Fortune Minerals Reports Additional Cobalt, Gold & Copper Process Optimization Validation for the NICO Project
The NICO Project consists of a planned mine and concentrator in the Northwest Territories (" NWT ") and a hydrometallurgical process facility in Lamont County, Alberta where concentrates from the mine, and other feed sources, will be processed to value-added products for the energy transition, new technologies, and defence industries. Development of the NICO Project will provide a reliable North American vertically integrated supply of cobalt sulphate, gold doré, bismuth ingots, and copper cement, thereby enhancing the domestic production of three critical minerals, plus 1.1 million ounces of in-situ gold as a countercyclical co-product to mitigate metal price volatility.
LONDON, Ontario, July 22, 2025 --( BUSINESS WIRE )-- Fortune Minerals Limited (TSX: FT) (OTCQB: FTMDF) (" Fortune " or the " Company ") ( www.fortuneminerals.com ) is pleased to report additional process optimization test work validation for the NICO cobalt-gold-bismuth-copper critical minerals project in Canada (" NICO Project "). The test work was completed at SGS Canada Inc. (" SGS ") in Lakefield, Ontario and proved additional enhancements to the cobalt, gold and copper circuits and recoveries for the planned Alberta Hydrometallurgical Facility, expanding on the improvements already announced for the mill, concentrator and bismuth circuits (see January 8 and May 9, 2025, news releases). The Process Design Criteria have been compiled and delivered to Worley Canada Services Ltd. (" Worley ") for engineering evaluation and incorporation into the Company's updated Feasibility Study in progress.
Story Continues
Liquid / Solid separation of the autoclave POX discharge was proven to be unnecessary, allowing for streamlining of the previous 2008 flowsheet and significantly lower the capital and operating costs. The entire autoclave discharge slurry will now be subjected to non-oxidative pre-neutralization and will no longer require the addition of oxygen or heating, and the residence time has been reduced to 0.5 hours as compared to the 5 hours with heat, oxygen and a hydrogen peroxide finish in the 2008 pilot. This simplified pre-neutralization process also effectively removed 99% of the arsenic contaminant without any cobalt losses from co-precipitation or entrapment and eliminated the need for a re-leach step that was also part of the previous 2008 flow sheet. Similar results were achieved using limestone or lime as the neutralization reagent, allowing for process design and cost flexibility.
Gold recoveries from the combined autoclave leach residue using the more direct process optimization were also higher, ranging between 97% and 98% compared to 95% recoveries using the 2008 pilot demonstrated targets.
Further study of the gold deportation during flotation for the NWT concentrator also identified losses to the cleaner scavenger tails when processing higher gold content ores. These tails can be selectively stockpiled at the mine site for subsequent processing at the Alberta Hydrometallurgical Facility. Leaching tests carried out at SGS verified that about 83% of the gold contained in these tails can be recovered using the same process conditions and equipment that will be installed to recover the bulk of the gold contained in the autoclave leach residue. However, inclusion of this gold stream would reduce the combined gold recovery from 98% to 95% - the same recovery indicated in the 2008 pilot.
Pre-neutralized autoclave Pregnant Leach Solution ("PLS") that was separated from the gold plant feed residue was subjected to copper cementation tests and confirmed that a polishing step will no longer be required. Secondary neutralization of the copper cementation process indicated complete removal of iron and arsenic from the discharge regardless of using air or oxygen and will not require heating as a further improvement.
Selective precipitation of a gypsum by-product could not be achieved with arsenic concentrations below 30 parts per million ("ppm"), exceeding the upper limits for the products Fortune had identified for potential sale. Production of a gypsum by-product has therefore been deferred until the Company identifies an alternative market for this material.
Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure ("TCLP") and Acid Base Accounting ("ABA") abatement tests were carried out on the gold leach discharge residues generated from the autoclave and the cleaner scavenger tails, both individually, and when they were combined. Tests confirm they are not leachate toxic and can be deposited in a government approved Class 2 landfill.
Fortune expects to complete its optimization validation test work next month after verifying the cobalt PLS manganese removal, Solvent-Extraction ("S-X") purification step, and evaporation and crystallization conditions for a high purity cobalt sulphate heptahydrate product for the lithium-ion rechargeable battery industry.
"We are very pleased with the results of the process optimization test work, which continues to exceed the Company's expectations and support higher metal recoveries and a potential material reduction in the capital and operating cost for the Company's planned Alberta Hydrometallurgical Facility," stated Robin Goad. Fortune's President and CEO.
Government Support
Fortune is working closely with the Government of Canada, the Government of Alberta and the Government of the United States to expand North American critical minerals production and enhance domestic supply chain resilience and security. The Company has been awarded ~C$17 million of non-dilutive contribution funding from the U.S. Department of Defense through its Defense Production Act Title III program, Natural Resources Canada's Global Partnerships Initiative and Critical Minerals Research Development and Demonstration programs, and Alberta Innovates Clean Resource Intake program. These funds are helping Fortune complete metallurgical improvements, updated Feasibility and Front-End Engineering and Design ("FEED") studies, and secure the remaining permits needed to finance, construct and operate the NICO Project (see news releases dated, May 16, 2024, and December 5, 2023).
China has effectively cornered the supply for many critical minerals through a decades-long policy of proactive strategic investment in mines and mid- and down-stream processing, financed with low-cost loans from its sovereign banks. Western democratic governments have now recognized the risks associated with critical mineral supply disruptions from this dominance and are investing in domestic production and collaboration among countries with fair trade practices. At the recent G7 Summit in Kananaskis, Alberta, world leaders agreed on strategies to strengthen critical minerals supply. " Non-market policies and practices in the critical minerals sector threaten our ability to acquire many critical minerals ", the draft statement said. " Recognizing this threat to our economies, as well as various other risks to the resilience of our critical minerals supply chains, we will work together and with partners beyond the G7 to swiftly protect our economic and national security."
Following the summit, Canada's Prime Minister Mark Carney also commented, "We will create a critical minerals production alliance, a G7-led strategic initiative to stockpile and develop critical minerals needed for defence and technology". The G7 agreed to work together to anticipate critical minerals shortages, coordinate responses to deliberate market disruption, and diversify mining, processing, manufacturing, and recycling. Further to this commitment to shore up critical mineral supplies, Carney said Canada can in part meet its potential annual $150 billion NATO spending obligation with investment in extracting, processing and exporting Canada's critical minerals to allies that will count towards the 5% of GDP target.
About Fortune's Metals
The Minerals Reserves for the NICO Project contain four payable metals, including cobalt, gold, bismuth and copper. The Alberta Hydrometallurgical Facility will be a mid-stream process plant to produce value-added products with supply chain transparency and custody control of the contained metals.
Fortune's cobalt production is targeting the rapidly expanding lithium-ion rechargeable battery industry needed to power electric vehicles, portable electronics and stationary storage cells. Cobalt is also used in aerospace superalloys, permanent magnets, cutting tools, cemented carbides, catalysts and pigments. The annual cobalt market is ~245,000 metric tonnes and is anticipated to grow to ~350,000 metric tonnes by 2030. The Democratic Republic of the Congo produces ~78% of global cobalt mine production, more than 60% of which is controlled by Chinese companies, which also control ~83% of refinery production and ~93% of the production of cobalt chemicals.
Bismuth's unique physical and chemical properties are difficult to substitute with other metals, and the NICO Project is the largest known deposit in the world with 12% of global reserves. Bismuth is used in automotive glass and steel coatings, paints and pigments, and brake pads. It is also used to make low melting temperature and dimensionally stable alloys and compounds, fire suppressant systems, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. Bismuth consumption is increasing as an environmentally safe and non-toxic replacement for lead in brass, solder, free machining steel and aluminum, galvanizing alloys, glass, ceramic glazes, and ammunition. Bismuth-tin alloy is used to make environmentally safe plugs to properly seal decommissioned oil and gas wells. Bismuth is also used in high performance semiconductors, solders for artificial intelligence data centers, and supercomputers. Manganese-bismuth magnets are resistant to demagnetization from heat. In the nuclear industry, bismuth is used for radiation shielding, coolants in some reactor designs, and it is a collector for plutonium in fuel re-processing and enrichment. China controls ~80% of current bismuth mine production and ~90% of refinery supply in an annual market of ~23,000 metric tonnes growing at ~7.5% CAGR.
About the NICO Project
Fortune has expended approximately C$145 million to advance the NICO Project from an in-house mineral discovery to a near construction-ready development asset with environmental assessment approval and the major mine permits already secured in the NWT. NICO and the Company's nearby Sue-Dianne copper deposit are IOCG-type mineral deposits with multiple payable metals, reducing the Company's vulnerability to price volatility or market manipulation. The Open Pit and Underground Mineral Reserves for the NICO deposit contain 33.1 million metric tonnes of ore containing 1.1 million ounces of gold, 82.3 million pounds of cobalt, 102.1 million pounds of bismuth, and 27.2 million pounds of copper. Development of the NICO Project would provide vertically integrated domestic production of three critical minerals to help diversify the current sources of supply from foreign entities of concern with a highly liquid and countercyclical gold co-product. The NICO Project will have average annual production during the first 14 years of the 20-year mine life of 1,800 metric tonnes of cobalt contained in 8,780 tonnes of cobalt sulphate, 47,000 troy ounces of gold in doré bars, 1,700 metric tonnes of bismuth in high purity ingots, and 300 tonnes of copper in a cement product.
For more detailed information about the NICO Mineral Reserves and certain technical information in this news release, please refer to the Technical Report on the NICO Project, entitled "Technical Report on the Feasibility Study for the NICO-Gold-Cobalt-Bismuth-Copper Project, Northwest Territories, Canada", dated April 2, 2014 and prepared by Micon International Limited which has been filed on SEDAR and is available under the Company's profile at www.sedar.com.
The disclosure of scientific and technical information contained in this news release have been approved by Robin Goad, M.Sc., P.Geo., President and Chief Executive Officer of Fortune and Alex Mezei, M.Sc., P.Eng. Fortune's Chief Metallurgist, who are "Qualified Persons" under National Instrument 43-101.
About Fortune Minerals
Fortune is a Canadian mining company focused on developing the NICO cobalt-gold-bismuth-copper project in the NWT and Alberta. Fortune also owns the Sue-Dianne copper-silver-gold satellite deposit located 25 km north of the NICO deposit and a potential future source of incremental mill feed to extend the life of the NICO concentrator.
Follow Fortune Minerals:
Click here to subscribe to Fortune's email list.
Click here to follow Fortune on LinkedIn.
@FortuneMineral on X.
This press release contains forward-looking information and forward-looking statements within the meaning of applicable securities legislation. This forward-looking information includes statements with respect to, among other things, the construction of the proposed mine and concentrator in the NWT and the hydrometallurgical process facility in Alberta, the potential for expansion of the NICO deposit and the Company's plans to develop the NICO Project. Forward-looking information is based on the opinions and estimates of management as well as certain assumptions at the date the information is given including, in respect of the forward-looking information contained in this press release, assumptions regarding: the successful completion of the Company's updated feasibility study, the Company's ability to secure the necessary financing to fund the working capital required for the government funded work, the Company's ability to complete construction of a NICO Project hydrometallurgical process facility; the Company's ability to secure other feed sources for the hydrometallurgical process facility, the Company's ability to arrange the necessary financing to continue operations and develop the NICO Project; the receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals for the construction and operation of the NICO Project and the related hydrometallurgical process facility and the timing thereof; growth in the demand for cobalt and bismuth; the time required to construct the NICO Project; and the economic environment in which the Company will operate in the future, including the price of gold, cobalt, bismuth and other by-product metals, anticipated costs and the volumes of metals to be produced at the NICO Project. However, such forward-looking information is subject to a variety of risks and uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual events or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking information. These factors include the risks that the Company may not be able to complete the metallurgical test work to validate process improvements, update the Feasibility and FEED studies and secure the remaining permits and authorizations needed to construct and operate the mine, concentrator in the NWT and hydrometallurgical facility in Alberta, the Company may not achieve material reductions in the cobalt and gold circuit sizes, the Company may not achieve the anticipated reductions in capital and operating costs, the Company may not be able to economically discharge residues in a Class 2 landfill, the Company may not be able to finance and develop NICO on favourable terms or at all, uncertainties with respect to the receipt or timing of required permits, approvals and agreements for the development of the NICO Project, including the related hydrometallurgical process facility, the construction of the NICO Project may take longer than anticipated, the Company may not be able to secure offtake agreements for the metals to be produced at the NICO Project, the Sue-Dianne Property may not be developed to the point where it can provide mill feed to the NICO Project, the inherent risks involved in the exploration and development of mineral properties and in the mining industry in general, the market for products that use cobalt or bismuth may not grow to the extent anticipated, the future supply of cobalt and bismuth may not be as limited as anticipated, the risk of decreases in the market prices of cobalt, bismuth and other metals to be produced by the NICO Project, discrepancies between actual and estimated Mineral Resources or between actual and estimated metallurgical recoveries, uncertainties associated with estimating Mineral Resources and Reserves and the risk that even if such Mineral Resources prove accurate the risk that such Mineral Resources may not be converted into Mineral Reserves once economic conditions are applied, the Company's production of cobalt, bismuth and other metals may be less than anticipated and other operational and development risks, market risks and regulatory risks. Readers are cautioned to not place undue reliance on forward-looking information because it is possible that predictions, forecasts, projections and other forms of forward-looking information will not be achieved by the Company. The forward-looking information contained herein is made as of the date hereof and the Company assumes no responsibility to update or revise it to reflect new events or circumstances, except as required by law.
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20250722036594/en/
Contacts
Fortune Minerals Limited
Troy Nazarewicz
Investor Relations Manager
info@fortuneminerals.com
Tel: (519) 858-8188
www.fortuneminerals.com
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
18 minutes ago
- Forbes
When Boards Undermine CEOs: How ‘Help' Turns Into Harm
In times of uncertainty, the relationship between a board and the executive team should be a source of strength. But when performance is under pressure, that relationship quickly becomes a source of strain. Yes, boards have a critical job to do. Their oversight, accountability, and long-term perspective are vital to company health and performance. It's when that oversight tips into overreach that the cost to the business can be significant. Here's what that can look like: Board Engagement Goes Into Overdrive Instead of giving management space to course correct, boards increase the volume of requests and deepen their involvement. Management ends up spending more time preparing decks or responding to board questions than solving problems and addressing issues. You're Pushed To Engage Board-Favored Firms Or Consultants Even well-intentioned referrals can feel politically loaded if those advisors are seen as board proxies rather than true partners to the CEO and management team. The Chair Dominates; Other Board Members Stay Quiet Power can become concentrated in a single board member, especially in crisis or founder-led environments. Without active participation or leadership from the rest of the board, governance suffers, and CEOs are left navigating a one-person approval funnel. Founders Who Sit On Boards Interfere In founder-led or founder-influenced companies, legacy leaders may continue to attend internal meetings or offer informal input. While their insight can be valuable, this often confuses authority and undermines the CEO's role in leading. The Appetite For Detail Becomes Unmanageable Some diligence is essential. But when board members dive too deep or question every metric or data point, it doesn't just slow things down — it sends an implicit message: 'I don't trust you.' Why It's Happening More Often The broader environment is contributing: Tariffs, supply chain volatility, geopolitical instability — these headwinds increase pressure on boards to 'do something.' When numbers dip, so does confidence, and without visible progress, some boards stop believing the leadership team has it under control and start stepping in. This dynamic can be even more pronounced in founder-led, PE-backed, or highly operational boards, where the distinction between governing and managing may not be as clearly defined. Another sensitivity: Many management teams see the breakdown coming before the CEO does. They may want the CEO to push back on the board, but that's no small task. Boards hold power, and speaking up takes political capital and comes with real risk. How To Reset Your Relationship With The Board: First Steps While overreach from the board can become frustrating, exhausting, and disappointing for management teams, the dynamic presents an opportunity to reestablish boundaries, grow trust, and strengthen transparency. Consider these steps:
Business Wire
an hour ago
- Business Wire
Deadline Alert: Sable Offshore Corp. (SOC) Investors Who Lost Money Urged to Contact Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP About Securities Fraud Lawsuit
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP reminds investors of the upcoming deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Sable Offshore Corp. ('Sable' or the 'Company') (NYSE: SOC) securities between May 19, 2025 and June 3, 2025, inclusive (the 'Class Period'), and/or pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's May 21, 2025 secondary public offering (the 'SPO'). IF YOU SUFFERED A LOSS ON YOUR SABLE INVESTMENTS, CLICK HERE TO INQUIRE ABOUT POTENTIALLY PURSUING CLAIMS TO RECOVER YOUR LOSS UNDER THE FEDERAL SECURITIES LAWS. What Happened? On May 19, 2025, Sable announced that it had resumed oil production from one of three offshore platforms related for its Las Flores pipelines ('Onshore Pipeline') in California. Then, on May 23, 2025, the California State Land Commission sent Sable a letter regarding its May 19th announcement, warning that it 'appears to mischaracterize the nature of recent activities, causing significant public confusion and raising questions regarding Sable's intentions,' and that Sable had conflated offshore well testing activities required by a federal regulatory agency with the restart of operations. Then, on May 28, 2025, the Santa Barbara County Superior Court approved a preliminary injunction from the California Coastal Commission regarding Sable's maintenance and repair work in the coastal zone related to the Onshore Pipeline. On this news, Sable's stock price fell $5.04, or 15.3%, to close at $27.89 per share on May 28, 2025, thereby injuring investors. Then, on June 4, 2025, Sable disclosed that a Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge had granted 'temporary restraining orders prohibiting [Sable] from restarting transportation of oil through the Las Flores Pipeline System.' On this news, Sable's stock price fell $0.94, or 3.9%, to close at $23.10 per share on June 4, 2025, thereby injuring investors further. What Is the Lawsuit About? The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) Defendants represented that Sable Offshore Corp. had restarted oil production off the coast of California when it had not; and (2) as a result, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Sable securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than September 26, 2025 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action lawsuit. Contact Us to Participate or Learn More: If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact us: Charles Linehan, Esq. Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles California 90067 Email: shareholders@ Telephone: 310-201-9150 Toll-Free: 888-773-9224 Visit our website at Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, Twitter, or Facebook. If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. To be a member of the class action you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class action. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
CHARLEBOIS: CUSMA-Exempt — the 93% Mirage
Since Aug. 1, many Canadian commentators have downplayed the impact of the 35% tariffs the United States has imposed on select Canadian goods, citing the Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) and its oft-repeated claim that 90% to 93% of Canadian exports remain exempt. While technically true, this statistic masks the much more complicated — and far less reassuring —reality for Canada's agri-food sector. A prominent December 2024 study from the University of Sherbrooke concluded that 93% of Canadian exports to the U.S. are tariff-exempt. On paper, that number may seem comforting. But it tells only part of the story — especially when it comes to food. Tariff exemptions are not automatic. To qualify for duty-free access under CUSMA, Canadian agri-food products must meet strict rules of origin and complex documentation standards. For many small and mid-sized food processors, these bureaucratic hurdles are burdensome and costly. Products with mixed or processed ingredients — such as snack bars, frozen meals, or nut butters —often fall into grey zones that create uncertainty at the border. The result? Products deemed 'exempt' in theory may still be delayed, penalized, or rejected in practice. Recommended video Most analyses, including the Sherbrooke study, fail to account for this nuance. As a result, the 93% figure is not only misleading — it's largely irrelevant for food companies navigating real-world trade. Worse still, these studies often overlook the geopolitical dynamics shaping food trade. Under President Donald Trump, tariffs have become less about technical qualifications and more about political leverage. The real risk today isn't simply tariffs themselves — it's the mere threat of tariffs. Many Canadian food exporters have already lost long-standing American customers spooked by the unpredictability of trade with Canada. Even in the absence of formal tariffs, the perception of risk is enough to drive U.S. buyers toward domestic suppliers. That's the real game Trump is playing — and winning. Whether a product qualifies for exemption no longer matters if market confidence is eroded. And make no mistake: for the food industry, where net margins are often razor-thin — typically in the range of 2% to 10% — a 35% tariff is not just inconvenient; it's existential. It can erase profitability overnight, making entire product lines unviable and undermining long-term investment. There is no country in the world currently protected by trade agreements in any meaningful way. If you provoke Washington, tariffs — or their threat — will follow. Since Trump's return, no countries have drawn more retaliatory attention than China and Canada. Both have responded with countermeasures, unlike Japan, South Korea, the U.K., or the European Union — all of which have successfully negotiated more stable trade terms and now face significantly lower tariff exposure than Canada. Since Mark Carney became Prime Minister in March, Canada has faced more tariffs from the U.S., not fewer. His strategy — if it can be called that — appears to be waiting for the U.S. economy to falter under the weight of its own tariffs. But that's a dangerous gamble. The American economy, for all its recent job market volatility, remains remarkably resilient. Betting against it has never been a winning strategy — just ask Warren Buffett. Some Canadians might believe that reduced access to U.S. markets will lead to food surpluses here at home, pushing prices down. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of how food economics work. Canadian food exporters rely on scale. Export markets allow companies to spread fixed costs and keep domestic prices affordable. If demand from U.S. buyers dries up, Canadian processors will have no choice but to raise prices domestically to stay afloat. The result? Higher—not lower—food prices for Canadian consumers. In short, the 93% tariff exemption statistic may provide political cover or academic reassurance, but it is a mirage. For those of us who work with food companies, study supply chains, and understand export-driven pricing models, the message is clear: Canada's food economy is far more exposed — and vulnerable — than many realize. — Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is Director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, co-host of The Food Professor Podcast and Visiting Scholar at McGill University.
