralisation.
· A
representative chip sample produced from RC drilling was washed and
taken for each 1m sample and stored in a chip tray which was
photographed.
· Core
was photographed.
|
Sub-sampling techniques and
sample preparation
|
·
If core, whether
cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core
taken.
·
If non-core,
whether riffled, tube sampled, rotary split, etc and whether
sampled wet or dry.
·
For all sample
types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample
preparation technique.
·
Quality control
procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise
representivity of samples.
·
Measures taken
to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ
material collected, including for instance results for field
duplicate/second-half sampling.
·
Whether sample
sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being
sampled.
|
· 1m RC
samples were split by the riffle splitter on the drill rig and
sampled dry.
· The 4m
composites were collected using a spear with the spear inserted
into the bag at a high angle and pushed across the sample to
maximise representivity of the sample.
· Core
was cut in half using a diamond saw with 1m half core samples
submitted for analysis.
· The
sampling was conducted using industry standard techniques and were
considered appropriate.
· Field
duplicates were used to test repeatability of the sub-sampling and
were found to be satisfactory.
· Every
effort was made to ensure that the samples were representative and
not biased in any way.
|
Quality of assay data and
laboratory tests
|
·
The nature,
quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory
procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or
total.
·
For geophysical
tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters
used in determining the analysis including instrument make and
model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their
derivation, etc.
·
Nature of
quality control procedures adopted (e.g. standards, blanks,
duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable
levels of accuracy (i.e. lack of bias) and precision have been
established.
|
· Samples were received, sorted, labelled and dried.
· Samples were crushed to 70% less than 2mm, riffle split off
250g, pulverise split to better than 85% passing 75 microns and 5g
was split of for assaying.
· The
samples were analysed using ALS Laboratories ME-MS89L Super Trace
method which combines a sodium peroxide fusion with ICP-MS
instrumentation utilising collision/reaction cell technologies to
provide the lowest detection limits available.
· A
prepared sample (0.2g) is added to sodium peroxide flux, mixed well
and then fused in at 670°C. The resulting melt is cooled and then
dissolved in 30% hydrochloric acid. This solution is then analysed
by ICP-MS and the results are corrected for spectral inter-element
interferences.
· The
final solution is then analysed by ICP-MS, with results corrected
for spectral inter-element interferences.
· Standards/blanks and duplicates were inserted on a 1:20 ratio
for both to samples taken.
· Duplicate sample regime is used to monitor sampling
methodology and homogeneity.
· Routine QA/QC controls for the method ME-MS89L include blanks,
certified reference standards of Lithium and duplicate samples.
Samples are assayed within runs or batches up to 40 samples. At the
fusion stage that quality control samples are included together
with the samples so all samples follow the same procedure until the
end. Fused and diluted samples are prepared for ICP-MS analysis.
ICP instrument is calibrated through appropriate certified
standards solutions and interference corrections to achieve strict
calibration fitting parameters. Each 40 sample run is assayed with
two blanks, two certified standards and one duplicate sample and
results are evaluated accordingly.
· A
QA/QC review of all information indicated that all assays were
satisfactory.
|
Verification of sampling and
assaying
|
·
The verification
of significant intersections by either independent or alternative
company personnel.
·
The use of
twinned holes.
·
Documentation of
primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data
storage (physical and electronic) protocols.
·
Discuss any
adjustment to assay data.
|
· All
information was internally audited by company personnel.
· Savannah's experienced project geologists supervised all
processes.
· All
field data is entered into a custom log sheet and then into excel
spreadsheets (supported by look-up tables) at site and subsequently
validated as it is imported into the centralised Access
database.
· Hard
copies of logs, survey and sampling data are stored in the local
office and electronic data is stored on the main server.
· Results were reported as Li (ppm) and were converted to a
percentage by dividing by 10,000 and then to Li2O% by
multiplying by 2.153.
|
Location of data
points
|
·
Accuracy and
quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole
surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation.
·
Specification of
the grid system used.
·
Quality and
adequacy of topographic control.
|
· The
coordinate of each drill hole was taken at the time of collecting
using a handheld GPS with an accuracy of 5m. All collars were
subsequently surveyed using DGPS with an accuracy of
0.2m.
· The
grid system used is WSG84.
· An
accurate, aerial topographic survey was obtained with accuracy of
+/- 0.5m.
|
Data spacing and
distribution
|
·
Data spacing for
reporting of Exploration Results.
·
Whether the data
spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of
geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral
Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and
classifications applied.
·
Whether sample
compositing has been applied.
|
· Drilling was predominantly on a nominal 25m by 20m spacing,
out to 40m by 40m.
· Drill
data is at sufficient spacing to define Indicated and Inferred
Mineral Resource.
· Compositing to 1m has been applied prior to resource
estimation.
|
Orientation of data in
relation to geological structure
|
·
Whether the
orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible
structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the
deposit type.
·
If the
relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation
of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a
sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if
material.
|
· At
NOA, drilling was generally angled to the SW and intersected the
moderately dipping deposit at close to orthogonal to the known dip
of the main pegmatite. At Reservatório the
holes were generally drilled at an azimuth of
150° with a dip
that varied from -60° to vertical. At Grandão the drill holes were
vertical.
· Intersections were close to true width for the NOA
pegmatite.
· No
orientation-based sampling bias has been identified in the
data.
|
Sample
security
|
·
The measures
taken to ensure sample security.
|
· Samples were delivered to a courier and chain of custody is
managed by Savannah.
|
Audits or
reviews
|
·
The results of
any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and
data.
|
· Internal company auditing and a review by Ashmore during the
April 2018 site visit found that all data collection and QA/QC
procedures were conducted to industry standards.
|
JORC Table 1 Section 2
Reporting of Exploration Results
Criteria
|
JORC Code
explanation
|
Commentary
|
Mineral tenement and land
tenure status
|
·
Type, reference
name/number, location and ownership including agreements or
material issues with third parties such as joint ventures,
partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests,
historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental
settings.
· The security of the tenure
held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to
obtaining a license to operate in the area.
|
· All
work was completed inside the Barroso Lithium Project
C-100.
· Savannah has received written confirmation from the DGEG that
under article 24 of Decree-Law no. 88/90 of March 16 being relevant
justification based on the resources allocated exploited and
intended, Savannah has been approved an expansion up to 250m of
C100 mining concession in specific areas where a resource has been
defined and the requirement for the expansion can be
justified.
|
Exploration done by other
parties
|
·
Acknowledgment
and appraisal of exploration by other parties.
|
· Limited exploration work has been carried out by previous
operators.
· No
historic information has been included in the Mineral Resource
estimates.
|
Geology
|
·
Deposit type,
geological setting and style of mineralisation.
|
·
The lithium mineralisation is predominantly in the
form of Spodumene-bearing pegmatites which are hosted in
meta-pelitic and mica schists, and occasionally carbonate schists
of upper Ordovician to lower Devonian age. The pegmatites vary in
thickness from 5m-20m.
|
Drill hole
information
|
· A summary of all information
material to the under-standing of the exploration results including
a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill
holes:
· easting and northing of the
drill hole collar
· elevation or RL (Reduced
Level - elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole
collar
· dip and azimuth of the
hole
· down hole length and
interception depth
· hole
length
· If the exclusion of this
information is justified on the basis that the information is not
Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding
of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this
is the case.
|
·
Grid used WSG84.
·
No material data has been excluded from the
release.
·
Drill hole intersections used in the resource have
been previously reported.
|
Data aggregation
methods
|
· In reporting Exploration
Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum
grade truncations (e.g. cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades
are usually Material and should be stated.
· Where aggregate intercepts
incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths
of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation
should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations
should be shown in detail.
·
The assumptions
used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly
stated.
|
·
Length weighted average grades have been
reported.
·
No high-grade cuts have been applied to reported
grades for lithium. A high grade cut of 100ppm was applied to the
tantalum data.
·
Metal equivalent values are not being
reported.
|
Relationship between
mineralisation widths and intercept lengths
|
· These relationships are
particularly important in the reporting of Exploration
Results.
·
If the geometry
of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is
known, its nature should be reported.
· If it is not known and only
the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear
statement to this effect (e.g. 'down hole length, true width not
known').
|
·
The majority of holes have been drilled at angles
to intersect the mineralisation approximately perpendicular to the
orientation of the mineralised trend.
|
Diagrams
|
· Appropriate maps and
sections (with scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be
included for any significant discovery being reported. These should
include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar
locations and appropriate sectional views.
|
· A
relevant plan showing the drilling is included within this
release.
|
Balanced
Reporting
|
·
Accuracy and
quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole
surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in
Mineral Resource estimation.
· Where comprehensive
reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable,
representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths
should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration
Results.
|
· All
relevant results available have been previously
reported.
|
Other substantive exploration
data
|
· Other exploration data, if
meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not
limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results;
geochemical survey results; bulk samples - size and method of
treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater,
geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or
contaminating substances.
|
· Geological mapping and rock chip sampling has been conducted
over the project area.
|
Further
work
|
·
The nature and
scale of planned further work (e.g. tests for lateral extensions or
depth extensions or large- scale step-out
drilling).
·
Diagrams clearly
highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main
geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this
information is not commercially sensitive.
|
·
Further RC and DD drilling to test for further
extensions and to increase confidence.
·
Economic evaluation of the defined Mineral
Resources.
|
JORC Table 1 Section 3
Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources
Criteria
|
JORC Code
explanation
|
Commentary
|
Database
integrity
|
·
Measures taken
to ensure that data has not been corrupted by, for example,
transcription or keying errors, between its initial collection and
its use for Mineral Resource estimation purposes.
·
Data validation
procedures used.
|
· The
assay data was captured electronically to prevent transcription
errors.
· Validation included visual review of results.
|
Site visits
|
·
Comment on any
site visits undertaken by the Competent Person and the outcome of
those visits.
·
If no site
visits have been undertaken indicate why this is the
case.
|
· Numerous site visits were undertaken by Dale Ferguson in 2017
which included an inspection of the drilling process, outcrop area
and confirmation that no obvious impediments to future exploration
or development were present.
· A site
visit by an Ashmore associate was undertaken in April 2018 to
confirm geological interpretations, drilling and sampling
procedures and general site layout.
|
Geological
interpretation
|
·
Confidence in
(or conversely, the uncertainty of) the geological interpretation
of the mineral deposit.
·
Nature of the
data used and of any assumptions made.
·
The effect, if
any, of alternative interpretations on Mineral Resource
estimation.
·
The use of
geology in guiding and controlling Mineral Resource
estimation.
·
The factors
affecting continuity both of grade and geology.
|
· The
pegmatite dykes hosting the NOA mineralisation are defined in
outcrop and in drilling and boundaries are generally very sharp and
distinct.
· The
shape and extent of the >0.5% Li2O mineralisation is
clearly controlled by the general geometry of the
pegmatites.
· Zonation of lithium within the pegmatite is evident, and
typically the margins are weakly mineralised.
|
Dimensions
|
·
The extent and
variability of the Mineral Resource expressed as length (along
strike or otherwise), plan width, and depth below surface to the
upper and lower limits of the Mineral Resource.
|
· The
pegmatite at Noa has a drilled extent of 440m east-west and a
maximum vertical depth of 145m. The thickness of the mineralisation
ranges from 10m to 20m.
|
Estimation and modelling
techniques
|
·
The nature and
appropriateness of the estimation technique(s) applied and key
assumptions, including treatment of extreme grade values,
domaining, interpolation parameters and maximum distance of
extrapolation from data points. If a computer assisted estimation
method was chosen include a description of computer software and
parameters used.
·
The availability
of check estimates, previous estimates and/or mine production
records and whether the Mineral Resource estimate takes appropriate
account of such data.
·
The assumptions
made regarding recovery of by-products.
·
Estimation of
deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic
significance (e.g. sulphur for acid mine drainage
characterisation).
·
In the case of
block model interpolation, the block size in relation to the
average sample spacing and the search employed.
·
Any assumptions
behind modelling of selective mining units.
·
Any assumptions
about correlation between variables.
·
Description of
how the geological interpretation was used to control the resource
estimates.
·
Discussion of
basis for using or not using grade cutting or
capping.
·
The process of
validation, the checking process used, the comparison of model data
to drill hole data, and use of reconciliation data if
available.
|
· Inverse distance squared interpolation was used to estimate
block grades within the resource.
· Surpac
software was used for the estimation.
· Samples were composited to 1m intervals to match the sample
lengths. Due to the extremely low CV of the data no high-grade cuts
were applied to Li2O in the estimate. A cut of 100ppm
was applied to Ta values.
· At NOA
the parent block dimensions were 10m EW by 5m NS by 5m vertical
with sub-cells of 5m by 1.25m by 1.25m.
· The
previous resource estimate for NOA was reported in March
2019.
· No
assumptions have been made regarding recovery of
by-products.
· The
grade of Fe2O3 was estimated for the deposit,
using factored Fe data to eliminate Fe introduced in the sample
preparation stage. The mean grade of Fe2O3
was determined to be 0.82% at NOA.
· An
orientated ellipsoid search was used to select data and was based
on drill hole spacing and the geometry of the pegmatite
dyke.
· A
search of 40m was used with a minimum of 6 samples and a maximum of
16 samples which resulted in 91% of blocks being estimated. The
remaining blocks were estimated with search radii of
80m.
· Selective mining units were not modelled in the Mineral
Resource model. The block size used in the model was based on drill
sample spacing and deposit geometry.
· The
deposit mineralisation was constrained by wireframes prepared using
a nominal 0.35% Li2O grade envelope.
· For
validation, quantitative comparison of block grades to assay grades
was carried out for each estimated body.
· Global
comparisons of drill hole and block model grades were also carried
out.
|
Moisture
|
·
Whether the
tonnages are estimated on a dry basis or with natural moisture, and
the method of determination of the moisture
content.
|
· Tonnages and grades were estimated on a dry in situ basis. No
moisture values were reviewed.
|
Cut-off
parameters
|
·
The basis of the
adopted cut-off grade(s) or quality parameters
applied.
|
· The
shallow, outcropping nature of both deposit suggests good potential
for open pit mining if sufficient resources can be delineated to
consider a mining operation. As such, the Mineral Resource has been
reported at a 0.5% Li2O lower cut-off grade to reflect
assumed exploitation by open pit mining.
|
Mining factors or
assumptions
|
·
Assumptions made
regarding possible mining methods, minimum mining dimensions and
internal (or, if applicable, external) mining dilution. It is
always necessary as part of the process of determining reasonable
prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider potential
mining methods, but the assumptions made regarding mining methods
and parameters when estimating Mineral Resources may not always be
rigorous. Where this is the case, this should be reported with an
explanation of the basis of the mining assumptions
made.
|
· Based
on comparison with other similar deposits, the Mineral Resource is
considered to have sufficient grade and metallurgical
characteristics for economic treatment if an operation is
established at the site.
· No
mining parameters or modifying factors have been applied to the
Mineral Resource.
· Previous high-level mining optimisation work indicates the
vast majority of the Mineral Resource can be mined using open pit
techniques.
|
Metallurgical factors or
assumptions
|
·
The basis for
assumptions or predictions regarding metallurgical amenability. It
is always necessary as part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider
potential metallurgical methods, but the assumptions regarding
metallurgical treatment processes and parameters made when
reporting Mineral Resources may not always be rigorous. Where this
is the case, this should be reported with an explanation of the
basis of the metallurgical assumptions made.
|
· Metallurgical test work has been conducted by Savannah on
representative mineralisation at the Grandão deposit. The work was
completed by Nagrom Metallurgical in Australia and confirmed that
high grade lithium, low grade iron concentrate can be generated
from the mineralisation using conventional processing technology.
Microscopy confirmed that the concentrate was almost entirely
spodumene.
· Additional metallurgical test work is underway and there is no
reason to consider that the NOA mineralisation will behave any
differently to the Grandão deposit.
|
Environmental factors or
assumptions
|
·
Assumptions made
regarding possible waste and process residue disposal options. It
is always necessary as part of the process of determining
reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction to consider
the potential environmental impacts of the mining and processing
operation. While at this stage the determination of potential
environmental impacts, particularly for a greenfields project, may
not always be well advanced, the status of early consideration of
these potential environmental impacts should be reported. Where
these aspects have not been considered this should be reported with
an explanation of the environmental assumptions
made.
|
· The
area is not known to be environmentally sensitive and there is no
reason to think that proposals for development including the
dumping of waste would not be approved if planning and permitting
guidelines are followed.
|
Bulk
density
|
·
Whether assumed
or determined. If assumed, the basis for the assumptions. If
determined, the method used, whether wet or dry, the frequency of
the measurements, the nature, size and representativeness of the
samples.
·
The bulk density
for bulk material must have been measured by methods that
adequately account for void spaces (vugs, porosity, etc), moisture
and differences between rock and alteration zones within the
deposit.
·
Discuss
assumptions for bulk density estimates used in the evaluation
process of the different materials.
|
· Bulk
density values from the Grandão deposit were applied to the NOA
deposit.
· The
Grandão densities were based on determinations using 3,370 core
samples, as well as 160 samples obtained from NOA.
· Bulk
density values applied to the estimate were 2.5t/m3 for
transitional lithologies, 2.65t/m3 for unoxidised
pegmatite and 2.67t/m3 for unoxidised schist.
|
Classification
|
·
The basis for
the classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence
categories.
·
Whether
appropriate account has been taken of all relevant factors (i.e.
relative confidence in tonnage/grade estimations, reliability of
input data, confidence in continuity of geology and metal values,
quality, quantity and distribution of the data).
·
Whether the
result appropriately reflects the Competent Person's view of the
deposit.
|
· The
Mineral Resource was classified in accordance with the Australasian
Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources
and Ore Reserves (JORC, 2012).
· The
portion of the NOA pegmatite defined by 20m to 40m spaced drill
holes and showing good continuity of pegmatite and Li2O
distribution has been classified as Indicated Mineral Resource. The
Indicated portion was extended for the full length of the pegmatite
which had been exposed and mapped in the pit and was extrapolated
up to 20m past drill hole intersections.
· The
remainder of the Mineral Resource at NOA was classified as Inferred
due the broader spaced drilling.
· The
results reflect the view of the Competent Person.
|
Audits or
reviews
|
·
The results of
any audits or reviews of Mineral Resource
estimates.
|
· The
Mineral Resource estimate has been checked by an internal audit
procedure.
|
Discussion of relative
accuracy/ confidence
|
·
Where
appropriate a statement of the relative accuracy and confidence
level in the Mineral Resource estimate using an approach or
procedure deemed appropriate by the Competent Person. For example,
the application of statistical or geostatistical procedures to
quantify the relative accuracy of the resource within stated
confidence limits, or, if such an approach is not deemed
appropriate, a qualitative discussion of the factors that could
affect the relative accuracy and confidence of the
estimate.
·
The statement
should specify whether it relates to global or local estimates,
and, if local, state the relevant tonnages, which should be
relevant to technical and economic evaluation. Documentation should
include assumptions made and the procedures used.
·
These statements
of relative accuracy and confidence of the estimate should be
compared with production data, where available.
|
· The
estimate utilised good estimation practices, high quality drilling,
sampling and assay data. The extent and dimensions of the
mineralisation are sufficiently defined by outcrop and the detailed
drilling. The deposit is considered to have been estimated with
level of accuracy reflected in the resource
classification.
· The
Mineral Resource statement relates to global estimates of tonnes
and grade.
· The
has been small scale mining conducted at NOA, with approximately
22,000t mined at an average Li2O grade of
1.24%.
|