In a message dated 1/9/01 6:36:58 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< Based on information that has appeared elsewhere, BHP states as acquisition
cost for Falcon of ~US$60 lkm (or $15/station since they as well state they
measure data at about a 250 sample interval). This is about airborne EM
comes in at, so is not out of line. However, BHP's right to a 51% interest
certainly looks like you've invited the proverbial 800 lb gorilla to
dinner >>
Sheesh, Ken, I think 250-meter gravity-gradient-sampling is downright
terrible for kimberlite exploration.
Very few economic pipes on the planet, if I remember right, have surface
dimensions in excess of 250 meters. The giants like Mwadi, Orapa, Jwaneng
(with grades less than 1 carat/tonne) probably would be nicely imaged with
250-meter gradient-stations. BUT, smaller (less than 20-million-tonne) but
high-grade pipes (>4 carats/tonne) like Mir, International, and even
Lac-De-Gras' Misery and A-154-South pipes could be trouble for any
250-meter-station technique. Even with the averaging/smearing inherent in
airborne geophysical sampling--I'd be worried about "missing" the high-grade
but smaller kimb target.
Comparing line-kilometer costs between HEM and Falcon is similar, but the
high (<10-metre) sampling-rate of HEM probably still make it the superior
airborne method for my kimberlite exploration programs. I believe Falcon
probably has greater exploration potential in oil/gas exploration where basin
targets/structures are large and shallow density-contrasts are better known
thanx to 3D-seismic-static-corrections.
Thanks for posting the BHP-Falcon promotional stuff, it is always
interesting.
Best Regards,
Terry J. Crebs
California Registered Geophysicist
Lakewood, CO USA
_______________________________________________________
List archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
