Lithogeochemistry is used to characterize the leached capping or gossan above porphyry copper deposits. Field estimates of the limonite and copper mineralogy in the capping can provide semi-quantitative predictions of the primary copper grade and grade of the underlying chalcocite enrichment zone. Drilling results at 18 porphyry copper properties showed that over 75% of primary grade predictions agreed within 30% of actual values, while over 80% of chalcocite enrichment predictions agreed within 20% of drilling values. However, capping interpretation alone is not definitive as the cap may be affected by carbonates or faults.
Lithogeochemistry is used to characterize the leached capping or gossan above porphyry copper deposits. Field estimates of the limonite and copper mineralogy in the capping can provide semi-quantitative predictions of the primary copper grade and grade of the underlying chalcocite enrichment zone. Drilling results at 18 porphyry copper properties showed that over 75% of primary grade predictions agreed within 30% of actual values, while over 80% of chalcocite enrichment predictions agreed within 20% of drilling values. However, capping interpretation alone is not definitive as the cap may be affected by carbonates or faults.
Lithogeochemistry is used to characterize the leached capping or gossan above porphyry copper deposits. Field estimates of the limonite and copper mineralogy in the capping can provide semi-quantitative predictions of the primary copper grade and grade of the underlying chalcocite enrichment zone. Drilling results at 18 porphyry copper properties showed that over 75% of primary grade predictions agreed within 30% of actual values, while over 80% of chalcocite enrichment predictions agreed within 20% of drilling values. However, capping interpretation alone is not definitive as the cap may be affected by carbonates or faults.
Lithogeochemistry is used to characterize the leached capping or gossan above porphyry copper deposits. Field estimates of the limonite and copper mineralogy in the capping can provide semi-quantitative predictions of the primary copper grade and grade of the underlying chalcocite enrichment zone. Drilling results at 18 porphyry copper properties showed that over 75% of primary grade predictions agreed within 30% of actual values, while over 80% of chalcocite enrichment predictions agreed within 20% of drilling values. However, capping interpretation alone is not definitive as the cap may be affected by carbonates or faults.
Lithogeochemistry is used during the detailed reconnaissance stage to delimit the
alteration zones as we have outlined above. It is also used in more detail, once the target has been selected, to characterize the leached capping (Anderson, 1982). Field estimates are made of the limonite and copper mineralogy of the capping. From these, estimates are made of the maximum and minimum copper grades of the former sulphide zone. Detailed mapping of the limonite and copper mineralogy and geochemical analyses for copper in the rock lead to semi-quantitative predictions of the primary grade and grade of the chalcocite enrichment zone. These predictions can be proven only by extensive diamond drilling. Anderson (1982) quotes figures for comparisons at 18 porphyry copper properties in southwestern USA. Here drilling results showed that over 75% of the primary-grade predictions agreed within 30% of the actual (drilling-determined) values and over 80% of the chalcocite-enrichment predictions agreed within 20% of the values obtained by drilling. Although capping interpretation is very useful it is not a universally applicable definitive method of porphyry copper evaluation. The petrology of the cap may be affected by carbonate host rocks below the surface which inhibit copper migration or faults may be present which offset the sulphide mineralization. Consequently the cap evaluation must form only part of an integrated survey involving geology, geophysics, geochemistry and, subsequently, drilling.