DOCSLIB.ORG

Independent Ni 43-101 Technical Report on the Bannockburn Nickel Sulphide Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Independent Ni 43-101 Technical Report on the Bannockburn Nickel Sulphide Project INDEPENDENT NI 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE BANNOCKBURN NICKEL SULPHIDE PROJECT Matachewan Area Ontario, Canada PREPARED FOR: Grid Metals Corp. 3335 Yonge Street, Suite 304 Toronto, Ontario M4N 2M1, Canada PREPARED BY: Caracle Creek International Consulting Inc. 1545 Maley Drive, Suite 2018 Sudbury, Ontario P3A 4R7, Canada Effective Date: December 31, 2020 Issue Date: January 19, 2021 Qualified Persons: Dr. Scott Jobin-Bevans (PhD, P.Geo., PMP) Principal Geoscientist Mr. Paul Davis (M.Sc., P.Geo.) Geoscientist Project Number: 605.20.00 Grid Metals Corp: Bannockburn Nickel, Ontario, Canada NI 43-101 Technical Report January 19, 2021 DATE AND SIGNATURE The Report, “Independent NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Bannockburn Nickel Sulphide Project, Matachewan Area, Ontario, Canada”, dated the 19th January 2021, with an Effective Date of the 31st December 2020, and prepared for Grid Metals Corp., was authored by the following: “signed and sealed original on file” _______________________________________ Scott Jobin-Bevans (PhD, P.Geo. #0183, PMP) Principal Geoscientist Caracle Creek International Consulting Inc. (Canada) “signed and sealed original on file” _______________________________________ Paul Davis (M.Sc., P.Geo. #1109) Geoscientist Paul Davis Consulting Dated: January 19, 2021 Caracle Creek International Consulting Page i of vi Grid Metals Corp: Bannockburn Nickel, Ontario, Canada NI 43-101 Technical Report January 19, 2021 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ ii List of Tables ............................................................................................................................................... iv List of Figures .............................................................................................................................................. v List of Appendices ....................................................................................................................................... vi 1.0 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Property Description and Location .............................................................................................. 1 1.3 History ......................................................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Geology and Mineralization ........................................................................................................ 2 1.5 Deposit Types .............................................................................................................................. 3 1.6 Exploration .................................................................................................................................. 4 1.7 Drilling ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.8 Interpretation and Conclusions ................................................................................................... 4 1.9 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 5 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................ 6 2.1 Terms of Reference and Project Scope ....................................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Declarations ...................................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Qualifications of Consultant ........................................................................................................ 8 2.3 Details of Inspection – Site Visit .................................................................................................. 8 2.4 Sources of Information.............................................................................................................. 10 2.5 Effective Date ............................................................................................................................ 10 2.6 Units of Measure and Terminology ........................................................................................... 10 2.6.1 Cumulate Igneous Rock Textures .................................................................................... 10 3.0 Reliance on Other Experts ................................................................................................................ 12 4.0 Property Description and Location ................................................................................................... 13 4.1 Mineral Disposition ................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Mining Lands Tenure System in Ontario ................................................................................... 18 4.2.1 Mining Lease ................................................................................................................... 19 4.2.2 Freehold Mining Lands .................................................................................................... 19 4.2.3 Licence of Occupation ..................................................................................................... 19 4.2.4 Land Use Permit .............................................................................................................. 20 4.3 Mining Law: Province of Ontario ............................................................................................... 20 4.3.1 Required Plans and Permits ............................................................................................ 20 4.3.1.1 Exploration Plans ....................................................................................................... 20 4.3.1.2 Exploration Permits ................................................................................................... 21 4.3.1.3 Current Permits and Project Status ........................................................................... 21 4.4 Royalties and Obligations .......................................................................................................... 22 4.5 Environmental Liabilities ........................................................................................................... 22 4.6 Other Significant Factors and Risks ........................................................................................... 22 4.6.1 Social or Community Impact ........................................................................................... 22 5.0 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography ........................................ 23 5.1 Accessibility ............................................................................................................................... 23 5.2 Climate ...................................................................................................................................... 23 5.3 Local Resources and Infrastructure ........................................................................................... 24 5.4 Physiography ............................................................................................................................. 24 5.4.1 Flora and Fauna .............................................................................................................. 24 5.5 Power, Water, Mine Facilities ................................................................................................... 25 Caracle Creek International Consulting Page ii of vi Grid Metals Corp: Bannockburn Nickel, Ontario, Canada NI 43-101 Technical Report January 19, 2021 6.0 History .............................................................................................................................................. 26 6.1 Asbestos .................................................................................................................................... 26 6.2 Nickel Sulphides ........................................................................................................................ 26 6.3 The Bannockburn Property ....................................................................................................... 27 6.3.1 Outokumpu Mines Ltd (1995-1999) ................................................................................ 27 6.3.2 Geological Mapping ........................................................................................................ 28 6.3.3 Enzyme Leach Soil Survey ............................................................................................... 28 6.3.4 Mobile Metal Ion (MMI) Soil Survey ............................................................................... 29 6.3.5 Geophysical Surveys ....................................................................................................... 29 6.3.5.1 Ground Magnetometer Survey.................................................................................. 29 6.3.5.2 HLEM Survey
Load more

Recommended publications
  • U-Pb Age, Re-Os Isotopes, and Hse Geochemistry of Northwest Africa 6704
    44th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference (2013) 1841.pdf U-PB AGE, RE-OS ISOTOPES, AND HSE GEOCHEMISTRY OF NORTHWEST AFRICA 6704. T. Iizuka1, Y. Amelin2, I. S. Puchtel3, R. J. Walker3, A. J. Irving4, A. Yamaguchi5, Y. Takagi6, T. Noguchi6 and M. Kimura5. 1Department of Earth and Planetary Science, University of Tokyo, Hongo 7-3-1, Bunkyo, Tokyo 113-0033, Japan ([email protected]), 2Research School of Earth Sciences, Australian National University, Canberra ACT, Australia, 3Department of Geology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA, 4Department of Earth and Space Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA, 5National Institute of Polar Research, Tachikawa, Tokyo 190-8518, Japan, 6College of Science, Ibaraki University, Bunkyo 2-1-1, Mito, Ibaraki 310-8512, Japan. Introduction: Northwest Africa (NWA) 6704 is a of Maryland using standard high temperature acid diges- very unusual ungrouped fresh achondrite. It consists of tion, chemical purification and mass spectrometry tech- abundant coarse-grained (up to 1.5 mm) low-Ca py- niques [3]. The quantities of each of the HSE was at roxene, less abundant olivine, chromite, merrillite and least 1000 times greater than the blanks measured at the interstitial sodic plagioclase. Minor minerals are same time. Thus, blanks had no impact on the measure- awaruite, heazlewoodite, and pentlandite. Raman spec- ments. Accuracy and precision of Ir, Ru, Pt and Pd con- troscopy shows that a majority of the low-Ca pyroxene centrations are estimated to be <2%, of Re <0.4%, and is orthopyroxene. Bulk major element abundances are of Os <0.1%.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW MINERAL NAMES Mrcnnnr Fr-Brscnpn
    THE AMERICAN MINERAI,OGIST, VOL. 55, JANUARY-FEBRUARY, 1970 NEW MINERAL NAMES Mrcnnnr Fr-Brscnpn Barringerite P. R. Busrcr (1969) Phosphide from meteorites.' Barringerite, a new iron-nickel mineral. Sci,ence165, 169-17 1,. The average of microprobe analyses was Fe 44.3*0.9, Ni 33.9+0.7, Co 0.25+0.03, P 21.8+0.4, stm 10O.25/6,corresponding to (Irer.roNio.srCoo.n)P,or (Fe, Ni)rP. X-ray study shows it to be hexagonal,space group P62 m, a 5.87 -t0.07, c 3.M+0.04 ft. The strongest X-ray lines (including many overlapping troilite or schreibersite; those starred do not overlap) are 2.98 (110),2.85* (101),2.53(200),2.23(lll),2.03*(201), 1.88* (r20), r.72(t00), 1.68(300, t2r), L.48(220), t.4t(3t0, 22r), r.29*(31r), 1.28(122), t.27 (400), 1.205(302),1.197(4oD.The structure is similar to those of synthetic FerP and NirP. p (calc) 6.92. Color white, very similar to that of kamacite, bluish compared to schreibersite. Harder than either kamacite or schreibersite. Reflectivity in air and oil slightly higher than that of schreibersite, lower than that of kamacite. Noticeably anisotropic (white to blue). Bireflectance not observed. The mineral occurs as bands 10-15 pm wide and several hundred microns long; they consist of individual grains less than 1 pm in diameter. They occur in the Ollague pallasite along the contacts between schreibersite and troilite. The name is for D.
    [Show full text]
  • NI 43-101 Preliminary Economic Assessment Report
    N.I. 43-101 TECHNICAL REPORT & PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT FOR THE TURNAGAIN PROJECT British Columbia, Canada Report date: November 18, 2020 Effective date: October 28, 2020 Prepared for: Suite 203 – 700 West Pender St., Vancouver, BC, V6C 1G8 www.gigametals.com Prepared by: 1066 W. Hastings St., Vancouver, BC, V6E 3X2 Qualified Persons Ian Thompson, P.Eng., Persio Rosario, P.Eng., Evan Jones, P.Eng., Gerald Schwab, P.Eng., & Stefan Hlouschko, P.Eng. – Hatch Ltd. • Garth Kirkham, P.Geo – Kirkham Geosystems • Daniel Friedman, P.Eng. – Knight Piésold • Ron Monk, P.Eng. – Kerr Wood Leidal • Chris Martin, C.Eng. MIMMM – Blue Coast Metallurgy • Andrew Mitchell, PhD, C.Eng – Wood Mackenzie Kirkham Geosystems Ltd. IMPORTANT NOTICE TO READER This report was prepared by the qualified persons (QPs) listed in Table 2.1. Each QP assumes responsibility for those sections or areas of this report that are referenced opposite their name in Table 2.1. None of the QPs, however, accepts any responsibility or liability for the sections or areas of this report that were prepared by other QPs. This report was prepared to allow Giga Metals Corporation (the “Owner”) to reach informed decisions respecting the development of the Turnagain Project. Except for the purposes legislated under provincial securities law, any use of this report by any third party is at that party's sole risk, and none of the contributors shall have any liability to any third party for any such use for any reason whatsoever, including negligence. This report is intended to be read as a whole, and sections should not be read or relied upon out of context.
    [Show full text]
  • Pallasites: Olivine-Metal Textures, Phosphoran Olivine, and Origin
    Pallasites: olivine-metal textures, phosphoranolivine, and origin Ed Scott University of Hawai’i, Honolulu, HI 96822. [email protected] Four questions: 3. Origin of the four FeO-rich MG pallasites 1. Why do some pallasites have rounded olivines? 2. Why is phosphoran olivine only found in five main-group pallasites? 3. Why do four main group pallasites with rounded olivines contain abnormally Fe-rich olivine? 4. Where did main group and Eagle Station group pallasites form? a 1. Origin of rounded olivine Did cm-sized rounded olivines form before angular olivines [9], or were olivines rounded after Fig. 5. Zaisho, Springwater, Rawlinna, and Phillips Co. fragmentation of olivine [2.3,7]? Constraints: contain anomalously Fe-rich olivine, Ni-rich metal, and • Uniform size distribution of rounded olivines in farringtonite Mg3(PO4)2 [20] suggesting Fe was oxidized. Fig.1c is unlike that of angular olivine pallasites Fig. 3. Ir vs. Ni showing metal in main group pallasites and IIIAB irons. Arrows show Data from [2]. which may contain dunite fragments several cm solid and liquid Fe-Ni paths during fractional crystallization. MG pallasites were b in width (Fig. 1a.). mostly formed by mixing of residual metallic liquid from a IIIAB-like core after 75- Springwater contains 4 • Angular olivine pallasites may contain pieces of 80% crystallization [1,2]. Pavlodar (Pa) has rounded olivines and plots near the vol.% farringtonite (center) rounded olivine texture (Fig. 1b). initial melt composition showing that rounding preceded metal crystallization. enclosing olivine. Slice ~12 • Pavlodar metal matches that expected for initial Marjalahti (Ma), Huckitta (Hu) and Seymchan (Se) have angular olivines and cm wide.
    [Show full text]
  • MINERALOGY and MINERAL CHEMISTRY of NOBLE METAL GRAINS in R CHONDRITES. H. Schulze, Museum Für Naturkunde, Institut Für Mineralogie, Invalidenstr
    Lunar and Planetary Science XXX 1720.pdf MINERALOGY AND MINERAL CHEMISTRY OF NOBLE METAL GRAINS IN R CHONDRITES. H. Schulze, Museum für Naturkunde, Institut für Mineralogie, Invalidenstr. 43, D-10115 Berlin, Germany, hart- [email protected]. Introduction: Rumuruti-chondrites are a group of [1]. Mostly, NM grains can be encountered as mono- chondrites intermediate between ordinary and carbo- mineralic grains, but multiphase assemblages of two naceous chondrites [1]. The characteristic feature of or three phases were found as well. Host phase of most these chondrites is their highly oxidized mineral as- NM grains are sulfides, either intact like in Rumuruti semblage. Equilibrated olivine usually has a fayalite or weathered to Fe-hydroxides in the desert finds. content around ~39 mole-% Fa. There is almost no Also silicates are frequent host phases (mostly olivine free NiFe-metal in these chondrites [1]. As a conse- and plagioclase). Several grains were found in or ad- quence, noble metals form separate phases [1,2,3] jacent to chromite. which otherwise, due to their siderophilic behavior, Mineralogy and mineral chemistry: Table 1 lists certainly would be dissolved in the FeNi metal. De- the NM minerals detected in R chondrites. Summa- spite the occurrence of noble metal minerals the rizing the results for all R chondrites, tetraferroplati- chemistry does not show any enrichment in these ele- num, sperrylite, irarsite, and osmium are the most ments which are CI-like except for very volatile and abundant NM minerals. Gold seems to be a common chalcophile elements which are even lower [4]. Noble phase, too, but was not so frequently observed due to metal grains were described so far from carbonaceous the lower chemical abundance.
    [Show full text]
  • Elemental Abundances in the Metal of Los Vientos 263 - an Anomalous Pallasite Formed in a Reduced Environment
    50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2019 (LPI Contrib. No. 2132) 1442.pdf ELEMENTAL ABUNDANCES IN THE METAL OF LOS VIENTOS 263 - AN ANOMALOUS PALLASITE FORMED IN A REDUCED ENVIRONMENT. S. Sharma1, M. Humayun1, R. Hewins2,3, B. Zanda2,4, J. Gattac- ceca5, C. Sonzogni5 and S. Sillitoe-Kukas1. 1Dept. Earth, Ocean & Atmospheric Science, and National High Magnet- ic Field Laboratory, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL 32310, USA ([email protected]); 2IMPMC, UPMC, MNHN – UMR CNRS 7590, 75005 Paris, France; 3Dept. Earth & Planetary Sciences, Rutgers University, Pisca- taway, NJ 08854, USA; 4IMCCE, Observatoire de Paris - CNRS UMR 8028, 75014 Paris, France; 5Aix Marseille Univ., CNRS, IRD, Coll France, INRA, CEREGE, Aix-en-Provence, France. Introduction: Metal-rich meteorites bear important metal in LoV 263. It does not resemble any ungrouped information on the diversity of planetesimals in the irons in Ni-Ga-Ge relations (not shown). Early Solar System. Pallasites, olivine-metal bearing Table 1: Composition of the metal in LoV 263. meteorites, characterized by their mineralogy, chemis- try and oxygen isotopic composition, include the Main Conc. (ppm) Conc. (ppm) Group pallasites (PMG), the Eagle Station pallasites V 0.2 Ru 12.4 (PES), and many anomalous members [1, 2, 3]. A Cr 4 Rh 1.70 growing number of anomalous pyroxene-bearing pal- Fe 938000 Pd 1.55 lasites have been found that are distinct from the PMG Co 4020 Sn 0.47 and PES - Vermillion, Yamato 8451, Choteau, NWA Ni 56500 Sb 0.047 10019, Zinder and NWA 1911 [4,5]. Milton is another Cu 131 W 1.93 unique pallasite, which is similar to ES group in its Fa content with a distinct oxygen isotopic signature [6].
    [Show full text]
  • Unbroken Meteorite Rough Draft
    Space Visitors in Kentucky: Meteorites and Asteroid “Ida.” Most meteorites originate from asteroids. Meteorite Impact Sites in Kentucky Meteorite from Clark County, Ky. Mercury Earth Saturn Venus Mars Neptune Jupiter William D. Ehmann Asteroid Belt with contributions by Warren H. Anderson Uranus Pluto www.uky.edu/KGS Special thanks to Collie Rulo for cover design. Earth image was compiled from satellite images from NOAA and NASA. Kentucky Geological Survey James C. Cobb, State Geologist and Director University of Kentucky, Lexington Space Visitors in Kentucky: Meteorites and Meteorite Impact Sites in Kentucky William D. Ehmann Special Publication 1 Series XII, 2000 i UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY Collie Rulo, Graphic Design Technician Charles T. Wethington Jr., President Luanne Davis, Staff Support Associate II Fitzgerald Bramwell, Vice President for Theola L. Evans, Staff Support Associate I Research and Graduate Studies William A. Briscoe III, Publication Sales Jack Supplee, Director, Administrative Supervisor Affairs, Research and Graduate Studies Roger S. Banks, Account Clerk I KENTUCKY GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Energy and Minerals Section: James A. Drahovzal, Head ADVISORY BOARD Garland R. Dever Jr., Geologist V Henry M. Morgan, Chair, Utica Cortland F. Eble, Geologist V Ron D. Gilkerson, Vice Chair, Lexington Stephen F. Greb, Geologist V William W. Bowdy, Fort Thomas David A. Williams, Geologist V, Manager, Steven Cawood, Frankfort Henderson office Hugh B. Gabbard, Winchester David C. Harris, Geologist IV Kenneth Gibson, Madisonville Brandon C. Nuttall, Geologist IV Mark E. Gormley, Versailles William M. Andrews Jr., Geologist II Rosanne Kruzich, Louisville John B. Hickman, Geologist II William A. Mossbarger, Lexington Ernest E. Thacker, Geologist I Jacqueline Swigart, Louisville Anna E.
    [Show full text]
  • Machine Learning for Semi-Automated Meteorite Recovery
    Machine Learning for Semi-Automated Meteorite Recovery Seamus Anderson1*, Martin Towner1, Phil Bland1, Christopher Haikings2,3, William Volante4, Eleanor Sansom1, Hadrien Devillepoix1, Patrick Shober1, Benjamin Hartig1, Martin Cupak1, Trent Jansen- Sturgeon1, Robert Howie1, Gretchen Benedix1, Geoff Deacon5 1Space Science and Technology Center, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia 2Spectre UAV Concepts, 191 St Georges Terrace, Perth, WA 6000, Australia 3Amotus Pty Ltd, Level 25/71 Eagle St, Brisbane City, QLD 4000, Australia 4Department of Psychology, Clemson University, 418 Brackett Hall, Clemson, SC, 29634 5Western Australian Museum, 49 Kew St, Welshpool, WA 6106, Australia *Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected]. Abstract We present a novel methodology for recovering meteorite falls observed and constrained by fireball networks, using drones and machine learning algorithms. This approach uses images of the local terrain for a given fall site to train an artificial neural network, designed to detect meteorite candidates. We have field tested our methodology to show a meteorite detection rate between 75-97%, while also providing an efficient mechanism to eliminate false-positives. Our tests at a number of locations within Western Australia also showcase the ability for this training scheme to generalize a model to learn localized terrain features. Our model-training approach was also able to correctly identify 3 meteorites in their native fall sites, that were found using traditional searching techniques. Our methodology will be used to recover meteorite falls in a wide range of locations within globe- spanning fireball networks. Introduction Fireballs and meteors have been observed since antiquity by Chinese, Korean, Babylonian and Roman astronomers (Bjorkman 1973), while meteorites and their unique metallurgical properties have also been known and used by various cultures around the world from Inuit tools (Rickard 1941) to an Egyptian ceremonial dagger (Comelli et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Geochemical Constraints on the Origin of the Moon and Preservation of Ancient Terrestrial Heterogeneities
    S. J. Lock et al., Space Science Reviews, 216, 109, doi: 10.1007/s11214-020-00729-z, 2020 Geochemical constraints on the origin of the Moon and preservation of ancient terrestrial heterogeneities Simon J. Locka,∗, Katherine R. Berminghamb,c, Rita Paraid, Maud Boyete aDivision of Geological and Planetary Sciences, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA 91125, USA. bDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA cDepartment of Geology, University of Maryland,College Park, MD 20742, USA. dDepartment of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO 63130, USA. eUniversit´eClermont Auvergne, CNRS, IRD, OPGC, Laboratoire Magmas et Volcans, F-63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France. Abstract The Moon forming giant impact marks the end of the main stage of Earth's accretion and sets the stage for the subsequent evolution of our planet. The giant impact theory has been the accepted model of lunar origin for 40 years, but the parameters of the impact and the mechanisms that led to the formation of the Moon are still hotly debated. Here we review the principal geochemical observations that constrain the timing and parameters of the impact, the mechanisms of lunar formation, and the contemporaneous evolution of Earth. We discuss how chemical and isotopic studies on lunar, terrestrial and meteorite samples relate to physical models and how they can be used to differentiate between lunar origin models. In particular, we argue that the efficiency of mixing during the collision is a key test of giant impact models. A high degree of intra-impact mixing is required to explain the isotopic similarity between the Earth and Moon but, at the same time, the impact did not homogenize the whole terrestrial mantle, as isotopic signatures of pre-impact heterogeneity are preserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Detailed Mineralogy and Trace Element Chemistry of Donino Iron Meteorite: a Pentlandite and Heazlewoodite Issue
    52nd Lunar and Planetary Science Conference 2021 (LPI Contrib. No. 2548) 1445.pdf DETAILED MINERALOGY AND TRACE ELEMENT CHEMISTRY OF DONINO IRON METEORITE: A PENTLANDITE AND HEAZLEWOODITE ISSUE. K. D. Litasov1,2, A. Ishikawa3, and K. E. Kuper4, 1Fersman Mineralogical Museum RAS, Moscow, 119071, Russia, 2Vereshchagin Institute for High Pressure Physics RAS, Troitsk, Moscow, 108840, Russia ([email protected]), 3Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Ookayama, Meguro, Tokyo, 152-8550, Japan ([email protected]), 4Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics SB RAS, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia ([email protected]). Introduction: Dronino is one of the famous iron tentatively described it as a glass. It is clear that SiO2 is meteorites found in Russia. The total weight of shower not a foreign phase or contamination. The SiO2 glass is fragments exceeds 3 tons. It was classified as an pure and contains only 0.5 wt.% FeO. ungrouped meteorite close to IVA irons. It contains about 10 wt.% of rounded sulfide inclusions up to a few mm in size, rare chromite, and Fe-bearing phosphate. Sulfide inclusions are often surrounded by Fe-oxide and hydroxide rims [1]. Previous investigations were related to the study of the fine structure and composition of metallic matrix [2- 4] and trace element and crystallography of sulfide inclusions [5-6]. Specific crystallographic works on Dronino iron revealed new secondary hydroxide minerals chukanovite and droninoite [7-8]. Here, we present new mineralogical and trace element data, which allows us to confirm unusual nature of Dronino meteorite and provide new evidence for its origin and cooling history.
    [Show full text]
  • Workshop on Differences Between Antarctic and Non-Antarctic Meteorites
    WORKSHOP ON DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ANTARCTIC AND NON-ANTARCTIC METEORITES Edited by Christian Koeberl and William A. Cassidy Held at Vienna, Austria July 27 - 28, 1989 Sponsored by Lunar and Planetary Institute University of Vienna Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 NASA Road 1 Houston, Texas 77058-4399 LPI Technical Report Number 90-01 Compiled in 1990 by the LUNAR AND PLANETARY INSTITUTE The Institute is operated by Universities Space Research Association under Contract NASW-4066 with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Material in this document may be copied without restraint for library, abstract service, educational, or personal research purposes; however, republication of any portion requires the written permission of the authors as well as appropriate acknowledgment of this publication. This report may be cited as: Koeberl C. and Cassidy W. A., eds. (1990) Workshop on Differences Between Antarctic and Non-Antarctic Meteorites. LPI Tech. Rpt. 90-01. Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston. 102 pp. Papers in this report may be cited as: Author A. A. (1990) Title of paper. In Workshop on Differences Between Antarctic and Non-Antarctic Meteorites (C. Koeberi and W. A. Cassidy, eds.), pp. xx-yy. LPI Tech. Rpt. 90-01. Lunar and Planetary Institute, Houston. This report is distributed by: ORDER DEPARTMENT Lunar and Planetary Institute 3303 NASA Road 1 Houston, TX 77058-4399 Mail order requestors will be invoiced for the cost of shippb_g and handling. Contents Introduction 1 Program 5 Summary of Technical Sessions 9 General Summary and Recommendations for Future Work 12 Acknowledgments 15 Abstracts 17 Terrestrial Age of Antarctic Meteorites N. Bhandari ]9 On the Difference Between Weathering Products on Antarctic and Non-Antarctic Mctcorites V.
    [Show full text]
  • 2002 TMS Annual Meeting & Exhibition
    Become AA TMS Member TMS derives its strength from its members, who take a hands-on approach to shaping the policy, programming, and publications of the society. Guided by these volunteers, TMS serves all segments of its professional community by: FACILITATING NETWORKING: By sponsoring numerous annual meetings and specialty conferences, TMS maximizes the opportunities for professionals from industries, universities, and government agencies worldwide to meet face to face and exchange technical ideas and experience, offer customer/client insights, find a mentor and/or serve as one, and just plain chat with peers and colleagues. PRODUCING JOM AND OTHER PUBLICATIONS: Every TMS member receives a complimentary subscription to JOM. Formerly Journal of Metals, this highly respected monthly journal, explores traditional, innovative, and revolutionary issues in the minerals, metals, and materials fields. Designed to be of maximum and immediate benefit to readers throughout the world, JOM is on-line before the print version is mailed. TMS also publishes three other journals (Journal of Electronic Materials and Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A and B), numerous conference proceedings volumes and textbooks, and videos designed to give materials scientists and engi- neers the latest information on scientific and applied advances in areas as diverse as electronic materials, automotive manu- facture, and extractive metallurgy. PROMOTING LIFE-LONG LEARNING: TMS is dedicated to the education of the materials science and engineering professional as well as to cultivating an interest in the field by young people. For the practicing professional, TMS and its five technical divisions sponsor continuing education courses, primarily technical but also nontechnical, to promote the education and development of current and future professionals.
    [Show full text]