Resource News
On-site plant considered best option for Goldsource Mines
By Resource Intelligence · July 19, 2010 · 12:45 pm · 1 Comment
A 500-megawatt electric generating plant, fired by clean coal, is the best option for Goldsource Mines Inc.’s extensive coal reserves near Hudson Bay, the company said this week.
Initial results from a preliminary economic assessment (PEA) prepared for the Vancouver company and its Border project, about 60 kilometres from the community of 1,800, suggests an on-site plant would eliminate transportation of coal from the site and add to the province’s future power requirements.
“(That) makes the most sense, I think, from a practical point of view,” company president Scott Drever said in an interview Friday, calling the development of a clean coal-fired plant at the site the most logical and practical option for the resource.
“It would fulfil some of the projected requirements for electricity that Saskatchewan needs and it would give employment to an area that is in desperate need of it.”
Drever said with an estimated 300 million tonnes of sub-bituminous coal in the area — at least 170 million tonnes of which is within the Border property — a 500-megawatt plant could run at the site for 50 or 60 years.
Goldsource’s coal alone has the same power equivalency as 200 to 400 million barrels of oil. A 500-megawatt plant would be large enough to produce one-sixth of the total energy SaskPower creates today, with one megawatt of energy enough to power 1,000 homes.
Such a project would likely cost in the range of $1 billion.
“Certainly we want to see it developed in some form or fashion,” Drever said. “It’s tremendous resource, it’s a tremendous energy source for Saskatchewan.
“In keeping with the development of Saskatchewan’s resources like potash and uranium and all the other minerals and things that Saskatchewan has, we think it just makes sense to go ahead and develop this particular resource.”
Read the rest at the Leader Post: http://www.leaderpost.com/site+plant+considered+best+option/3289863/story.html#ixzz0u9gKltWK
Could anyone suggest a reason why GXS stock has not reacted at all to this news?