Elevate reports results from U-pgrade pilot plant in Namibia
Original announcement by miningweekly on
- Company
- Elevate Uranium
- Ticker
- ASX|Elevate-Uranium
- Exchange
- Unavailable
- Region
- Namibia
- Primary commodity
- Uranium
- Secondary commodities
- None reported
- Document categories
- Metallurgy
- Extracted
- 2026-08-31 14:35:22 UTC
Analysis by Minestarters Atlas
Minestarters Atlas analysis
Summary
Elevate Uranium reported successful operational updates from its U-pgrade pilot plant at the Marenica project in Namibia. The process achieved an 88% mass rejection and 79% uranium recovery, confirming historical bench-scale results and enabling a simpler acid leach route.
Reasoning: The pilot plant results confirm the technical viability of the U-pgrade process, specifically regarding mass rejection and recovery, while demonstrating a significant metallurgical advantage by removing calcite.
Positive factors
- Mass rejection performance in line with design basis
- Uranium recovery matches historical bench-scale expectations
- Calcite flotation enables simpler, lower-cost acid leach route
- Pilot plant successfully translating bench-scale results
Negative factors
- Pilot plant operating challenges due to low volumetric flows
Facts used in scoring: 3
Classification and evidence
Mill Routeneutral
Processing via mill or concentrator (CIL, CIP, tank leach, flotation).
Why it applies: The process involves flotation and acid leaching stages.
Evidence · text
“Calcite flotation (Stage 4) has removed the carbonate mineral that would preclude acid leaching, thereby allowing a simpler acid leach route”
High Recoverypositive
Recovery at or above the exceptional band for the commodity and processing route.
Why it applies: 79% uranium recovery is reported for the pilot plant stages.
Evidence · text
“Uranium recovery of 79% is reported using Stages 1 to 4”
Extracted facts
Stored fact records: 3. Some facts used in scoring do not have a stored record.
Metallurgical Results (3)
Fact 1uraniumRecovery: 79 %Head Grade: 89Head Grade Unit: ppmView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Commodity
- uranium
- Ticker
- ASX|Elevate-Uranium
Test Work
- Sample
- Marenica ore (Stages 1 to 4)
Recovery
- Recovery
- 79 %
- Recovery Basis
- actual_test
- Head Grade
- 89
- Head Grade Unit
- ppm
Review
- Needs Review
- No
- Historical
- No
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-08-31T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: 79% recovery is consistent with previous bench-scale testing.
Positive factors
- Recovery in line with historical expectations
Evidence · text
“Uranium recovery of 79% is reported using Stages 1 to 4, in line with expectations from historical bench-scale testing.”
Fact 2uraniumHead Grade: 590Head Grade Unit: ppmView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Commodity
- uranium
- Ticker
- ASX|Elevate-Uranium
Test Work
- Sample
- Marenica ore (Stages 1 to 4)
Recovery
- Head Grade
- 590
- Head Grade Unit
- ppm
Review
- Needs Review
- No
- Historical
- No
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-08-31T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: The ore was successfully upgraded from 89 ppm to 590 ppm.
Positive factors
- Significant grade upgrade from head grade
Evidence · text
“Marenica ore was upgraded from a head grade of 89 ppm uranium to 590 ppm uranium using Stages 1 to 4.”
Fact 3uraniumHistorical resultNeeds review: historical_restatementView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Commodity
- uranium
- Ticker
- ASX|Elevate-Uranium
Test Work
- Sample
- Stage 5 (historical bench-scale testing)
Recovery
- Conc. Grade
- 4240
- Conc. Grade Unit
- ppm
Review
- Needs Review
- Yes
- Review Reason
- historical_restatement
- Historical
- Yes
- Historical Source Date
- 2013-01-01T00:00:00.000Z
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-08-31T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: This is a restatement of historical bench-scale results for Stage 5.
Evidence · text
“Stage 5, which achieved a final concentrate grade of about 4 240 ppm uranium during bench-scale testing”
How Atlas produces this analysis
Minestarters Atlas uses automated extraction to summarize mining announcements, identify reported measurements, and classify supporting evidence. Sentiment reflects the extracted narrative and classification rules; it is an interpretation, not a reported measurement. Evidence quotes and context are provided where available. Missing data, low-confidence results, and review flags indicate limitations. Check the original publisher announcement before relying on an interpretation.