Acoustic E.M. System
"If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration." - Nikola Tesla
ESSCO is a private multi-sector physics branch technology developer active in the design, development, analysis and data interpretation of airborne and remote sensing geophysical surveying technologies.
cost-effective service is available to mineral and oil/gas firms active within the exploration sector. We are offering under a pure R&D (research and development) understanding, the deployment of an airborne based "Acoustic EM" (acoustic electro-magnetic) coverage pass over any one active project which the client may warrant as being of interest for comparative feedback against any other current ‘state of the art’ geophysical system.
Our service can reduce exploration drilling costs by 85 to 90% through the elimination of most ‘barren’ anomalies identified through modern airborne geophysics and AI interpretation services. The old programmer’s adage ‘GIGO’ (garbage in=garbage out) applies here. We effectively filter out most of the ‘garbage’ data.
Acoustic EM is an emerging new airborne deployed ultra-deep penetrating (+2500 meter) subsurface target detection/outlining technology innovation process whereby the passively induced/captured EM eddy current spectrum returns which are typically/conventionally acquired and processed through inductance coil capture are in our case, and in parallel, uniquely treated to a dynamic (real-time) inversion processing pathway which occurs by way of an inverse piezoelectric capture circuit process treatment which is able to produce real time conversion output results. The effectiveness at these depths cannot currently be matched in the industry.
In our case specifically, inverse piezoelectric- based eddy current capture processing allows for the native extraction and retainment of the eddy current's inherent "acoustic spectrum waveform component" which can then be introduced/utilized as an interpretable workable data source which facilitates and takes advantage of what would otherwise be data that is discarded/filtered as electrical noise.
In essence, the typically discarded/filtered signal noise byproduct component rationale which is applied to the eddy current spectrum through synthetic post-processing computer model manipulation, in reality constitutes a seriously detrimental outcome towards a vital component of the total useable eddy current signature volume which, in our case by virtue of the acoustic conversion of the eddy current ‘noise’ into useable data, is now able to be retained/utilized and directly attributed towards the increasing of the data point volume availability. This can offer an 85-95 percent higher data point retention/utilization availability. This factor ultimately allows for orders of magnitude greater causative anomaly source data being left in place. This factor is instrumental in allowing for advanced target resolution discernments to occur.
Further to the above and to expand on the benefits of retaining/utilizing the full spectrum of available eddy current data, our unique and advanced ability is to utilize this natively extracted eddy current acoustic spectrum data for the purpose of identification of a target source density component. This data is then factored into the creation of anomaly ‘polygon’ shape files. This introduces a powerful visual reference enhancement in the accurate target verification as a legitimate bedrock source.
In essence, today's conventional geophysical technology EM eddy current signatures can have significant data voids inherently built into them due largely to the anomaly source models being represented by an electrical field which in reality is a virtual empty space construct. This requires it to be treated to significant algorithmic manipulation (synthetically reduced/subjectively reshaped) and thus creates a vague target model that requires multiple drill holes to test- essentially ‘prospecting with the drill’. An ESSCO target can be tested with one or 2 holes only, which, if successful would be followed up with additional work.
In summary, all EM anomalies that are currently acquired through present day conventional electromagnetic technologies need to be synthetically post- processed in an attempt to be categorized/positioned as legitimate bedrock conductors. This data can now be further discerned at much more advanced/deeper levels by utilizing our capture technology which can reduce the need for present day drill hole verification test requirements by 89-95 percent over that which is required through current means.
In practical terms, "Acoustic EM" generated anomaly polygon isoshells, being able to have causative geological source density data considerations natively being built into our target generating process, inherently allows for accurate target discernment which permits for the testing of any one density isoshell to be able to be confidently and efficiently approached with only 1 to 2 holes being needed. This allows for the fast tracking of a project at a fraction of the cost.
Interested companies/individuals who are considering looking to having any one exploration property subjected to an investigative deployment pass to assess its effectiveness against current products, are encouraged to reach out to have a more detailed baseline technical and logistical discussion arrangement schedule established with ESSCO to see how this novel technology could significantly enhance target discernment/filtering outcomes which will save considerable time and money moving any one project forward.
This R&D structured project examination and results deliverance approach is offered at a nominal cost. Results provided will be - survey data acquisition undertakings; 2D and 3D isometric maps; results summary report.
Please direct inquiries to:
The discovery of large-volume Base Metal and Precious Metal orebodies.
The mineral exploration industry is having difficulty keeping up with the increasing demand for new deposits that can be economically mined.
The depletion of mineral reserves is a real concern to the mining industry. It is becoming more and more difficult to replace them as existing ore is gradually mined out. Some of the world’s top mining analysts and executives even postulated the ‘peak gold’ hypothesis back in 2007 and 2008.
This is an offshoot of the ‘peak oil’ concept which was first presented in a paper by Hubbert in 1956. The premise is that there is a point in time where the maximum rate of petroleum extraction is reached. He correctly predicted that America’s oil production from conventional sources in the continental U.S. would peak between 1965 and 1970. However, thanks to new technologies and extraction techniques the U.S. is now one of, if not the top oil producers in the world.
In the case of ‘peak gold’, industry experts looked at the world’s precious (and base metal) production and reserves, and determined that production had peaked, or would do so around 2015. About 10 years ago, this prediction must have sent alarm bells ringing in C-Suites around the world. Bidding wars for mineral assets by major mining companies around the world led to many overpriced acquisitions. Billions were spent around the world- such as Barrick in Africa, and Kinross’ embarrassing 2010 $7 billion Fruita del Norte gold asset in Ecuador. It was recently acquired by the shrewd Lundin group for pennies on the dollar.
‘$200 Billion Flushed Away By The World’s Biggest Mining Companies’ – This striking headline from the June, 2016 Forbes magazine summarizes well the costly mistakes made during the last commodity boom. The accounting firm PwC published a report on the matter, which Forbes jestingly referred to as an ‘autopsy’. It revealed an industry-wide failure of mining company management by the top- 40 mining firms. Poor investment and capital management decisions squandered any benefits from the commodity price boom.
The damage done to the exploration industry by this acquisition frenzy and subsequent failure is immeasurable. Many companies failed or closed. Instead of exploring for assets and expanding ore reserves, mining companies went into debt to buy them at the top of the commodity cycle. Another consequence of this 'crash' of the mining industry is the closing of many long-established boutique brokerage firms which catered to junior exploration companies. The result is a very challenging environment for these companies to raise capital.
The ‘peak gold’ issue points to the failure of the mineral exploration industry to adequately increase reserves. In some cases, this may result in the substitution of minerals where possible, (as currently in the battery and EV industry) or a repeat of the bidding wars for scarce mineral assets.
That ‘peak gold’ is such a concern in the industry demonstrates that the expensive, slow, gradual and limited nature of current positive exploration results has proven inadequate and that a more effective tool is required in the exploration arsenal.
Stargate II (SGII) is one such tool. Where various iterations of airborne EM and other surveys identify multiple (often dozens or more) anomalies on a company’s mining claims, it is a subjective decision which one to drill, where, and to which coordinates. The method of elimination drilling approach is an ineffective and expensive tactic to test a prospective area.
If a Stargate II air survey is performed on a property and a criteria-meeting (world-class) target is identified, the SGII algorithms provide the vectors for one drill hole to initially test the property. If the predicted mineralization is encountered, then follow up drilling is performed, and a new mineral resource is outlined.
This is a much more cost- effective approach to exploration than the current norm. Since the economic downturn a few years ago, exploration dollars are increasingly scarce, and this new exploration tool is a logical method of supplementing a company’s current exploration program.
Because the SGII system and data is proprietary, some individuals in the industry dismiss it as ‘poor science’.
However, in modern science, ‘Occam’s Razor’, the ancient problem-solving principle is still in use today. It emphasizes that ‘simpler explanations are generally better than complex ones’. In fact, this principle has come to be referred to as the Rule of Simplicity.
Because SGII provides a simple test of its hypothesis - a single drill hole through its outlined anomaly, then this satisfies the scientific 'rule of simplicity'. It is also very economical.
Shareholders in this industry appreciate the cost of capital, and are generally supportive of the economies of using the SGII system. If there has been resistance to using the system, often it was from competing exploration professionals.
Exploration should be results-based. Too often, poor outcomes from an exploration program simply results in 'doubling down', or doing more of the same- ordering another survey or testing another anomaly. This is the ‘conservative’ and ‘acceptable’ approach to exploration. In these times of reduced exploration funding, this is no longer sustainable.
ESSCO’s suggestion to interested companies or property owners is to use a portion of those scarce exploration dollars and put Stargate II to the test.