GEM 4106 FINAL

EXAM
Exploration Design for Kimberlitic Diamond Intrusion in Aricheng, Guyana
by Larissa Farnum

Student USI: 1007082

Area Selection Criteria

Geological Potential for target mineral primary diamonds
Tectonic activity
Lithological evidence
Presence of alluvial diamonds
Presence of indicator minerals garnet (red), ilmenite, chromite
Land Tenure
Available land in area of interest (partnerships can be worked on a
later date)
Phase of Exploration
Reconnaissance

Why did I choose

here ?

USGS Bulletin 1693Mineral Deposit models

(1992)
Descriptive deposit
model by G.J Orris and
J.D Bliss- 1991
Genetic model by R.H
Mitchell
Venezuelas Guaniamo
deposit
Brazils Carolina
Kimberlite Deposit
Diamond Occurrences in
Guyana
Previous Works

Descriptive Deposit Model

Host rock kimberlite diatremes, olivine lamproite and leucite lamproites
Texture pipes: porphyritic. Breccias with inclusions of many rocks from mantle, basement
and overlying sequences. Lapilli tuff fills upper levels of diatreme.
Age productive pipes 80-100, 250 and 1000 Ma
Depositional Environment- intrusion of pipes from mantle source under high pressure
with rapid cooling
Tectonic environment cratonic areas, stable since early Proterozoic. Some intrude folded
cover rocks that overlie deformed cratonal margins. Pipes occur in areas of epeirogenic
warping or doming and along major basement fracture zones. Some pipes occur at
intersections of regional zones of weaknesses.
Associated deposit type Diamond placers
Mineralogy diamond, bort, carbonado, ballas and amorphous carbonado
Structure sparsley disseminated diamonds as phenocrysts or xenocrysts in breccia
Alterations serpentinization which results in blue clay zones. Silicification and
carbonate alteration of country rock near pipe; rarely alkali metasomatism forming kfeldspar and Na amphiboles
Ore controls Diamond distribution is irregular and is restricted to kimberlite or lamproite
pipes and upward flaring crater zones
Geochemical Signature Cr, Ti, Mn, Ni, Co, PGE, Ba. Anomalous Ni, Nb and heavy
minerals pyrope, garnet, phlogopite, Mg-ilmenite indicates nearby pipe. Lamproite pipe
lacks ilmenite.

Kimberlite

lamprophyre

Genetic Deposit Model

Cliffords Rule and Subduction activity
Lithospheric mantle is depleted in basaltic
components and may contain spinel, garnet
ilherzolite, harzburgite and dunite
Scattered throughout are eclogitic rocks
Asthenospheric mantle consist of mantle
material which can generate Mid-Oceanic
Ridge Basalts whose rocks are considered to
be fertile
Kimberlite intrusions occur in clusters or
fields
large scale it is controlled by deep seated
structures
Locally it is controlled by shallow zones of
weaknesses eg. faults or margins of diabase
dykes
Can occur as a result of rifting
Its emplacement is along zones of regional
fractures that allow for rapid rise of mantle
magma

Genetic Model Contd

Lamproites occur along the

margins of cratons or in cratonized
accreted mobile belts in regions of
thick crust (>40-55 km) and thick
lithosphere (>150-250 km)

Distribution of kimberlites and lamproites in

West Australia showing their relationships to the
Kimberly Archean craton and the adjacent
Proterozoic cratonized mobile belts.

Kimberlite Localities on Amazonian Craton

Guaniamo
Approx.
location

Alluvial
diamonds

And Guyana ?? Just alluvial diamonds

Geologists such as Conolly and Swain developed classification for the alluvial
diamonds; High Alluvial or white sand series, Terrace deposits, River flats, and
deposits directly from the Roraima Plateau
The primary diamond indicator minerals identified in the past are Zircon,
ilmenite, rutile, tourmaline, gold and diamonds which occur in the sands.
Recently there was a red garnet found in the Isseneru area, a locality in
proximity to the project location
There wasnt any discovery of kimberlites or lamproites to date
Alluvial diamonds are widely accepted as being sourced from the Roraima
Sediments
Chances are there may be more than one sources. (The source of the
diamonds in Roraima and others)
Why? Because in Northern part of the Amazonian craton (the Guiana Shield)
has a large orogenic belt which extends along its eastern portion related to
the Trans Amazonian orogenic cycle. (Costa, Monie etal 2008)
During TATE cycle there wouldve possibly been the opening of deep seated
structures that wouldve allowed for later emplacement of
kimberlite/lamproites.

Regional Geology Favorable for emplacement

Trans-Amazonian orogeny, known as TATE, is responsible for the

cratonization of the Paleoproterozoic of the Guiana Shield

The Granite greenstone belts are in the North of the shield whilst
the Late Paleoproterozoic to Mesoproterozoic volcanic, intrusive
and sedimentary rocks lie in the southernmost part of the shield
and is separated by a Central Granitoid terrain.
The geological evolution of the Guiana Shield is divided into four
distinct changes:
Formation of the Archean basement
Main Trans-Amazonian orogeny (2.2-2.0 Ga)
Late Trans-Amazonian orogeny
Subsequent Proterozoic and Paleozoic anorogenic events

Because..
Central Amazon - is
indicative of
underplating
accumulation of
partial melts during
subduction (1.8-1.7
Ga)
whilst Tapajos Parima
of is juvenile
magmatic activity
between 2.1-1.87 Ga.

Resulted in the shear zones (red)

Possible pathways for mantle
derived kimberlitic magmatic
intrusions Post-TATE

District Geology Overlies mostly BMS

Land Tenure aim was to intercept the Avanavero

12,390 acres
11 PPMS

Previous works by Cogema and Prometheus Resources

Well fractured
rocks
localized
pathways

Aricheng
North
The
favorable
indication

Lamprophyre

Since they occur as clusters, what would be

the odds ??

Red Garnet
found hereIsseneru

Episyenites
(lamprophyre)

Makreba Falls

Exploration by Golden Star Resources

No records of their
report and hence
their exploration
methods

Exploration Program
Objectives
To identify mantle derived indicator minerals in the area of
interest
Correlate local rock units to diamondiferous occurrences based
on findings
Propose follow up based on findings

Exploration Program
Generally it will follow this flow chart
Most important kimberlite
indicator minerals are:
garnet, chromite, ilmenite,
Cr-Diopside and olivine
But the resistive ones are
garnet, ilmenite and
chromite
Mantle-derived garnet, CrDiopside, ilmenite and
chromite have visual
characteristics that permit
their distinguishing them
from similar minerals of
crustal origin

Stream Sediment Sampling alluvial medium

River alluvial will first be
screened to -2mm since
heavy minerals are within
the size range of 0.32mm
Sampling will take place
at confluence of streams
and along first, second
and third order streams.
Sample size 10kg,
bagged, tagged and sent
for laboratory testing

Data Analysis
Geochemical analysis of indicator minerals
Laboratory separation of the sample will be done to identify the
individual indicator minerals in the sample
- Gravity >3.2 S.G
- Magnetic (Para, Non and Ferro)

Binocular microscope identification of indicator minerals

Scanning electron microprobe analysis

defines Cr
rich field

Potenital for
Eclogitic garnets

Whether you
have
diamonds
source or not

Electron Microprobe data from indicator minerals of the Ekati mine discovery

Eg of indicator minerals
Peridote
garnet in
diamond

diopside
G10
G9

Diamondiferous
eclogite xenolith
Eclogitic
garnet
inclusion
in
diamond

Correlating Rock Units From Results

Essentially indicator minerals identified would be plotted on a local map in an effort to
trace upstream to the source area

A tracer trail would be followed upstream by collecting additional stream sediment

samples until samples are found that contain a notable increase in indicator minerals,
followed by samples with no indicator minerals.

Once this is achieved, the region between the sets of samples would be searched both
in drainage and along slopes above drainage.

After the region is identified then further follow-up work would be required to identify the
source.

Follow Up - Source for the Indicator Minerals

The objective would be to intercept the source in order to have rock samples for
petrological testing

The body would have to be first delineated

Likely source would be buried and greater probability lies for it to be an intrusion
and not a pipe given the possible evidence put forward by Cogema

Following in Snap Lakes footsteps, seismic survey would better delineate a buried
kimberlite dyke

Exploration drill to intercept source

Snap Lake NWT kimberlite dyke seen in seismic

Expenditure for one year of Exploration

Item

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

Month

10

11

12

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

7,500

87,500

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

1,000

36,000

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

1,500

16,500

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

1,200

48,200

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

5,100

56,100

Geologists

5,000

Equipment

25,000

Food
Transportation

35,000

Staff

Total

65,000

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

16,300

Total

244,300

GUY$48,860,000

Analysis and Interpretation

Activities
Separation of Sample

Sample Preparation

Scanning Electron Microprobe

US$10/per analysis

Unit

Cost GUY $

About US$700 per sample (25

samples total)

3,500,000

Average 10 max.

20,000

Total GUY$

Land Tenure
Items/ Individual
Pre and Post PPMS
expenditures (US$ 50,000)
PPMS Fee for the first year @
GUY$330/acre when a PPMS =
1,200 acres
Conversion to mining easy with
fee, but shorter time permit
duration
Expenditure not mandated by
GGMC
No requirements to report
exploration work unless mining
No environmental assessment
required for mining
Report Tabulation
Total GUY$

3,520,000

Unit

Cost
10,000,000

11

4,356,000

20,000
14,376,000

Total GUY$

66,756,000

Thank you! Happy New

Year !!