|Posted by haimdatsawh on June 29, 2012 at 8:20 AM||comments (0)|
Extreme weather shocks Suriname's leaders into climate action
Thu, 28 Jun 2012 11:15 GMT
Source: alertnet // Marvin A. Hokstam
A view of Paramaribo, Suriname, from the Suriname River. ALERTNET/Marvin A. Hokstam
By Marvin A. Hokstam
PARAMARIBO, Suriname (AlertNet) - Gone are the days that people in Suriname considered their country blessed by the gods against disastrous weather.
Last week, an unprecedented storm caught the country off guard. Winds, clocked at 80 kilometers per hour, raged for an hour and a half, toppling trees, blowing off roofs and snapping light poles like twigs.
It was the third or fourth time in a year that unusual severe weather wreaked havoc in the South American country, but this time was the worst. There were no injuries reported, but workers of the National Coordination Center for Disaster Relief rushed to help people under threat at more than 35 places around Paramaribo, the country’s capital.
The next morning after the latest storm, parliamentarians gathered for an urgent meeting to question the government about which measures will be taken so the country is not surprised by extreme weather again.
Located on the north eastern shoulder of South America, former Dutch colony Suriname lies outside the hurricane belt. The country prides itself on its tropical weather, with rainy and sunny seasons throughout the year.
Storms and hurricanes, like those that threaten the peace of mind in Caribbean islands during the hurricane season from May to November, are unheard of in Suriname, leaving the country totally unprepared for the sudden storm that blew in from the east on the evening of June 20.
First it hit the Amerindian village of Galibi and the village of Albina on the left bank of the Marowijne River, the border with French Guiana. Galibi, which is located near the shores of the Atlantic Ocean, got the full brunt of the storm’s force.
Trees were uprooted and towering waves damaged boats that were floating, tied up, in the river. Several houses were damaged and the village was left without electricity when the storm blew further to Paramaribo.
There, the storm blew off parts of the root at Saint Vincentius hospital, sent rain gushing into the Maretraite shopping mall, causing panic, and crushed cars as it blew over trees. Government-owned radio station SRS suffered damage to its main tower and had to switch to an auxiliary transmitter unit to be able to broadcast on Wednesday.
WRITING ON THE WALL
“For the first time in its history, Suriname suffered the effects of (such a) a storm,” the country’s worried environmental minister, Ginmardo Kromosoeto, said the next day as he addressed the Rio+20 sustainable development summit in Brazil. For John Goedschalk, director of Suriname’s Climate Compatible Development Agency (CCDA), the storm was the writing on the wall, underscoring his calls for political will to implement climate change adaptation measures.
“We shouldn’t even question whether this weather is caused by climate change,” he said. “The seas are warming up and the intensity of the wind we’re experiencing is a natural reaction to that phenomenon.”
The damage the storm left in the small country was just as unprecedented as the storm itself; the cost of the destruction has not been released, but the government has so far allocated 500,000 Surinamese dollars ($154,000) for repairs.
And more structural changes are coming, said Vice President Robert Ameerali, as he answered questions from parliamentarians in the National Assembly. Some 10 million Surinamese dollars ($3.1 million) will be made available annually for the National Coordination Center for Disaster Relief (NCCR) and for a relief fund that will be established for victims of inclement weather, he said.
“It is imperative that we make funds available structurally, so the NCCR can have the relief resources it needs to execute its tasks, permanently,” said Ameerali.
As a result of the storm, calls were made for the Meteorological Office to invest in a Doppler radar. With the radar, authorities could predict bad weather with more certainty and communities could be warned in time to take precautions, members of parliament said. Parliamentarians have also called for other measures, including awareness campaigns.
Such campaigns are crucial to educating people about the change in climatic conditions, said Meteorologist Roel Oelers, a meteorologist.
“We did issue warnings that there was bad weather underway, but not many people listened,” he said.
NCCR Director Colonel Jerry Slijngaard called the recent spate of storms “lessons.”
“Suriname is no longer that blissful exception to the rule that we were always so proud of. The pictures of trails of disaster caused by weather on the islands are no longer things that we can consider impossibilities. That’s why we should learn from the (Caribbean) region,” he said.
Some experts hinted at the possibility of moving some of Suriname’s infrastructure away from the sea, as the Meteorological Office has suggested that that the new weather patterns may not subside anytime soon and sea level along the coast is rising.
CCDA Director Goedschalk said his agency is in talks with the National Institute for Environment and Development to form an interagency taskforce that will assess the situation. Among matters he expects to be placed under the magnifying glass is the country’s building legislation.
“We still build houses in the conventional ways, because we never had to take strong winds into consideration. But with the increases we’re experiencing in wind strengths, we should add requirements like better anchorage of roofs to our legislation,” he said.
Slijngaard, of the country’s disaster relief centre, says the country should also look to the nearby Caribbean for lessons.
“On the islands people have started building much stronger years ago. They use more steel and stronger roof constructions. Right now in Suriname too many houses are still built according to a style that dates from a time of carefreeness,” he said.
Marvin A. Hokstam is a freelance writer based in Paramaribo, Suriname.
|Posted by haimdatsawh on June 29, 2012 at 8:15 AM||comments (0)|
The Seed Emergency:
The Threat to Food and Democracy Vandana Shiva Activist and author Dr Vandana Shiva is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology. Patenting seeds has led to a farming and food crisis - and huge profits for US biotechnology corporations.Last Modified: 06 Feb 2012 17:26
New Delhi, India - The seed is the first link in the food chain - and seed sovereignty is the foundation of food sovereignty. If farmers do not have their own seeds or access to open pollinated varieties that they can save, improve and exchange, they have no seed sovereignty - and consequently no food sovereignty. The deepening agrarian and food crisis has its roots in changes in the seed supply system, and the erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty. Seed sovereignty includes the farmer's rights to save, breed and exchange seeds, to have access to diverse open source seeds which can be saved - and which are not patented, genetically modified, owned or controlled by emerging seed giants. It is based on reclaiming seeds and biodiversity as commons and public good. The past twenty years have seen a very rapid erosion of seed diversity and seed sovereignty, and the concentration of the control over seeds by a very small number of giant corporations. In 1995
In India, 95 per cent of cotton seeds are reportedly controlled by Monsanto, a US biotechnology corporation [EPA]
when the UN organised the Plant Genetic Resources Conference in Leipzig, it was reported that 75 per cent of all agricultural biodiversity had disappeared because of the introduction of "modern" varieties, which are always cultivated as monocultures. Since then, the erosion has accelerated. The introduction of the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights Agreement of the World Trade Organisation has accelerated the spread of genetically engineered seeds - which can be patented - and for which royalties can be collected. Navdanya was started in response to the introduction of these patents on seeds in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade - a forerunner to the WTO - about which a Monsanto representative later stated: "In drafting these agreements, we were the patient, diagnostician [and] physician all in one." Corporations defined a problem - and for them the problem was farmers saving seeds. They offered a solution, and the solution was to make it illegal for farmers to save seed - by introducing patents and intellectual property rights [PDF] on those very seeds. As a result, acreage under GM corn, soya, canola, cotton has increased dramatically.
Threats to seed sovereignty Besides displacing and destroying diversity, patented GMO seeds are also undermining seed sovereignty. Across the world, new seed laws are being introduced which enforce compulsory registration of seeds, thus making it impossible for small farmers to grow their own diversity, and forcing them into dependency on giant seed corporations. Corporations are also patenting climate resilient seeds evolved by farmers - thus robbing farmers of using their own seeds and knowledge for climate adaptation. Another threat to seed sovereignty is genetic contamination. India has lost its cotton seeds because of contamination from Bt Cotton - a strain engineered to contain the pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium. Canada has lost its canola seed because of contamination from Roundup Ready canola. And Mexico has lost its corn due to contamination from Bt Cotton. After contamination, biotech seed corporations sue farmers with patent infringement cases, as happened in the case of Percy Schmeiser. That is why more than 80 groups came together and filed a case to prevent Monsanto from suing farmers whose seed had been contaminated. As a farmer's seed supply is eroded, and farmers become dependent on patented GMO seed, the result is debt. India, the home of cotton, has lost its cotton seed diversity and cotton seed sovereignty. Some 95 per cent of the country's cotton seed is now controlled by Monsanto - and the debt trap created by being forced to buy seed every year - with royalty payments - has pushed hundreds of thousands of farmers to suicide; of the 250,000 farmer suicides, the majority are in the cotton belt.
Seeding control Even as the disappearance of biodiversity and seed sovereignty creates a major crisis for agriculture and food security, corporations are pushing governments to use public money to destroy the public seed supply and replace it with unreliable non-renewable, patented seed - which must be bought each and every year. In Europe, the 1994 regulation for protection of plant varieties forces farmers to make a "compulsory voluntary contribution" to seed companies. The terms themselves are contradictory. What is compulsory cannot be voluntary. In France, a law was passed in November 2011, which makes royalty payments compulsory. As Agriculture Minister Bruna Le Marie stated: "Seeds can be longer be royalty free, as is currently the case." Of the 5,000 or so cultivated plant varieties, 600 are protected by certificate in France, and these account for 99 per cent of the varieties grown by farmers. The "compulsory voluntary contribution", in other words a royalty, is justified on grounds that "a fee is paid to certificate holders [seed companies] to sustain funding of research and efforts to improve genetic resources". Monsanto pirates biodiversity and genetic resources from farming communities, as it did in the case of a wheat biopiracy case fought by Navdanya with Greenpeace, and climate resilient crops and brinjal (also known as aubergine or eggplant) varieties for Bt Brinjal. As Monsanto states, "it draws from a collection of germ-plasm that is unparalleled in history" and "mines the diversity in this genetic library to develop elite seeds faster than ever before". In effect, what is taking place is the enclosure of the genetic commons of our biodiversity and the intellectual commons of public breeding by farming communities and public institutions. And the GMO seeds Monsanto is offering are failing. This is not "improvement" of genetic resources, but degradation. This is not innovation but piracy. For example, the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) - being pushed by the Gates Foundation - is a major assault on Africa's seed sovereignty.
Agribusiness The 2009 US Global Food Security Act [PDF] also called the Lugar-Casey Act [PDF], "A bill to authorise appropriations for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to provide assistance to foreign countries to promote food security, to stimulate rural economies, and to improve emergency response to food crisis, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 and for other purposes". The amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act would "include research on bio-technological advances appropriate to local ecological conditions, including genetically modified technology". The $ 7.7bn that goes with the bill would go to benefit Monsanto to push GM seeds.
"Royalties for Monsanto are based on debt, suicidal farmers and the disappearance of biodiversity worldwide."
An article in Forbes, titled "Why Uncle Sam Supports Franken Foods", shows how agribusiness is the only sector in which US has a positive trade balance. Hence the push for GMOs - because they bring royalties to the US. However, royalties for Monsanto are based on debt, suicidal farmers and the disappearance of biodiversity worldwide. Under the US Global Food Security Act, Nepal signed an agreement with USAID and Monsanto. This led to massive protests across the country. India was forced to allow patents on seeds through the first dispute brought by the US against India in the WTO. Since 2004, India has also been trying to introduce a Seed Act which would require farmers to register their own seeds and take licenses. This in effect would force farmers from using their indigenous seed varieties. By creating a Seed Satyagraha - a non-cooperation movement in Gandhi's footsteps, handing over hundreds of thousands of signatures to the prime minister, and working with parliament - we have so far prevented the Seed Law from being introduced. India has signed a US-India Knowledge Initiative in Agriculture, with Monsanto on the Board. Individual states are also being pressured to sign agreements with Monsanto. One example is the Monsanto-Rajasthan Memorandum of Understanding, under which Monsanto would get intellectual property rights to all genetic resources, and to carry out research on indigenous seeds. It took a campaign by Navdanya and a "Monsanto Quit India" Bija Yatra ["seed pilgrimage"] to force the government of Rajasthan to cancel the MOU. This asymmetric pressure of Monsanto on the US government, and the joint pressure of both on the governments across the world, is a major threat to the future of seeds, the future of food and the future of democracy.
Dr Vandana Shiva is a physicist, eco-feminist, philosopher, activist and author of more than 20 books and 500 papers. She is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, and has campaigned for biodiversity, conservation and farmers' rights, winning the Right Livelihood Award [Alternative Nobel Prize] in 1993.
|Posted by haimdatsawh on June 12, 2012 at 9:20 AM||comments (0)|
TEXT-S&P: 'BB' category sovereigns in South and Central america
Mon Jun 11, 2012 9:58pm IST
June 11 - Six sovereigns in Latin America have 'BB' category ratings, which
on the surface might imply that the countries are similar in many respects--from
their economies to their political systems--said Standard & Poor's Ratings
Services in a report titled "A Comparative Look At 'BB' Category Sovereigns In
South And Central America".
The reality, it turns out, is that even though the six share some
characteristics, there are also many differences between them.
"Our report highlights the complex interplay of factors that can land
distinctly different sovereigns in the same rating category and illustrates
how the vicissitudes of the global economy can support or constrain a
sovereign's rating," said Standard & Poor's credit analyst Olga Kalinina.
The three South American countries--Bolivia, Paraguay, and Suriname--have
benefited greatly from high world prices for their primary commodities:
natural gas, soya, and gold. Combined with rising industrial production, this
has boosted their economies, and, in the case of Bolivia and Suriname,
government revenues as well.
By contrast, the three less commodity-rich sovereigns in Central America were
hurt more by the global recession and have recovered from it slowly. Costa
Rica's, El Salvador's, and Guatemala's public finances, which were already
weak, have worsened as their budget deficits have widened and their government
debts climbed. Nevertheless, these three countries have maintained relatively
stronger public institutions and continued pursuing predictable and
market-oriented policies. This has partially offset their economic
Bottom line, the two sets of countries seem to be moving along opposite
trajectories. On balance, creditworthiness is improving in Bolivia, Paraguay,
and Suriname--we've upgraded all three to the 'BB' category from 'B' in the
past two years, as their governments have proven able to cash in on the
favorable commodities cycle.
The Central American sovereigns, by contrast, are facing rising credit risks.
We have a negative outlook on our 'BB' rating on Guatemala, and we have
downgraded El Salvador by two rating notches over the past three years. These
countries are trying to stave off rising credit risks.
The report is available to subscribers of RatingsDirect on the Global Credit
Portal at www.globalcreditportal.com. If you are not a RatingsDirect
subscriber, you may purchase a copy of the report by calling (1) 212-438-7280
or sending an e-mail to email@example.com. Ratings
information can also be found on Standard & Poor's public Web site by using
the Ratings search box located in the left column at www.standardandpoors.com.
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.
|Posted by haimdatsawh on June 12, 2012 at 12:20 AM||comments (0)|
Msiba, My Love has been chosen to be shown at Belize International Film Festival July 13-17 in the Short Film Animation Category.
More info on Msiba
Msiba, My Love was read in English by Therese Dover--A Tear of Joy and the poet Ivan Khayiat--A Tear of Sorrow. Both voices combine in the reading of Bitter/Sweet.
The DVD has stunning images of the earth and the rain forest. These images celebrate the beauty of Suriname's forest interior. It,hover, also evokes pain and sorrow as we see the threats to this pristine environment from indiscreet mining and logging.
The images and animation complements the reading and adds to the words of the poem. The film editor Shafeek Nazir hascarefully interpreted the poem. So the viewer has another layer of emotional intensity.
A specially composed sound track by Rohit Badatljawdharie with hypnotic and haunting tones is in the background. It gives its own signature to the DVD.
The pictures in the DVD were done by Rohit Badatljawdharie, Rudi Moredjan and Studio TMC
The poetry is by Ivan Khayiat.
Msiba was chosen a state gift by the government of Suriname and a copy of the book and DVD was given to 15 Caribbean heads of state.
The DVD now has the poem read in 6 languages (Dutch, French,
Spanish,Portuguese, Sarmakan ( the language of the tribe which was
displaced) and Saran Tongo( the Surinamese Language). Translations are
being completed in Hindi and Mandarin Chinese.
A group in Brazil has invited us to be part of their RIo 20 +
participation in June.
The DVD now has the poem read in 7 languages (Dutch, French,
Spanish,Portuguese,Hindi, Sarmakan ( the language of the tribe which was
displaced) and Saran Tongo( the Surinamese Language).
The book and DVD was given to 15 Caribbean heads of state as a State gift from The President of Suriname..
|Posted by haimdatsawh on May 29, 2012 at 12:10 AM||comments (0)|
CGX Energy to get $30 mln loan from Pacific Rubiales
10:13 am by Brad Lemaire
CGX Energy (CVE:OYL ) said Monday it struck a $30 million private placement with Pacific Rubiales Energy (TSE:PRE ) due to rising costs related to the Eagle-1 well.
Pacific Rubiales will buy 85.71 million units priced at 35 cents per share, which would give the natural gas producer a 35 percent stake in CGX. Each unit consists of one common share and one-half purchase warrant, and have an exercise price of 60 cents per share for a period of 18-months.
Proceeds will go toward funding expenditures to CGX’s oil and gas exploration activities in Guyana and for general corporate purposes.
CGX, a Canadian oil and gas explorer, holds four licenses in the Guyana Suriname basin, a frontier basin in South America with a proven hydrocarbon systems and deep water plays.
The U.S. geological survey ranks the Guyana Suriname basin as having the second highest resource potential among unexplored oil basins in the world. The mean resource is estimated at 15.2 billion barrels.
Pacific Rubiales produces natural gas and heavy crude oil, and owns a majority stake in Meta Petroleum Corp., a Colombian oil operator that runs oil fields in the Llanos basin.
The offering is subject to shareholder and TSX Venture Exchange approval. CGX’s stakeholders will vote on June 28, at their annual meeting.
On May 7, CGX announced cost increases on its Eagle-1 well and the need to raise about $20 million in the near term.
Initial costs for the well were pegged at $55 million, but increased to $71 million on May 7. But now the final costs are estimated to be 10 percent higher than first estimated.
If the units are not issued by July 31, interest on the principle will have a rate of 13.5 percent and will be compounded quarterly until paid in full.
In addition, both companies also announced jointly that they have entered into a services agreement, whereby Pacific Rubiales will offer technical assistance to CGX’s operations.
Pacific Rubiales will have the option to take part in wells being drilled on the Corentyne and Annex off-shore petroleum production licenses, in Guyana. If Pacific funds 50 percent of the exploration well cost and some seismic expenses, it will get a 33 percent stake in the licenses.
"This is a great opportunity to expand investment in the highly prospective offshore Guyana oil play," Pacific’s chief executive Ronald Pantin said in a statement.
"Through our ownership in CGX, the technical services agreement and a direct earning option, the company will participate in an exploration campaign in an offshore basin with analogous geology to West Africa and Brazil."
|Posted by haimdatsawh on March 29, 2012 at 11:30 AM||comments (0)|
A jungle trek for investments in Suriname
Thomas Kostigen's Impact Investor
Commentary: Small nation has chance for sustainable growth
March 16, 2012|Thomas Kostigen
PARAMARIBO, Suriname (MarketWatch) — Suriname has some of the least spoiled and species-rich land on earth, and social entrepreneurs here are working to keep it that way — with a twist: developing a model of conservation and commerce.
Suriname is the smallest sovereign country in South America, yet it has big potential. Technically it is part of the Caribbean, which is experiencing a sort of revitalization thanks to efforts by billionaire private investors and a mandate by the Obama administration to invest more resources in the region.
Mark Plotkin, a Skoll Foundation Entrepreneur and head of the Amazon Conservation Team, tells me that Suriname could be a case study for “getting things right in sustainable development in the tropics.” He says that means everything from eco tourism to microfinance to handicraft development to cultural tourism to payment for ecosystem services to payment for carbon credits. Read more about the Amazon Conservation Team.
“You have two great and obvious advantages in Suriname: one, very low population density with intact ecosystems, and two, the massive mistakes that every one has made in terms of environmental degradation from Mexico to Brazil.” His point: Suriname can learn from the mistakes of the past and set itself up for a prosperous future.
Likewise the social impacts in Suriname abound. The country is in dire need of infrastructure — power, telecommunications, and the like. Alcoa (US:AA) , Iamgold (US:IAG) , and Newmont Mining (US:NEM) are already here digging up the place and mining for metals and minerals. More mining growth is expected. That means more people, more housing, more energy, transportation, food and social service needs — development. Yet Suriname is 80% unspoiled. So the trick is to strike a sustainable balance.
“What’s wrong with forestry done the right way?” Plotkin asks, as I interview him late one night over Parbo Bier in the back of a lodging house by the river that runs through this city. “Why can’t we make sure that the business ‘value added’ is for the tribal peoples who need some money on a regular basis, giving them enough to deal with outside world and still allowing them to live off the land and protect it?”
The businesses here in the humid wilds of the rain forest range from health-care clinics to agricultural operations to eco-tourism outfits, as well as the giant mining multinationals.
You can not only see the prongs of growth springing up in the form of new buildings, you can feel it; there is a bustle in town. Even the architecture begs excitement. Paramaribo’s center looks like the French Quarter of New Orleans (a boat service between the two cities used to exist and the architects drew much of their inspiration from The Big Easy).
Still, the entire country’s population is less than 500,000. Its gross domestic product is a mere $3.3 billion, (mostly fueled by those mines). Bauxite accounts for 70% of Suriname’s foreign exchange. Growth for the next five years, as estimated by the Investment and Development Corp. in Suriname, is a steady and strong 6% annually.
Beyond its natural resources, Suriname has something else going for it: its link to the Caribbean.
The Caribbean Central American Action (CCAA) organization promotes private-sector-led economic development in the Caribbean Basin, and is seeing new impact investments programs launched. The Inter-American Development Bank is also focusing more on the Caribbean Basin. A source close to the Obama administration says the President has asked that more resources be devoted to the Caribbean. And the uber wealthy impact investor Michael Lee-Chin is making substantial investments in the area. Indeed, Lee-Chin’s Portland Private Equity recently launched the AIC Caribbean Fund, a $225 million vehicle for social enterprises.
Haiti, of course, is a big driving point for much of this attention because of its tragedy. The spotlight, though, is casting light on other Caribbean nations and people are discovering that, well, there are new discoveries to be had.
Take the medicinal qualities and potential for plants found in Suriname, a specialty for ethnobiologist Plotkin. Deep in the jungle where uncontacted tribes roam there are plant remedies for everything from broken bones to depression. The ACT tracks and chronicles these shamanic practices and brews. Fertile investment opportunities lie here for product development programs, which are nonprofit organizations with scientific, technical, clinical development and policy expertise that manage and advance portfolios of global health products. Royalties and income streams that arise from any new discovery are shared — usually with Big Pharma, which often seeds PDPs along with outside investors. (Investment funds are set up for these schemes.)
|Posted by haimdatsawh on March 6, 2012 at 8:10 AM||comments (0)|
Gold Port Resources: First Twin Hole Results Confirm Historic Gold Zone at Groete Creek
VANCOUVER, British Columbia, March 1, 2012 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Gold Port Resources Ltd. CA:GPO +11.11%
Twin Hole TW96-13 Returned 50.3 Meters Of 0.56 Grams Per Tonne Gold, With The Historical Hole Value At 0.615 Grams Per Tonne Gold Over 50.3 Meters
Hole GC-2-2012 Expands Mineralization South
Hole GC1-2012 Confirms Fault Boundary To The West
Seven Historical Drill Sites Located
Second Acker Core Drill Rig On Site
Gold Port Resources Ltd. CA:GPO +11.11% ("The Company") is pleased to report the preliminary results of the first twin hole, and two additional holes, completed at the Groete Creek Gold Copper Project, Guyana. This historic gold copper project is located in Cuyuni Mining District 4, approximately 60 kilometers southwest of Georgetown, the Capital of Guyana, and close to the city of Bartica, a town of 15,000 people. Access is by dirt road from Manaka, directly to the project area.
Hole TW96-13 was a twin hole of historical GC96-13, as drilled by Caribbean Basic Industries Ltd. (subsidiary of Coeur d' Alene Mines) in 1996, and has provided an approximation of the historical results for this hole. Hole GC-1-2012 was drilled west across a fault and has confirmed the termination of mineralization across this fault. Hole GC-2-2012 was drilled approximately 125 meters south of the southern most historic drill collar and has confirmed the presence of gold mineralization, potentially expanding the gold zone south. A second Acker drill rig has been moved onto the project site for additional drilling.
Between 1994 and 1996, an area of the project was drilled by CADMICO and Caribbean Basic Industries (a subsidiary of Coeur d'Alene Mines). A total of seven historical holes from this program have been located by either original drill collar or drill pad site. Hole TW96-13 was the first original drill collar located, and provided solid physical evidence of the historical hole location. Hole TW96-13 was sited to within 3 meters of the original collar location of GC96-13, drilled at 169 degrees south, and drilled at a 45 degree angle, replicating the historical hole direction as closely as possible. The historic drill grid, which measure approximately 1,200 meters east to west and 250 meters north south, locates hole TW96-13 at the western most portion of the historical gold zone, on the outer fringe of the known mineralized zone.
Drill core was split and bagged on site, and then transported to ACME Laboratories of Guyana (a Certified Laboratory) for processing. Company security personnel were in possession of the drill core until delivery to the laboratory. Every twentieth core sample, the half core sample split was further divided into two samples and duplicate samples were submitted as a check on the assaying accuracy. ACME inserted its own blanks as standards during assaying. The sample interval was 1.5 meters in the recently completed drill hole and also in the historical drill hole. Work was conducted under the supervision of Mr. Paul Pelke, a Qualified Person under NI 43-101. Sample preparation was completed at ACME Laboratories (Certified) of Guyana, with final assay work completed by ACME Laboratories (Certified) of Santiago, Chile. Assay was by 30 gram fire assay.
Both the historical results and twin results identify multiple gold zones beginning at surface. In reviewing the historical drill hole 96-13 for a 2009 43-101 report on the Groete Creek project for Gold Port Resources, three significant gold intervals in 96-13 were identified: a near surface zone in the saprolite, an interval from 50.3 meters through 100.6 meters and an interval from 109.8 meters through 117.4 meters. For purposes of comparison, intervals corresponding as close as possible to those historical intervals were selected in the recently completed twin drill hole.
The top three meters of the historic drill hole averaged 0.25 grams per tonne gold, while the top 4.5 meters of the 2012 twin drill hole averaged 0.495 grams per tonne gold. These values clearly show the nugget effect present in the near surface saprolite. For the 50.3 meter intervals ranging from 50.3 meters through 100.6 meters, there were two differences between the recent and the historical drill holes. In the historical drill hole, there were seven sample intervals which were above 1 gram per tonne gold, while four samples above 1 gram per tonne gold were found in the recent drill hole. In addition, one of the seven intervals in the historic drill hole showed 7.7 grams per tonne gold while the most closely corresponding interval in the recent drill hole showed 0.654 grams per tonne gold. For purposes of comparing the recent to the historical drill hole, the 7.7 gram per tonne value was cut to 1.0 grams per tonne gold in the historical drill hole.
After making the above adjustment, the whole hole average for the recent drill hole was 0.276 grams per tonne gold over 238 meters total depth, while the historical drill hole had an overall average grade of 0.297 grams per tonne gold over 206.9 meters total depth. For the 50.3 meter interval from 50.3 meters through 100.6 meters, the recent drill hole had an average grade of 0.560 grams per tonne gold while the historical drill hole had an average grade of 0.615 grams per tonne gold.
The 7.2 meter interval from 109.8 meters through 117.4 meters had an average grade of 0.423 grams per tonne gold in the recent drill hole while the historical drill hole had an average grade of 0.510 grams per tonne gold.
Gold mineralization is encountered to the bottom of both the current and historic drill holes, from 117.4 meters to Total 'Depth (TD). TW96-13 averaged 0.226 grams per tonne gold over 120.6 meters, to its bottom at 238 meters. GC96-13, the historic hole, averaged 0.228 grams per tonne gold over this interval to its bottom at 206.9 meters. The recent Gold Port drill hole confirms that mineralization extends at least another 30 meters deeper than the historical mineralization. Copper results are expected shortly.
Two additional drill holes are being reported. Drill Hole GC1-2012 was located 300 meters southwest of hole TW96-13 and across a fault. As expected, it did not encounter gold mineralization.
Drill Hole GC2-2012 was drilled approximately 125 meters south of the southern most historical drill collar, and to 255 meters depth. The Hole was drilled at minus 45 degrees and at an azimuth of 169 degrees. The drill hole showed gold mineralization in the top 75 meters, returning 0.363 grams per tonne gold from surface to 24 meters, and averaging 0.231 grams per tonne gold for the entire top 75 meters. This drill hole has gold in both the saprolite and the bedrock, and shows that the mineralization extends at least another 125 meters further south from the area of historical drilling. Further drilling to expand the mineralized zone is underway.
Hole TW96-13 is the first of an anticipated seven twin historical drill holes located at the Groete Creek Gold Copper Project. The objective is to provide P and E Mining Consultants Inc. (Brampton, Ontario Canada) the necessary confirmation data to re-calculate the historical gold zone to NI 43-101 standards. Drill holes have been located to potentially expand the historical deposit to the south, north, and east. Further assays are pending.
A second Acker drill rig has now been located on the project. It will replace the current Acker rig during a refitting and upgrade program. The Company will be running two rigs consecutively upon completion of the refitting work.
Historical work completed at the Groete Creek Gold Project prior to the Gold Port program has totaled approximately 3,000 meters of core drilling. These results identified a gold copper zone approximately 1,200 meters in length and 300 meters in width. At the end of this program, in a report titled the Groete Creek Gold Project date December 1996 by Glen Attwood for Caribbean Basic Industries Ltd., a drill indicated geological resource of 93.65 million tonnes averaging 0.594 grams per tonne gold and 0.11% copper at a 0.10 gram per tonne cut-off was completed. The estimate was calculated using a simple polygonal in cross section (geologic resource in cross-section), and a hypothetical pit-outline assuming a maximum slope angle of 50 degrees.
CAUTION: The historical estimate presented above is relevant to the further exploration of the project which, the Company is currently undertaking with a drill program. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current mineral-resources or mineral reserves; and the Issuer is not treating the historical estimate as current mineral resources or mineral reserves; therefore they should not be relied upon. The term " drill indicated geologic resource" is a historical term used by CBI and is not comparable to the CIM defined resource, and should be compared to a potential mineral deposit requiring further exploration drilling to define an initial resource. There is no recent drill information on the Groete Creek Gold Project, and further drilling will be required to upgrade and verify the historical estimate as a current mineral resource, and there is no certainty that this can be accomplished. The content of this press release was reviewed by Mr. Paul Pelke, a Qualified Person under NI-43-101 and a geological consultant to the Company.
On Behalf of the Board of Directors of Gold Port Resources Ltd.
Adrian F.C. Hobkirk,President and Chief Executive Officer - firstname.lastname@example.org
For further information, contact Adrian Hobkirk at 714-316-3272 or email: email@example.com or Allan Feldman at AJF Consultants Ltd. at 604-948-9663 or email: AJFConsultants@aol.com. www.goldportresources.com
The TSX Venture Exchange has not reviewed the content of this News Release and therefore does not accept responsibility or liability for the adequacy or accuracy of the contents of this News Release. This news release contains certain " forward- looking statements " within the meaning of Section 21E of the United States Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Except for statements of historical fact relating to the Company, certain information contained herein constitutes forward- looking statements. Forward-looking statements are based upon opinions and estimates of management at the date the statements are made, and are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected in the forward looking statements. The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements.
SOURCE Gold Port Resources Ltd.
Copyright (C) 2012 PR Newswire. All rights reserved
|Posted by haimdatsawh on March 6, 2012 at 7:30 AM||comments (0)|
Suparna Gold Commences Diamond Drilling at Sara Creek Concession
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA, Mar 01, 2012 (MARKETWIRE via COMTEX) -- Suparna Gold Corp. ("Suparna" or the "Company") CA:SUG -6.67% is pleased to announce that a 5,000 metre diamond drilling program, to be completed by Surecore Portable Diamond Drilling Ltd., has commenced on Suparna's Sara Creek Property located in east central Suriname, South America. Drilling activities are expected to run 24 hours a day, seven days a week to ensure a continuous operation.
The first eleven holes, planned for the Gran Creek target area within the central part of the Sara Creek Property, have been delineated to investigate a lithological contact zone (mafic and felsic units) associated with an implied shear zone. The shear zone is associated with two sets of vein systems (shear and tension veins) within the mafic unit, both of which may be auriferous. Initial investigations on drillcore show that the first hole, GRA-001 (end of hole at 214 m) has intersected surface clay and saprolite as well as underlying felsic and metavolcanic units, both of which contain sulphide rich (pyrite and chalcopyrite) sections associated with quartz veins.
The Company uses both Filab Suriname and the Assay Office in Suriname for sample preparation and fire assays and periodically inserts blanks with sample submissions in conjunction with the Company's QA/QC procedures. In addition, the Company will be sending a percentage of prepared samples to SGS Peru (ISO certified) for additional QA/QC measurements.
About Suparna Gold Corp.
Suparna is an exploration company with its flagship Sara Creek Property located in the highly prospective Guiana Shield in Suriname, South America. The Sara Creek project has a large property position in the Guiana Shield covering 56,920 hectares, and is located approximately 150 air kilometres to the south of Paramaribo, the capital city of Suriname.
Mr. Nico Scholtz, Pr. Sci. Nat., is the "qualified person", as defined in National Instrument 43-101, who has reviewed and approved the technical content in this press release.
Except for statements of historical fact, this news release contains certain "forward-looking information" within the meaning of applicable securities law. Forward-looking information is frequently characterized by words such as "plan", "expect", "project", "intend", "believe", "anticipate", "estimate" and other similar words, or statements that certain events or conditions "may" or "will" occur. In particular, forward-looking information in this press release includes, but is not limited to, statements with respect to the Company's proposed drilling program and exploration activities. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking information are reasonable, there can be no assurance that such expectations will prove to be correct. We cannot guarantee future results, performance or achievements. Consequently, there is no representation that the actual results achieved will be the same, in whole or in part, as those set out in the forward-looking information.
Forward-looking information is based on the opinions and estimates of management at the date the statements are made, and are subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking information. Some of the risks and other factors could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to: general economic conditions in Canada, the United States and globally; industry conditions, including fluctuations in commodity prices; governmental regulation of the mining industry, including environmental regulation; geological, technical and drilling problems; unanticipated operating events; competition for and/or inability to retain drilling rigs and other services; the availability of capital on acceptable terms; the need to obtain required approvals from regulatory authorities; stock market volatility; volatility in market prices for commodities; liabilities inherent in mining operations; changes in tax laws and incentive programs relating to the mining industry; and the other factors described in our public filings available at www.sedar.com . Readers are cautioned that this list of risk factors should not be construed as exhaustive.
The forward-looking information contained in this news release is expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. We undertake no duty to update any of the forward-looking information to conform such information to actual results or to changes in our expectations except as otherwise required by applicable securities legislation. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking information.
Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.
Suparna Gold Corp.
SOURCE: Suparna Gold Corp.
Copyright 2012 Marketwire, Inc., All rights reserved.
|Posted by haimdatsawh on March 6, 2012 at 7:10 AM||comments (0)|
NVMN Executes Option Agreement for 2,567 Hectare Diamond & Gold Property with Exciting Resource Surveys
MARCELLUS, N.Y., Feb 29, 2012 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- Nova Mining Corp. NVMN +4.00% announced today that the Company has executed an Option Agreement with Natural Resources Recovery Guyana (NRRG) regarding five diamond, gold and timber harvesting concessions totaling 2,567 hectares (6,000 acres) in Northeastern Guyana, South America. Under the Agreement, both parties are to negotiate, in good faith, an Investment and Profit Sharing Agreement related to the concessions. The terms of the Option is 60 days, during which Nova Mining management will conduct due diligence on NRRG's concessions and resource survey results.
The concessions are located in the Upper Cuyuni Basin - Greenstone Belt, Guyana, between the country's border with Brazil and Venezuela. All permitting and mining licenses have been secured from the Guyana Mining Commission and verified by a Guyana-based law firm specializing in mineral rights.
Subject to affirming the assertions by NRRG, Nova Mining management believes that acquiring an interest in NRGG's Guyana concessions could prove to be a very lucrative move for the Company.
Nova Mining Corp. (NVMN) strongly believes that current market conditions are extremely favorable for diamond prices and sales due to the new significant demand being placed on the existing worldwide diamond supply. New manufacturing methods requiring superior cutting materials, the need for more diamond tipped oil drilling bits and rapidly rising demand in Asia resulted in a staggering price increase of 49% in the first half of 2011, accelerating after two years of 30% annual growth. Due to these steadily increasing market trends, the Company is initially focusing on diamonds, but is also looking to build a mining asset portfolio that contains copper and gold resources.
Nova Mining Corp. (NVMN) aggressively searches out and acquires the most promising strategic mining resources worldwide. NVMN competes in an industry sector that includes the Harry Winston Diamond Corporation HWD +0.38% , the Hecla Mining Company HL +0.79% AngloGold Ashanti Ltd. AU -0.45% , and Harmony Gold Mining Ltd. HMY -0.54% .
About Nova Mining Corp. (otcqb:NVMN)
Nova Mining Corporation is a Nevada corporation listed on the OTCQB under the trading symbol NVMN. The Company's is a growth-focused company that seeks to acquire an international portfolio of viable mining projects ready for further development. The Company operations philosophy includes securing local partners with strong management abilities and proven records for low production cost and high return on investment. Nova Mining is listed on the NASDAQ OTC exchange under the symbol NVMN.
Safe Harbor Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995: This news release contains forward-looking information within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including statements that include the words "believes," "expects," "anticipate" or similar expressions. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the company to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. In addition, description of anyone's past success, either financial or strategic, is no guarantee of future success. This news release speaks as of the date first set forth above and the company assumes no responsibility to update the information included herein for events occurring after the date hereof.
SOURCE: Nova Mining Corp.
For Nova Mining Corp.
Carmen Joseph Carbona, 315-558-3702
Copyright Business Wire 2012
|Posted by haimdatsawh on March 6, 2012 at 6:45 AM||comments (0)|
Guyana continues to work with Brazil on hydropower
Please allow me to point out some inaccuracies and to shed some light on some of the questions raised in the article, ‘Greenidge questions suitability of Amaila Falls for Hydropower‘ published in the Kaieteur News of Monday, February 27, 2012.
In summary, Guyana has not ignored the offers from Brazil but, rather, continues to aggressively work with Brazil as quickly as the procedures and processes of the two governments allow. Amaila has always been short-listed as a good site for development. Current electricity generation in Guyana is based on the most up-to-date medium-speed, HFO-fuelled diesel engines which best match our demand, in terms of the daily load curve and the off-service times of units for regular maintenance and rare emergencies. Whilst annual payments to Amaila hydro are more than the purchase price of imported fuels, today, Amaila offers 40% more electricity at constant annual payments, whilst knowledgeable authorities project continued rises in petroleum prices.
To expand on the above, let me firstly assure Mr Greenidge and the people of Guyana, that following the meeting and joint communiqué issued by Presidents Bharrat Jagdeo and Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva, a Brazilian government mission came to Guyana, and subsequently an MOU was entered into for the Brazilian side to develop a study of potential hydropower sites within the Mazaruni and Potaro river basins, including diversions within and between the two basins. Previous studies which are in the control of Guyana would be made available as a starting point. Consistent with this MOU, arrangements are presently being made with the Brazilian government for a consortium of two large Brazilian hydropower design and construction companies to pursue the relevant feasibility studies, which are a requirement for such major projects.
Both the Guyanese and Brazilian governments are keeping before them the attractive possibilities for the development of hydropower sites in Guyana, for sale of electric energy to Brazil, specifically into northern Brazil which itself is still at a relatively early stage of development, and in which various supporting infrastructure is to be, and is being, developed. Whilst remaining open to the outcome of the studies, but taking account of the distances involved, rules of thumb would suggest that production and export/import of at least 1000 MW would be desirable, with probably 500 MW being the economic minimum.
For sure, Guyana’s domestic needs of less than 150 MW could readily be met from any such large hydropower development, and unit costs are likely to be lower than costs at a site developed solely for satisfaction of Guyana’s own domestic demand. The question is, when will a large hydropower be actually in place, and should we not proceed with plans to satisfy our own domestic needs.
Governments, even with the best of intentions, are constrained by many factors: first of all elections cycles and election results; different personalities with different focuses and different prioritizations, even within the same party when returned to government; and, of course, the timing which makes good economic sense, and the availability of financing. We are, nevertheless, encouraged by recent discussions with our Brazilian counterparts.
I recall at the time of our nationalization of the DEMBA operations, 1971-72, losing one of our best general foremen on holiday, having been involved in a traffic accident on the then unsurfaced road from Bon Fim to Boa Vista, and hearing all the talk then that that road was to be surfaced within a year or two – it wasn’t completed until about 2000! Similarly, the Takutu Bridge had been under discussion since about 1970! Governments are no less earnest than others, but government procedures and processes are subject to far more uncertainties.
This government, quite likely as the preceding one, has judged that whilst prices are likely to be lower for electricity from some large hydropower development, such as for a large smelter which might be built in Guyana or for export sale to Brazil or elsewhere, it is prudent to pursue a hydropower development to meet our local domestic needs in good time.
It is very true that development of hydropower sites in Guyana has long been a dream of our people. Thus, the government of the day, in 1976, had a MONENCO report that identified sixty- plus sites and which recommended fifteen, including Amaila, for further study. A review by SWECO, in 1982, identified six sites for focus – Tiger Hill, Tumatumari, Tiboku, Amaila, Kaieteur and Upper Mazaruni, listed roughly in order of increasing size. The first four would be aimed at meeting existing local needs – the last three could meet the additional needs of a local smelter, or for export.
Tiger Hill, Tumatumari and Tiboku are each less than the 125 MW we need today. Amaila falls in both groups – the geography of its location is good, with one of the lowest development costs per MW in Guyana. Utilizing only the Kuribrong and Amaila rivers, Amaila is good for about 150-200 MW, but with diversions of water from the Upper Mazaruni and Upper Potaro, it could be increased to about 1100 MW. The topography at the Kaieteur Falls on the Potaro is similar to the Amaila Falls on the Kuribrong, and similar developments can be done around the Kaieteur, as at Amaila. For such, and additional, reasons, in the estimation of many, including the late Mr Joseph O’Lall, Amaila was judged to be the most suitable site for development to satisfy local domestic needs.
The adjacent Potaro and Mazaruni river basins, the subject of the current MOU between the Governments of Brazil and Guyana, hold the potential for some 4000 MW, or more, out of the total potential of some 7000 MW for Guyana. The SWECO Upper Mazaruni design, which the government was pursuing in the mid-1970s, projected a single power station of up to 3000 MW, with a huge flooded area instead of the cascade of four or more stations envisaged earlier by MONENCO, with much less flooding, much less storage, much less smoothing of power developed through the year, and likely higher costs. In these days, flooding and displacements are treated with much less disdain than in the 1970s, and the now prevailing formalized environmental and social impact study procedures set very high standards for approval.
Whilst, on the one hand, Mr Greenidge seems to be taking the government to task for not proceeding expeditiously and earnestly with large hydropower development for export to Brazil, be assured, on the other hand, of very public procedures and processes for consideration and mitigation, if at all possible, of negative environmental and social impacts on any, and all, stakeholders of any such developments.
Thirdly, allow me to address, and to expel from Mr Greenidge, any view that “electricity generation in Guyana has been based on outdated technology.” The medium-speed Wartsila, HFO-fuelled diesel engines on which we have been standardizing, have been meeting the best specifications in the world for gensets of that size. The question of utilizing high-cost imported fuels is a matter of choosing the realistically lowest-cost alternative available to us, here and now. Yes, petroleum is costly – and yet, a good portion of the electricity generated in the world is based on petroleum fuels and incurs much the same costs as we do. As reported a few months ago in a Caricom Energy Review, Hawaii, utilizing petroleum fuels, has an electricity tariff of US34 cents per kwh, much the same as obtains in Guyana. Electricity prices, like everything else, reflect to a great degree the “natural advantage” of the location. In our current circumstances, we have not so far been able to be persuaded of a lower-cost alternative to meet our demands. For decades, hydroelectricity has been a tantalizing possibility on the horizon – in Amaila, we think we now have it!
Finally, let me assure Mr Greenidge, along with our fellow Guyanese, that a number of issues to which he has alluded, are before us, and we do have answers:-
: bringing the large, greater-than-1MW customers, like Banks DIH and DDL, and other large, industrial customers on the grid, with the related issues of tariff rebalancing – there are studies on these specific issues, and no one would be worse off for having Amaila;
: regarding the requirement of at least three weeks off-line of any hydro-station (or independent part thereof) for checks and maintenance within one year of start-up, and every five years thereafter – yes, GPL will keep its sets maintained and will do the best at the time, as for example, take power from any other hydropower station connected, or pursue short-term rental of emergency sets;
: regarding payments of about US$100 million annually to the hydropower station, as stated in the article, against fuel purchases, now, of about US$90 million, Amaila will supply up to 40% more electricity than we generate today. The annual payment to the hydro will be fixed for the 20-yr BOOT (Build, Own, Operate and Transfer)-life, then be dropped to no more than 15% of the earlier price, whilst fuel prices are expected to be volatile but steadily increasing, particularly so when the cost of fossil fuels must carry the cost of removal of the CO2 from the atmosphere.
Let me express my appreciation for this opportunity to address questions which were in the mind of Mr Greenidge and, no doubt, many others. This response would, undoubtedly, present only a few steps in educating ourselves about electricity generation and costs, our hydro potential, and what would be involved in hydropower development.
Yes, Amaila would be one of the biggest single developments undertaken so far within our country. Certainly, we must do all we can to avoid errors, and to this end, at least four groups are subjecting the plans to independent review.
We always work and hope for success, but the future is never known and it often comes with a few surprising turns; nonetheless, we must go on ever hoping that fortune will smile on us and that our people will consider us kindly.
Samuel A Hinds