LETTER TO THE EDITOR — Reader disputes Pakeagama Lake claims

We note with interest the recent exchange of letters between John Cumming and Donald Bubar in the June 14-29 issue of The Northern Miner, regarding the claims made for the Pakeagama Lake pegmatite discovery.

In his rebuttal to Donald Bubar, John Cumming states that SQUI (spodumene-quartz-intergrowth) has “a higher value than petalite.” Mr. Cumming is wrong, as a review of the posted prices of the two commodities will indicate. The most recent price information available (in the May 1999 edition of Industrial Minerals) shows the quoted price for petalite to be US$250 per tonne F.O.B. Durban, South Africa, while the price of “Glass Grade Spodumene” (processed SQUI) is US$195 to US$200 per tonne F.O.B. West Virginia. Clearly, petalite is the higher-valued commodity, even without regard to the difference engendered by adding ocean freight to the price of petalite.

The reader is cautioned, however, that the price per tonne is not the entire equation in evaluating these minerals for use in glass manufacture. Their relative worth in each individual glass formulation must be calculated using the delivered cost of the other raw materials for which, in varying degrees, these minerals will serve as substitutes. Each case is unique.

We trust this will help a little in clarifying a complex situation.

George Edwards

President,

G.H. Edwards & Associates

Gainesville, Fla.

Editor’s note: John Cumming stated that spodumene, not SQUI, has a higher value than petalite. In the June 14, 1999, edition of Metal Bulletin, petalite (4.2% Li2O bagged f.o.b. Durban) is priced at US$250 per tonne whereas spodumene (more than 7.25% Li2O) is priced at US$385-395 per tonne.

It must be noted, however, that these prices reflect long-term negotiated contracts for two obscure industrial minerals, and any new producer entering the lithium-silicate market may have to sell its product at a discount in order to attract customers.