Filed by Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp.
This communication is filed pursuant to Rule 425 under the United States Securities Act of 1933
and deemed filed pursuant to Rule 14a-12
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Subject Company: American Battery Materials, Inc.
Commission File Number: 001-41594
Date: July 24, 2023
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
FORM
8-K
CURRENT
REPORT
Pursuant to Section
13 or Section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
Date of
Report (Date of earliest event reported): July 24, 2023
SEAPORT
GLOBAL ACQUISITION II CORP.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its
charter)
Delaware |
|
001-41075 |
|
86-1326052 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(Commission
File Number) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number) |
360
Madison Avenue, 23rd
Floor |
|
|
New
York, NY |
|
10017 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
(212)
616-7700
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Not Applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K
filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:
x |
Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425) |
¨ |
Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12) |
¨ |
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act
(17 CFR 240.14d-2(b)) |
¨ |
Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act
(17 CFR 240.13e-4(c)) |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934:
Title
of each class |
|
Trading
Symbol(s) |
|
Name
of each exchange on
which registered |
Units,
each consisting of one share of Class A common stock and one-half of one redeemable warrant |
|
SGIIU |
|
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC |
Class
A common stock, par value $0.0001 per share |
|
SGII |
|
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC |
Warrants,
each whole warrant exercisable for one share of Class A common stock at an exercise price of $11.50 per share |
|
SGIIW |
|
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant
is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Emerging growth company x
If an emerging growth company, indicate by check
mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting
standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.
Item 7.01 Regulation FD Disclosure.
As previously announced, on June 1, 2023,
Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp., a Delaware corporation (“SGII”), entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger,
as amended by Amendment No. 1 to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of July 14, 2023 (“Merger Agreement”),
by and among SGII, Lithium Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of SGII (“Merger Sub”),
and American Battery Materials, Inc. (OTC Pink: BLTH), a Delaware corporation (“ABM”). ABM is an exploration stage
company focused on environmentally friendly direct lithium extraction and other minerals critical to the global energy transition. Pursuant
to the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will merge with and into ABM, with ABM surviving the merger (the “Merger” and,
together with the other transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement, the “Transactions”). As a result of the
Transactions, ABM will become a wholly-owned subsidiary of SGII, with the stockholders of ABM becoming stockholders of SGII.
On July 24, 2023, ABM issued a press release
announcing that it has acquired and staked additional lithium mining claims adjacent to its Lisbon Valley Project, located in San Juan
County, Utah. The newly acquired mining claims expand ABM’s strategic land position to approximately 14,300 acres, a seven-fold
increase from its current position of 2,000 acres.
In connection with the new acquisition, ABM released
a revised version of its Technical Report Summary focused on its Lisbon Valley Project and posted a revised version of its corporate presentation
(the “Corporate Presentation”).
A
copy of the Technical Report Summary, the press release and the Corporate Presentation are each furnished hereto as Exhibit 96.1,
Exhibit 99.1 and Exhibit 99.2, respectively, and are incorporated herein by reference. The press release, the Technical Report
Summary and the Corporate Presentation are intended to be furnished and shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the
liabilities of that section, nor shall they be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended
or the Exchange Act, except as expressly set forth by specific reference in such filing.
Important Information and Where to Find It
In
connection with the Transactions, SGII intends to file a preliminary and definitive proxy statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (“SEC”). SGII’s stockholders and other interested persons are advised to read, when available,
the registration statement on Form S-4, which will include a proxy statement/prospectus of SGII (the “S-4”), as
well as other documents filed with the SEC in connection with the Transactions, as these materials will contain important information
about ABM, SGII and the Transactions. This communication is not a substitute for the S-4 or any other document that SGII will
send to its stockholders in connection with the Transactions. When available, the S-4 will be mailed to stockholders of SGII as of a record
date to be established for voting on, among other things, the proposed Transactions. Stockholders will also be able to obtain copies of
the S-4 and other documents filed with the SEC that will be incorporated by reference therein, without charge, once available, at the
SEC's website at www.sec.gov. The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, the websites referenced in this
communication is not incorporated by reference into, and is not a part of, this communication.
Participants in the Solicitation
SGII and its respective directors and executive
officers may be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies from SGII’s and ABM’s stockholders in connection with the
proposed Transactions. SGII’s and ABM’s stockholders and other interested persons may obtain, without charge, more detailed
information regarding the directors and officers of SGII and ABM in SGII's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 4,
2023 and ABM’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 21, 2023. Information regarding the persons who
may, under SEC rules, be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies to SGII stockholders in connection with the proposed Transactions
will be set forth in the proxy statement for the proposed Transactions when available. Additional information regarding the interests
of participants in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the proposed Transactions will be included in the Form S-4 that
SGII intends to file with the SEC.
No Offer or Solicitation
This communication is for informational purposes
only and shall neither constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities or to vote in any jurisdiction
pursuant to the Transactions or otherwise, nor shall there be any sale, issuance or transfer of securities in any jurisdiction in which
the offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to the registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such jurisdiction.
Forward Looking Statements
This Current Report on Form 8-K includes
certain statements that are not historical facts but are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the
United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements generally are accompanied by words such as
"believe," "may," "will," "estimate," "continue," "anticipate," "intend,"
"expect," "should," "would," "plan," "predict," "potential," "seem,"
"seek," "future," "outlook," and similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or
that are not statements of historical matters. All statements, other than statements of present or historical fact included in this communication,
regarding SGII’s proposed Transactions with ABM, SGII's ability to consummate the transaction, the benefits of the transaction and
the combined company’s future financial performance, as well as the combined company’s strategy, future operations, estimated
financial position, estimated revenues and losses, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management, and the target grades
and tonnages information are forward-looking statements. These statements are based on various assumptions, whether or not identified
in this communication, and on the current expectations of the respective management of SGII and ABM and are not predictions of actual
performance. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to serve as, and must not
be relied on as, a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction or a definitive statement of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances
are difficult or impossible to predict and will differ from assumptions. Many actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of
SGII or ABM. Potential risks and uncertainties that could cause the actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied
by forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, changes in domestic and foreign business, market, financial, political
and legal conditions; the inability of the parties to successfully or timely consummate the business combination, including the risk that
any regulatory approvals are not obtained, are delayed or are subject to unanticipated conditions that could adversely affect the combined
company or the expected benefits of the business combination or that the approval of the stockholders of SGII or ABM is not obtained;
failure to realize the anticipated benefits of business combination; risk relating to the uncertainty of the projected financial information
with respect to ABM; the amount of redemption requests made by SGII's stockholders; the overall level of consumer demand for lithium;
general economic conditions and other factors affecting; disruption and volatility in the global currency, capital, and credit markets;
ABM's ability to implement its business and growth strategy; changes in governmental regulation, ABM's exposure to litigation claims and
other loss contingencies; disruptions and other impacts to ABM’s business, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and government actions
and restrictive measures implemented in response, and as a result of the proposed transaction; ABM's ability to comply with environmental
regulations; competitive pressures from many sources, including those, having more experience and better financing; changes in technology
that adversely affect demand for lithium compounds; the impact that global climate change trends may have on ABM and its potential mining
operations; any breaches of, or interruptions in, SGII's or ABM’s information systems; fluctuations in the price, availability and
quality of electricity and other raw materials and contracted products as well as foreign currency fluctuations; changes in tax laws and
liabilities, tariffs, legal, regulatory, political and economic risks.
More information on potential factors that could
affect SGII’s or ABM's financial results is included from time to time in SGII's and ABM’s public reports filed with the
SEC, including their Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K as well
as the S-4 that SGII plans to file with the SEC in connection with SGII’s solicitation of proxies for the meeting of stockholders
to be held to approve, among other things, the proposed Transactions. If any of these risks materialize or SGII's or ABM's assumptions
prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from the results implied by these forward-looking statements. There may be additional
risks that neither SGII nor ABM presently know, or that SGII and ABM currently believe are immaterial, that could also cause actual results
to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. In addition, forward-looking statements reflect SGII's and ABM's expectations,
plans or forecasts of future events and views as of the date of this communication. SGII and ABM anticipate that subsequent events and
developments will cause their assessments to change. However, while SGII and ABM may elect to update these forward-looking statements
at some point in the future, SGII and ABM specifically disclaim any obligation to do so, except as required by law. These forward-looking
statements should not be relied upon as representing SGII's or ABM's assessments as of any date subsequent to the date of this communication.
Accordingly, undue reliance should not be placed upon the forward-looking statements.
Item 9.01 Financial Statements and Exhibits.
SIGNATURE
Pursuant to the requirements
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto
duly authorized.
Dated: July 24, 2023
|
SEAPORT GLOBAL ACQUISITION II CORP. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Stephen Smith |
|
Name: |
Stephen Smith |
|
Title: |
Chief Executive Officer |
Exhibit 96.1
| TECHNICAL REPORT SUMMARY
ABM LISBON VALLEY LITHIUM PROJECT
SAN JUAN COUNTY, UTAH, USA
Effective Date: July 6, 2023
Prepared for:
American Battery Materials, Inc.
By:
Bradley C. Peek, MSc., CPG
Peek Consulting, Inc.
V.07.2023.02 |
| American Battery Materials Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page ii
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Property Description and Location ...................................................................................... 1
1.3 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and Physiography ........................ 2
1.4 History.................................................................................................................................. 2
1.5 Geologic Setting and Mineralization ................................................................................... 3
1.6 Deposit Types ...................................................................................................................... 4
1.7 Exploration ........................................................................................................................... 5
1.8 Drilling ................................................................................................................................. 6
1.9 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing .................................................................... 6
1.10 Adjacent Properties .............................................................................................................. 6
1.11 Interpretation and Conclusions ............................................................................................ 7
1.12 Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 7
2. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... 8
3. RELIANCE ON OTHER SPECIALISTS ............................................................................. 10
4. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND LOCATION ................................................................. 11
5. ACCESSIBILITY, CLIMATE, LOCAL RESOURCES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND
PHYSIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................................ 16
6. HISTORY .............................................................................................................................. 19
7. GEOLOGIC SETTING AND MINERALIZATION ............................................................ 22
7.1 Stratigraphy ........................................................................................................................ 23
7.2 Structure ............................................................................................................................. 28 |
| American Battery Materials Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page iii
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
7.3 Geophysics ......................................................................................................................... 30
8. DEPOSIT TYPES.................................................................................................................. 33
8.1 Brines ................................................................................................................................. 34
8.2 Wells Located on the Subject Property .............................................................................. 48
9. EXPLORATION ................................................................................................................... 50
10. DRILLING ......................................................................................................................... 52
11. SAMPLE PREPARATION, ANALYSES AND SECURITY .......................................... 53
12. DATA VERIFICATION ................................................................................................... 54
13. MINERAL PROCESSING AND METALLURGICAL TESTING ................................. 55
14. ADJACENT PROPERTIES .............................................................................................. 58
15. OTHER RELEVANT DATA AND INFORMATION ..................................................... 61
16. INTERPRETATION AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................... 62
17. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................... 64
18. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 65
19. CERTIFICATE OF THE AUTHOR .................................................................................. 68
20. CONSENT OF COMPETENT PERSON .......................................................................... 69 |
| American Battery Materials Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page iv
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
List of Figures
Figure 4.1 – Road map of Utah with project location. .................................................................. 12
Figure 4.2 - Overview of ABM’s Lisbon Lithium claims in San Juan County, Utah. ................. 14
Figure 4.3 – An example of one of the claim stakes found on the property May 7, 2023. ........... 15
Figure 5.1 – Topographic map underlying a plot of the ABM claim blocks. CI=40’. ................. 17
Figure 5.2 - Climate data for Moab, Utah. .................................................................................... 18
Figure 6.1 - Lisbon Valley Lithium claims in relation to the Superior Peterson Fed 88-21P well.
........................................................................................................................................................ 21
Figure 7.1 - Structural elements of the Paradox Basin and adjacent areas (from Nuccio and
Condon, 1996)............................................................................................................................... 23
Figure 7.2 - Generalized stratigraphic nomenclature within the greater Paradox Basin area. ...... 26
Figure 7.3 - Geologic map of the LVL claim area outlined in red. Modified after Doelling
(2002). ........................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 7.4 – W-E Cross section through the Lisbon Oil field on the north flank of the Lisbon
Valley Anticline. ........................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 7.5a - Three-dimensional analysis of the Lisbon Valley gravity anomaly (Byerly and
Joesting, 1959). ............................................................................................................................. 31
Figure 7.5b – Two-dimensional analysis of the Lisbon Valley gravity anomaly (Byerly and
Joesting, 1959). ............................................................................................................................. 32
Figure 8.1 – Oil and gas wells occurring on the ABM claims. ..................................................... 49
Figure 9.1 – Stratigraphic column and type log for the units showing (Pennsylvanian) clastic and
salt section (Mayhew and Heylmann 1965).................................................................................. 51
Figure 13.1 - Process flow diagram of a typical lithium extraction process. ................................ 56
Figure 14.1 – The location of ABM’s Lisbon Lithium Project relative to Anson’s project and the
Cane Creek Potash Mine. .............................................................................................................. 60
List of Tables
Table 1.1 - Chemical analysis of brine from the Superior Fed 88-21P well from Hite
(1978). ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Table 1.2 - Anson Resources announced resources from their DFS. ............................................. 7
Table 2.1 - Abbreviations and Acronyms used in report. ............................................................... 9
Table 4.1 - Claims with BLM UT numbers. ................................................................................. 13
Table 6.1 - Chemical analysis of brine from the Superior Fed 88-21P well from Hite (1978). ... 20
Table 8.1 - Amerada Petroleum No. 2 Green River ..................................................................... 35
Table 8.2 - British-American No. 1 Gov’t.-Norwood .................................................................. 35
Table 8.3 - California Oil No. 1, Navajo 177 ............................................................................... 36
Table 8.4 - Delhi-Taylor No. 2, Seven Mile ................................................................................. 37
Table 8.5 - Humble No. 1 Rustler Dome ...................................................................................... 38
Table 8.6 - King Oil No. 2 Big Flat .............................................................................................. 39
Table 8.7 - Pure Oil No. 1 Hobson-USA ...................................................................................... 39 |
| American Battery Materials Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page v
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.8 - Pure Oil No. 1 Hobson-USA ...................................................................................... 40
Table 8.9 - Pure Oil No. 2 Big Flat ............................................................................................... 40
Table 8.10 - Roberts Brine Well ................................................................................................... 41
Table 8.11 - Southern Natural No. 1 Long Canyon ...................................................................... 42
Table 8.12 - Southern Natural No. 1 Long Canyon ...................................................................... 43
Table 8.13 - Suburban Storage No. 1 ............................................................................................ 43
Table 8.14 - Superior No. 22-34 Salt Wash ............................................................................ 44
Table 8.15 - Superior No. 14-5 Bowknot ..................................................................................... 44
Table 8.16 - Texaco No. 2 Navajo AC ......................................................................................... 45
Table 8.17 - Texaco No. 1 Smoot (Salt Wash field) ..................................................................... 45
Table 8.18 - Tidewater No. 74-11 Big Flat ................................................................................... 46
Table 8.19 - Tidewater No. 74-11 Big Flat ................................................................................... 46
Table 8.20 - White Cloud #2 (aka. Roberts Brine Well) .............................................................. 47
Table 8.21 - Oil & gas wells drilled within the LVL claim block. ............................................... 48
Table 14.1 – Anson Resources announced resources from their DFS. ......................................... 58
Table 14.2 – Financial highlights from the Anson Resources DFS. ............................................. 58 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 1
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
1. Summary
1.1 Introduction
American Battery Materials, Inc. (ABM)(formerly BoxScore Brands Inc.) acquired the
rights to the Lisbon Lithium Project from Plateau Ventures LLC. Peek Consulting was
engaged by ABM to write this report to document progress on the property and for
funding purposes.
The report has been written to conform to the U. S. Securities and Exchange
Commission’s (SEC’s) Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K for a Technical Report Summary.
The subject property is an exploration stage property that currently has no mineral
resources or mineral reserves yet defined. No exploration has been conducted on the
property to date. This report is a summary of the data reviewed and the conclusions
drawn from that data.
This report is an update of a previous report entitled “ABM Lisbon Valley Lithium
Project, San Juan County, Utah, USA” with an effective date of May 15, 2023. The
current report includes a substantial increase in the land position of the project.
1.2 Property Description and Location
The property is located in San Juan County, Utah. The center of the claims lies
approximately 35 miles (58 kilometers) southeast of the city of Moab. The property
position consists of 743 placer mining claims staked on U. S. Government land
administered by the U. S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
The claims are a semi-contiguous group named the LVL group covering roughly 23
square miles. The original 102 claims were staked in portions of Sections 17-18, 20-22,
and 27-29, T30S, R25E, Salt Lake Baseline and Principal Meridian in 2017, with
additional claims staked in Q2, 2023 in Sections 22, 25-28, 33-35 in T30S, R25E;
Section 31, T30S, R26E; Sections 1, 3-4, 8-15, 17, T 31S, R25E; and Sections 5-8, 17-18,
T31S, R26E (Figure 4.2). The original 102 claims were located on September 8, 9 and
10, 2021. All original claim corners and location monuments were located using
handheld Garmin GPS units (Gavin Harrison, personal communication). Additional
claims were located and staked by a (confidential) mining consulting company between
May 3, 2023 and June, 12 2023.
It will be necessary for ABM to re-enter an oil and gas well or to drill a new well to
obtain brine samples for analysis and metallurgical testing. Permits for such |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 2
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
operations will be required from the BLM and the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and
Mining. These permits are currently in process.
1.3 Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and
Physiography
Moab, Utah, the nearest population center to the property, is a city of 5,336 persons
(2020 Census). It is located in a relatively remote portion of Utah but is easily accessed
by U. S. Highway 191. Highway 191 intersects with Interstate 70 about 30 miles (48
kilometers) north of Moab, at Crescent Junction. Moab is a tourist destination and has
numerous motels and restaurants. Moab would also be the nearest source of labor in
the region.
The region has a history of mining, primarily uranium and vanadium that dates back as
far as 1881. The Lisbon Valley Copper Mine is in the heart of the Lisbon Valley and is
currently producing copper cathode. An all-weather road and electric power supply the
mine.
All the ABM claims fall between elevations of 6200 and 6900 feet (1890 and 2100
meters) above sea level.
It is anticipated that ABM will use a Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) method rather
than using evaporation ponds to recover the lithium and other potential mineral from
brines, should the project advance to the production stage. The project should therefore
have sufficient space on the ABM claims to construct processing facilities.
The climate is arid, also termed “high desert”. Moab has average annual precipitation of
9.02 inches (229 mm). The climatic conditions allow for fieldwork to continue
throughout the year.
1.4 History
The Paradox Basin initially attracted attention because of high lithium values reported
in the literature in brines recovered from oil and gas exploration wells. The Paradox
Basin has been explored for oil and gas for many years (Durgin, 2011). The earliest
discoveries of potash in the area were made in 1924 in oil and gas wells, but the
correlation of the beds and the extent and richness of the deposits were not recognized
until the 1950s. The Seven Mile, Salt Wash and White Cloud potash target areas, all west |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 3
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
of Moab, were quickly identified. Further exploration led to the development of the Cane
Creek potash mine adjacent to the Colorado River.
Brines were commonly encountered in these wells, but none of the wells was of
economic significance for brine until in 1962 when the Southern Natural Gas Company
drilled a well, Long Canyon Unit #1, which encountered a substantial flow of high-density brine at a depth of 6,013 feet (Durgin, 2011).
Several companies have reported high lithium values occurring in brines from oil & gas
and potash wells drilled into the Paradox Formation. Hite (1978) investigated the
potash potential of the Lisbon Valley area in a USGS Open File Report. The analytical
report has been the main impetus for the acquisition of the Lisbon Valley Lithium
property. In Hite’s report, he published the analytical results of a brine sample from the
Superior Oil Co. Well Fed 88-21P. Table 1.1 lists the analytical results from Hite’s
report.
Table 1.1 - Chemical analysis of brine from the Superior Fed 88-21P well from Hite
(1978).
Compound/Element % ppm
Na2O 9.24 92,400
K2O 2.91 29,100
Li2O 0.073 730
CaO 1.30 13,000
MgO 7.44 74,400
CO2 0.056 560
SO3 0.021 210
B2O3 0.84 8,400
P2O5 0.0009 9
Cl 19.44 194,400
Br 0.32 3,200
I 0.003 30
1.5 Geologic Setting and Mineralization
The Paradox Basin is an oval-shaped area located in southeastern Utah and
southwestern Colorado that may be defined by the maximum extent of salt deposits in
the Paradox Formation (formerly) referred to as the Hermosa Formation of Middle
Pennsylvanian age (Hite and others, 1984; Nuccio and Condon, 1996). The basin was
primarily a Pennsylvanian and Permian feature that accumulated thick deposits of |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 4
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
carbonate, halite, and clastic rocks in response to downwarping and uplift along its
northeastern basin. The basin was later modified, largely due to the Laramide Orogeny 50 to
70 million years (Ma) ago. Today the basin has been eroded in places by uplift of the
Colorado Plateau and downcutting by the Colorado River and its tributaries (Nuccio and
Condon, 1996).
The Paradox Basin is composed of sedimentary rocks that overlie an Early Proterozoic
basement of metamorphic gneiss and schist that is locally intruded by granite (Nuccio
and Condon, 1996; Tweto,1987). Cambrian through Jurassic sedimentary rocks
unconformably overlie the basement rock in much of the basin. Cretaceous rocks are
also noted in the southeastern part of the basin.
The Paradox Formation, which is of primary interest to this study, contains dolomite,
black shale, anhydrite, halite, and other salts. The lithium-rich brines of the Paradox
Basin have all been derived from the Paradox Formation. Halite is the most abundant
rock type, occurring in beds tens of feet thick. The black, dolomitic shale is the source
rock of some of the oil and gas recovered in the basin. The Paradox was deposited in a
series of cycles that represent repeated desiccation and marine flooding of the basin
(Hite and Buchner, 1981). The black shales of the Paradox have been used as marker
beds to correlate depositional cycles throughout the basin. The cycles have been grouped
into larger zones, or “substages” (Barnes and others, 1967), or “production intervals”
(Hite and others, 1984).
The primary structure in the area of the ABM claims is the Lisbon Valley anticline. It is
bordered on its northeast side by the Lisbon Valley fault. The fault zone can be traced
on surface northwest and southeast for a distance of 41 miles (66 km). The fault and
anticline are the result of salt tectonics prevalent in the Paradox Basin (Hite, 1978).
1.6 Deposit Types
There is currently no known production of lithium from the Paradox Basin. The deposit
model and exploration target for the Lisbon Lithium Project is very similar to the model
defined by Anson Resources in the Paradox Basin to the northwest of ABM’s claim block
(See Section 13 – Adjacent Properties). Anson, an Australian company, operating in the
U. S. as A1 Lithium Incorporated, has defined a major lithium and bromine resource
and has completed a Definitive Feasibility Study. ABM’s target deposit model is similar
in all respects to that of Anson’s deposit.
In the Paradox Basin the lithium-rich brines occur in the “saline facies” of the Paradox
Member of the Hermosa Formation of Pennsylvanian age and are totally in the |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 5
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
subsurface. The “saline facies” of the Paradox Formation is composed of at least 29
evaporite cycles. Many of the cycles are potash-bearing and there is an active potash
mine in the basin.
The method of extraction of the lithium from the brines is foreseen to be by Direct
Lithium Extraction (DLE) and reinjection of the processed brine back into the
subsurface. This method has been gaining favor in the lithium industry over the last
several years because it does not involve the use of evaporation ponds. DLE uses a
much smaller footprint than evaporation ponds and is therefore more acceptable from
an environmental standpoint. As yet, ABM has not done any testing for the possibility
of using DLE and will not be able to do any testing until samples of brine are acquired
from the target formations.
The brines were not considered important until 1962, when Southern Natural Gas
intersected the brine zone and a very substantial flow of brines under tremendous
pressure. A second well was drilled 500 feet (152 meters) northeast of the first well and
encountered flows estimated to be in excess of 50,000 barrels of brine per day. Many of
the wells had analyses showing lithium assays. These are partially enumerated in
Section 8.1 – Brines.
Seven oil and gas wells have been drilled on the property now held by ABM according to
records of the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. Unfortunately, no analyses of the
brines from these wells have been found in the literature. Six of the wells have been
plugged and abandoned. One well is being used as a water disposal well.
1.7 Exploration
There has been no exploration conducted on the property by ABM or its predecessors
other than the gathering and assimilation of data from all available sources.
A thorough review of 40 historic well files and corresponding well log data was
conducted in the fall and winter of 2022-2023. Formation tops were picked in 23 of the
available 40 wells that penetrated some or all of the Paradox salts/clastics and/or the
Leadville Limestone.
Structure contour maps of the zones have been generated but are currently proprietary.
The primary targets include Clastic Zones 17 and 31, as well as the Leadville Limestone.
These zones have been shown by historical records and recent production to have free
flowing brines with high lithium concentrations – in some cases above 200 ppm Li. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 6
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Secondary targets are Clastic Zones 19, 29, 33, and 39. These zones have been recently
identified by Anson Resources’ drilling and testing (see Section 13 on Adjacent
Properties) to contain supersaturated brines with elevated lithium concentrations.
Though potential targets have been identified, ABM intends to test all clastic zones
encountered in future appraisal wells.
1.8 Drilling
No drilling has been conducted by ABM or its predecessors. Drilling has been
conducted by oil and gas and by potash interests on and in the area surrounding the
LVL claims, which has provided much of the information for this report.
1.9 Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing
No metallurgical testing has been conducted by ABM and none can be conducted until
brine samples can be collected from wells drilled or re-entered on the subject property.
The anticipated type of processing envisioned by ABM for extraction of lithium and
possibly other commodities from the brines is summarized here.
The use of open ponds for evaporation and concentration of lithium brines is nominally
inexpensive, however, the evaporation process is time consuming, land intensive and
wasteful of water. The development of new brine resources from undeveloped lithium
brine deposits is likely to meet significant environmental and social barriers to
implementation, particularly in the US, and evaporation ponds are not considered
environmentally sustainable.
Over the past decade many direct lithium extraction (DLE) technologies have arisen due
to intense research and economic drive to separate lithium from other ions in a feed
solution. These processes can involve organic and inorganic sorption reagents based on
polymers, membranes, manganese, titanium, or aluminum oxides and form the
backbone of DLE extraction technologies.
1.10 Adjacent Properties
There is no known lithium production in the Paradox Basin. The Cane Creek potash
mine is located 32 miles (51 kilometers) northwest of the LVL claim group. The mine
has been operating since 1965, initially as an underground room and pillar style mine.
It was converted to a solution mining operation in 1970. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 7
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Anson Resources, an Australian company whose properties are primarily west of Moab,
Utah, has been active over the past few years in the Paradox Basin. Anson has re-entered four abandoned oil and gas wells and performed extensive testing of the wells’
brine recovery performance and methods for recovering the lithium and bromine from
the brines. According to their website, www.ansonresources.com , they have completed
a Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) on September 8, 2022, and have identified
substantial indicated and inferred resources of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent (LCE) and
Bromine (Br2) as shown in Table 1.2.
Table 1.2 - Anson Resources announced resources from their DFS.
Category Brine (Mt) Li (ppm) Br (ppm) Contained LCE
(‘000t)
Contained
Br2
(‘000t)
Indicated 530 123 3,474 346 1,840
Inferred 1,038 125 3,308 692 3,434
1.11 Interpretation and Conclusions
There is abundant evidence from oil, gas and potash wells drilled in the Paradox Basin
that indicates that there is a high probability of identifying and producing super
saturated brines from beneath the ABM property position. The geology of the area of
the ABM claims and of the Paradox Basin as a whole is quite complex although zones
that have been targeted and proven by Anson Resources exist and they are mappable
within and beyond the claims area.
The only way to determine if the lithium enriched brines exist and can be economically
produced from the target zones is to drill exploration wells to produce and test brine
from the targeted zones. American Battery Materials intends to drill two
exploratory/appraisal wells within its claims position and is currently waiting permit
approval. The estimated spud dates for the two wells is expected to be 6-12 months for
this report’s effective date.
1.12 Recommendations
It is recommended that ABM drill and complete two appraisal wells and perform
comprehensive testing on key horizons within the Paradox clastic members and
Leadville (Mississippian) Limestone. Individual formations should be evaluated for
overall reservoir quality, bottom hole pressures and flow rates from conventional |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 8
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
completions. Any extracted brines should be tested to determine lithium concentrations
and to prove economic viability of a pilot and permanent production program. The
company has identified an appraisal and development program that is proprietary. This
information will be disclosed in an advanced technical report after the appraisal wells
are drilled and individual zones are identified and fully evaluated.
2. Introduction
American Battery Materials, Inc. (ABM)(formerly BoxScore Brands Inc.) acquired the
rights to the Lisbon Lithium Project from Plateau Ventures LLC. Peek Consulting was
engaged by ABM to write this report to document progress on the property and for
funding purposes.
The report has been written to conform to the U. S. Securities and Exchange
Commission’s (SEC’s) Subpart 1300 of Regulation S-K for a Technical Report Summary.
The subject property is an exploration stage property that currently has no mineral
resources or mineral reserves yet defined. No exploration has been conducted on the
property to date. This report is a summary of the data reviewed and the conclusions
drawn from that data.
This report is an update of a previous report entitled “ABM Lisbon Valley Lithium
Project, San Juan County, Utah, USA” with an effective date of May 15, 2023. The
current report includes a substantial increase in the land position of the project.
Peek Consulting, Inc. and Bradley C. Peek, CPG were retained by ABM to prepare this
technical report summary. The author is an independent consultant and is not an
employee of ABM. The author is a Qualified Person as defined by Canada’s NI 43-101
and the SEC’s Regulation S-K 1300.
The majority of information contained in this report was gleaned from various sources
and, when possible, verified by the author. These other sources being:
• Published literature.
• Utah Geological Survey website.
• Oil, gas and potash well logs from various sources.
• Plateau Ventures LLC concerning the claim staking and ownership.
• A confidential claim staking company also concerning claim staking and
ownership. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 9
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
• The U. S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) MLRS website for verification that
the mining claims are active.
• Sources are also referenced in the text of this document, where pertinent.
The author lived in Moab from 2006 until 2010, so is familiar with the general area of
the claims and the geology of the Paradox Basin. The author consulted for the Lisbon
Valley Mining Company at the Lisbon Valley Copper Mine in 2007. The mine is
adjacent to the placer claims that are the subject of this report, so the author is familiar
with the area’s geology and surface expression.
Table 2.1 - Abbreviations and Acronyms used in report.
BLM U. S. Bureau of Land Management
BSWPD Barrels Salt Water Per Day
LCE Lithium Carbonate Equivalent
Li Chemical symbol for lithium
Ma Million years before present
mD Millidarcy
Psi Pounds per square inch
PPM Parts per million
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
USGS U. S. Geological Survey
All dollar figures in this report are in U. S. dollars unless otherwise noted.  |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 10
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
3. Reliance on Other Specialists
Gavin Harrison of Plateau Ventures LLC, who is not a Qualified Person, supplied most
of the information regarding the staking and locations of the placer mining claims. Mr.
Harrison has more than 20 years of experience staking and recording claims on BLM
land in several states in the western U. S.
Kenneth C. “Scott” Avanzino, Jr., ABM’s current COO is an exploration and wellsite
geologist with 18 years of industry experience. Mr. Avanzino holds a B. S. in Geology
from Colgate University and M. S. in Geology from Tulane University. Mr. Avanzino
assisted the author with well log interpretation, subsurface mapping, and reviewed the
technical report summary. Subsurface mapping is currently proprietary and confidential
and will be included in later advanced technical reports.
The author takes full responsibility for the content of this report summary. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 11
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
4. Property Description and Location
The property is located in San Juan County, Utah. The center of the claims lies
approximately 35 miles (58 kilometers) southeast of the city of Moab (Figure 4.1). The
property position consists of 743 placer mining claims staked on U. S. Government land
administered by the U. S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Each claim covers an
area of 20 acres (8.1 hectares).
The claims are a semi-contiguous group named the LVL group covering roughly 23
square miles. The original 102 claims were staked in portions of Sections 17-18, 20-22,
and 27-29, T30S, R25E, Salt Lake Baseline and Principal Meridian in 2017, with
additional claims staked in Q2, 2023 in Sections 22, 25-28, 33-35 in T30S, R25E;
Section 31, T30S, R26E; Sections 1, 3-4, 8-15, 17, T 31S, R25E; and Sections 5-8, 17-18,
T31S, R26E (Figure 4.2). The original 102 claims were located on September 8, 9 and
10, 2021. All original claim corners and location monuments were located using
handheld Garmin GPS units (Gavin Harrison, personal communication). Additional
claims were located and staked by a (confidential) mining consulting and survey
company between May 3, 2023, and June 12, 2023. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 12
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 4.1 – Road map of Utah with project location.
Project Location |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 13
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
The original 102 placer claims were staked by Plateau Ventures LLC. and sold to Boxscore
Brands who changed its corporate name to American Battery Materials, Inc. All 102 claims
were originally owned 100% by Boxscore Brands and were transferred to American Battery
Material’s operating company Mountain Sage Minerals, LLC in June of 2023. An additional 641
placer claims have been staked since the last technical report dated May 15, 2023. All claims are
registered or filed in the name of Mountain Sage Mineral’s, a wholly owned operating company
registered in the state of Utah. The previous (102) placer claims and those (172) have been
registered currently in good standing according to BLM records. There are 469 claims that are
pending review by BLM.
Table 4.1 is a listing of the claim names with BLM UT numbers for the claims as posted
in the BLM’s MLRS online database. The author has witnessed several of the original
claim group corners and location monuments on the ground and has been furnished
with copies of the claim location certificates time- and date-stamped by the San Juan
County Recorder.
Table 4.1 - Claims with BLM UT numbers.
Claim No.
From
Claim No.
To
BLM No.
From
BLM No.
To
LVL-001 LVL-102 UT105270470 UT105270571
LVL-103 LVL-274 UT105835855 UT105836026
LVL - 275 LVL - 743 PENDING PENDING
Annual holding costs for the claims are $165 per claim per year to the BLM, due
September 1st. There is also a $2 per claim annual document fee to be paid to San Juan
County, Utah each year, due November 1st. There is no set expiration date for the claims
if the payments are made annually. There are currently no required royalties to be paid
on production from U. S. Government mining claims.
Currently there are no known significant factors or risks that may affect access, title, or
right/ability to perform work on the Company’s property. The current land under claims
contains no buildings or structures. All lithium mineralization is interpreted to be in the
form of brines in the subsurface. There are no known mineralized zones on or below the
surface of ABM’s staked land other than those defined by the information presented in
this report. There are no known environmental liabilities associated with the property
position. To the author’s knowledge the only development on the property are some oil
and gas wells with associated roads and pipelines.
It will be necessary for ABM to re-enter an oil and gas well or to drill a new well to |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 14
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
obtain brine samples for analysis and metallurgical testing. Permits for such
operations will be required from the BLM and the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and
Mining. These permits are currently in process.
Figure 4.2 - Overview of ABM’s Lisbon Lithium claims in San Juan County, Utah. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 15
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 4.3 below is an example of one of the claim stakes found on the property during
the author’s site visit on May 7, 2023. The stake is the location monument for claim
number LVL#5.
Figure 4.3 – An example of one of the claim stakes found on the property May 7, 2023. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 16
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
5. Accessibility, Climate, Local Resources, Infrastructure and
Physiography
Moab, Utah, the nearest population center to the property, is a city of 5,336 persons
(2020 Census). It is located in a relatively remote portion of Utah but is easily accessed
by U. S. Highway 191. Highway 191 intersects with Interstate 70 about 30 miles (48
kilometers) north of Moab, at Crescent Junction. Moab is a tourist destination and has
numerous motels and restaurants. Moab would also be the nearest source of labor in
the region.
The region has a history of mining, primarily uranium and vanadium that dates back as
far as 1881. The Lisbon Valley Copper Mine is in the heart of the Lisbon Valley and is
currently producing copper cathode. An all-weather road and electric power supply the
mine.
To access the property from Moab, travel south on Highway 191 for 25 miles (40
kilometers) to La Sal Junction. Turn east on State Highway 49. Travel 7 miles (11
kilometers) and turn south onto Highway 113. Go another 13 miles (21 kilometers) to
the northeast corner of the property. A few gravel roads cross the property. Oil and gas
drilling and production, along with ranching have made the area relatively accessible.
All the ABM claims fall between elevations of 6200 and 6900 feet (1890 and 2100
meters) above sea level.
It is anticipated that ABM will use a Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) method rather
than using evaporation ponds to recover the lithium and other potential mineral from
brines, should the project advance to the production stage. The project should therefore
have sufficient space on the ABM claims to construct processing facilities.
The vegetation of the region is sparse, mostly consisting of widely spaced low brush.
Juniper and pinion trees are sparsely dispersed on the uplands and are more prevalent
in the canyons. Much of the surface is bare rock. Topography is low to moderate but is
often steep, or even vertical, where the thick Jurassic sandstone units are cut by the
ephemeral streams. Figure 5.1 is a topographic map of the Lisbon Valley area with the
ABM claim block superimposed. The contour interval on the map is 40 feet.
At present, ABM does not own water rights in the Lisbon Valley area. The company will
need to obtain water rights and a source of fresh water to process the brines and extract
lithium, should the property reach production. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 17
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 5.1 – Topographic map underlying a plot of the ABM claim blocks. CI=40’.
The climate is arid, also termed “high desert”. Moab has average annual precipitation of
9.02 inches (229 mm). In July, the hottest month, it has an average high temperature of
99°F (37°C) and an average low temperature of 65°F (18°C). In January, the coldest
month, it has an average high temperature of 43°F (6°C) and an average low of 20°F (-
7°C) (Source: Wikipedia.com). The chart below is a graphic representation of the Moab
average temperatures (Source: www.usclimatedata.com). The climatic conditions allow
for fieldwork to continue throughout the year. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 18
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
The Paradox Basin covers a large portion of the central part of the Colorado Plateau.
The landscape is dominated by thick sections of mostly red Jurassic sandstones cut by
streams and rivers into deep, steep-sided canyons. Mattox (1968) describes the Paradox
Basin in the following way:
“The Paradox Basin, here defined as being that area in southeastern Utah and
southwestern Colorado that is underlain by saline strata of Pennsylvanian age, has an
aerial extent of approximately 1,000 square miles. The climate is essentially arid over
much of the basin, the only exceptions being in the Abajo and La Sal Mountains. The
vegetation is sparse except in the mountains, where there are heavy stands of timber.
The Colorado River traverses the basin, and it and some of its tributaries are permanent
streams; in general, however, the streams of the area are ephemeral, and flash flooding
is a characteristic phenomenon of their flow.”
Figure 5.2 - Climate data for Moab, Utah. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 19
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
6. History
The Paradox Basin initially attracted attention because of high lithium values reported
in the literature in brines recovered from oil and gas exploration wells. The Paradox
Basin has been explored for oil and gas for many years (Durgin, 2011). The earliest
discoveries of potash in the area were made in 1924 in oil and gas wells, but the
correlation of the beds and the extent and richness of the deposits were not recognized
until the 1950s. The Seven Mile, Salt Wash and White Cloud potash target areas, all west
of Moab, were quickly identified. Further exploration led to the development of the Cane
Creek potash mine adjacent to the Colorado River.
Brines were commonly encountered in these wells, but none of the wells was of
economic significance for brine until in 1962 when the Southern Natural Gas Company
drilled a well, Long Canyon Unit #1, which encountered a substantial flow of high-density brine at a depth of 6,013 feet (Durgin, 2011).
In 1964 the White Cloud #2 well was drilled by J.E. Roberts, 500 feet northeast of the
Long Canyon #1 well, specifically for testing the “Brine Zone.” Brine was encountered at
6,013 feet and it was recorded that artesian brine flow was so strong that drilling had to
be suspended after penetrating only 6 feet of the 28 foot pay zone. The hole was
eventually deepened. Brine from the well was tested by a U. S. Geological Survey
laboratory and was reported to contain 1700 ppm lithium (Gwynn, 2008). See note in
table 8.20 relating to this reported value.
In 1953 Delhi Oil Corporation explored the Seven Mile area, seven miles NW of Moab,
drilling 10 holes on one-half mile centers and identifying a substantial potash resource.
In 1956 Delhi identified an excellent potash target at Cane Creek, nine miles south of the
Seven Mile area. They drilled 7 test holes there and decided that the Cane Creek target
was thicker and higher grade. In 1957 a wildcat oil hole 10 miles west of the Seven Mile
area intersected a 16-foot-thick high grade potash bed at the same stratigraphic horizon
as Cane Creek and Seven Mile.
In 1960 Texas Gulf Sulfur acquired the Delhi potash properties and was in full production
from an underground mine by early in 1965. They announced that the Cane Creek potash
bed was 11 feet thick and averaged 25 to 30% potash (Jackson, 1973). The Cane Creek
mine, now owned by Intrepid Potash switched to solution mining and solar evaporative
precipitation in 1971 and as of Intrepid’s 2020 annual report is still producing at a rate |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 20
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
between 75,000 and 120,000 tons of potash per year. Its expected mine life is +100 years
with proven and probable reserves at grades of 44.4% and 46.2% KCl, respectively.
Hite (1978) investigated the potash potential of the Lisbon Valley area in a USGS Open
File Report. The analytical report has been the main impetus for the acquisition of the
Lisbon Valley Lithium property. Hite examined the available data from oil and gas wells
and the potash wells drilled into the Lisbon Valley oil field up until that time. He found
significant potential for the development of a potash mine. In Hite’s report, he published
the analytical results of a brine sample from the Superior Oil Co. Well Fed 88-21P. Table
6.1 lists the analytical results from Hite’s report and Figure 6.1 shows the location of Fed
88-21 in relation to the ABM claim block.
Table 6.1 - Chemical analysis of brine from the Superior Fed 88-21P well from Hite
(1978).
Compound/Element % ppm
Na2O 9.24 92,400
K2O 2.91 29,100
Li2O 0.073 730
CaO 1.30 13,000
MgO 7.44 74,400
CO2 0.056 560
SO3 0.021 210
B2O3 0.84 8,400
P2O5 0.0009 9
Cl 19.44 194,400
Br 0.32 3,200
I 0.003 30
The analysis for lithium from the brine yielded a value of 0.073% Li2O or 730 ppm. This
converts to 340 ppm Li. The analysis also showed high values for other salts that could be
recovered as byproducts of lithium production.
Unfortunately, at the time the brine sample was collected, it was uncertain which horizon
was producing the brine flow. As Hite states:
“The stratigraphic position of the brine source could never be established even
though the company cored continuously through the evaporites.” |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 21
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
If the well were to be re-entered, the different zones would need to be isolated and
tested to establish which stratigraphic horizons produce brines with the highest lithium
values. Based on the casing point and Superior 88-21 well’s total depth, the producing
horizon lies between 2400 to 3500 feet below the ground surface.
Anson Resources, an Australian company operating in the United States as A1 Lithium
Incorporated, has taken their project in the Paradox Basin to the Definitive Feasibility
stage (See Section 13 – Adjacent Properties). To date, no lithium production has
occurred in the Paradox Basin.
Figure 6.1 - Lisbon Valley Lithium claims in relation to the Superior Peterson Fed 88-
21P well. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 22
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
7. Geologic Setting and Mineralization
The Paradox Basin is an oval-shaped area located in southeastern Utah and
southwestern Colorado that may be defined by the maximum extent of salt deposits in
the Paradox Formation (formerly referred to as the Hermosa Formation of Middle
Pennsylvanian age (Hite and others, 1984; Nuccio and Condon, 1996). The basin was
primarily a Pennsylvanian and Permian feature that accumulated thick deposits of
carbonate, halite, and clastic rocks in response to downwarping and uplift along its
northeastern basin. The basin was later modified, largely due to the Laramide Orogeny 50 to
70 million years (Ma) ago. Today the basin has been eroded in places by uplift of the
Colorado Plateau and downcutting by the Colorado River and its tributaries (Nuccio and
Condon, 1996). Figure 7.1 shows the structural features in and surrounding the Paradox
Basin. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 23
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.1 - Structural elements of the Paradox Basin and adjacent areas (from Nuccio
and Condon, 1996).
7.1 Stratigraphy
The Paradox Basin is composed of sedimentary rocks that overlie an Early Proterozoic
basement of metamorphic gneiss and schist that is locally intruded by granite (Nuccio
and Condon, 1996; Tweto,1987). A stratigraphic column of the basin is presented in
Figure 7.2. Cambrian through Jurassic sedimentary rocks unconformably overlie the |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 24
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
basement rock in much of the basin. Cretaceous rocks are also noted in the southeastern
part of the basin.
The collision of the Laurentia and Gondwana super-continents in the Pennsylvanian
and Permian affected the basin, as the Uncompahgre Plateau to the northeast
experienced rapid and large-scale uplift as the northeastern side of the basin subsided.
All Cambrian through Mississippian rocks were eroded from the plateau as well as some
of the Precambrian rocks. Isopach maps in Nuccio and Condon (1996) show that as
much as 12,000 feet of sediment accumulated in a trough to the southwest of the
Uncompahgre Plateau during Pennsylvanian and Permian time. Deposits of the
Pennsylvanian Period, in ascending order, include the Molas Formation, Hermosa
Group, Paradox Formation, and Honaker Trail Formation. The Molas Formation is
transitional from nonmarine to marine, with marine limestone deposited by the
transgressive Middle Pennsylvanian sea.
The Middle and Upper Pennsylvanian Hermosa Group makes up most of the
Pennsylvanian strata in the basin. From oldest to youngest, the Hermosa includes the
Pinkerton Trail, Paradox, and Honaker Trail Formations (Wengerd and Metheny, 1958).
The Pinkerton Trail Formation is composed of interbedded marine limestone and dark
shale, deposited in shallow marine conditions of normal salinity.
The Paradox Formation, which is of primary interest to this study, contains dolomite,
black shale, anhydrite, halite, and other salts. The lithium-rich brines of the Paradox
Basin have all been derived from the Paradox Formation. Halite is the most abundant
rock type, occurring in beds tens of feet thick. The black, dolomitic shale is the source
rock of some of the oil and gas recovered in the basin. The Paradox was deposited in a
series of cycles that represent repeated desiccation and marine flooding of the basin
(Hite and Buchner, 1981). In the southwestern part of the basin, the Paradox Formation
grades into shelf carbonates, including algal-mound deposits that have served as oil and
gas reservoir rocks. In the easternmost part of the basin, the Paradox Formation cannot
be differentiated. The black shales of the Paradox have been used as marker beds to
correlate depositional cycles throughout the basin. The cycles have been grouped into
larger zones, or “substages” (Barnes and others, 1967), or “production intervals” (Hite
and others, 1984). Figure 6 is a correlation chart showing the stratigraphy across the
Paradox Basin.
For references regarding the sedimentary units lying above the Hermosa Group,
additional information can be found in Campbell (1980), Wengerd and Metheny (1958),
Nuccio and Condon (1996), Huntoon (1992), Huntoon, et al (1994), Dubiel (1989), Stewart,
et al (1972), Pipiringos and O’Sullivan (1978), Peterson and Turner-Peterson (1987), Turner |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 25
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
and Fishman (1991), Molenaar (1981), Robinson (1972), McDonald (1972), Spieker (1949),
Fouch (1976), and Fouch et al (1983).
Figure 7.2 below is the generalized stratigraphic nomenclature within the greater
Paradox Basin area. North American series names have been added for the
Mississippian, Pennsylvanian and Permian; however, there is not an intended exact
respective match with the formations. Formations assigned to the Hermosa Group are
after Rasmussen, D.L. and L. Rasmussen (2009) and Rasmussen (2014). The halite-and potash-bearing interval is marked by green shading. Regional unconformities are
shown by the undulating line separating some formations and groups. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 26
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.2 - Generalized stratigraphic nomenclature within the greater Paradox Basin
area.
The ABM claims are underlain by Quaternary through Pennsylvanian sedimentary units. Figure
7.3 shows the surficial geology on and around the LVL claim block. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 27
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.3 - Geologic map of the LVL claim area outlined in red. Modified after
Doelling (2002). |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 28
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
7.2 Structure
The primary structure in the area of the ABM claims is the Lisbon Valley Anticline. The
Lisbon Valley Anticline was originally identified by gravity anomaly in 1959 (Figure
7.5a) and later supported by 2D seismic surveys and subsurface mapping using available
oil and gas well data. The structure is a 4-way anticlinal closure that is cut by a large
listric normal fault on its northeast side by the NW/SE trending, down to the northeast,
Lisbon Valley Fault (shown in Figure 7.3). The Lisbon Valley Fault zone can be traced
on the surface (northwest and southeast trend) for a distance of 41 miles (66 km). The
fault and anticline are the result of salt tectonics prevalent in the Paradox Basin (Hite,
1978). Bedding and dip of the Paradox and younger sedimentary rocks generally
conform to the structure map presented in Figure 7.5a, showing the top of salt. On the
crest of the anticline, salt dissolution has occurred in the upper salt members and
salt/clastics zones are highly folded and, in some cases, faulted with increasing depth.
Figure 7.4 is a cross section across the NW flank of the Lisbon Valley Anticline showing
Robert Hite’s interpretation of the intense structural deformation caused by salt flowage
(from Hite 1978). It is important to note that the ABM claims sit on the southeast flank
of the Lisbon Valley Anticline where deformation is less prevalent, and individual beds
are mappable. Salt is typically encountered between 2200 and 2500 feet below ground
level and is generally 6500' thick in vicinity of the ABM claims area. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 29
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.4 – W-E Cross section through the Lisbon Oil field on the north flank of the
Lisbon Valley Anticline. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 30
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
7.3 Geophysics
No geophysical surveys have been conducted by ABM on the property. There are
numerous 2D seismic lines and a single 3D seismic survey in the vicinity of the ABM
claims that may be purchased, but these have not been pursued at this point in time.
A published study (Byerly and Joesting, 1959) included a gravity survey across Lisbon
Valley. The three and two-dimensional survey results are shown in Figures 7.5a and
7.5b. The gravity anomalies are caused by density contrasts and changes in thickness of
the evaporites in the Paradox Formation relative to the other intrabasement rocks. In
general, these early geophysical results match up very well to standard subsurface
mapping using formation tops identified in the later oil and gas well logs. (Section 9 –
Exploration). |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 31
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.5a - Three-dimensional analysis of the Lisbon Valley gravity anomaly (Byerly
and Joesting, 1959). |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 32
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 7.6b – Two-dimensional analysis of the Lisbon Valley gravity anomaly (Byerly
and Joesting, 1959). |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 33
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
8. Deposit Types
There is currently no known production of lithium from the Paradox Basin. The deposit
model and exploration target for the Lisbon Lithium Project is very similar to the model
defined by Anson Resources in the Paradox Basin to the northwest of ABM’s claim block
(See Section 13 – Adjacent Properties). Anson, an Australian company, operating in the
U. S. as A1 Lithium Incorporated, has defined a major lithium and bromine resource
and has completed a Definitive Feasibility Study. ABM’s target deposit model is similar
in all respects to that of Anson’s deposit.
In the Paradox Basin the lithium-rich brines occur in the “saline facies” of the Paradox
Member of the Hermosa Formation of Pennsylvanian age and are totally in the
subsurface. The “saline facies” of the Paradox Formation is composed of at least 29
evaporite cycles. Many of the cycles are potash-bearing and there is an active potash
mine in the basin. Each cycle, if complete, consists of, in ascending order, (1) limestone,
(2) dolomite, (3) anhydrite, and (4) halite with or without potash salts. The sequence is
then repeated in a reverse order of (3) anhydrite, (2) dolomite, and (1) limestone to
complete the cycle. Units 1, 2 and 3 of each cycle include some clastic material that is
commonly euxinic black shale, mudstone, and siltstone. A complete vertical succession
in any one cycle is not everywhere present because of a lateral gradation from a
hypersaline or saline facies in the basin deep to a limestone facies on the basin shelf.
Thus, in the basin deep, only units 3 and 4 may be present, while at some point
intermediate between the basin deep and basin shelf all units may be present, and the
vertical succession is complete (Hite, 1961).
Halite (NaCl), anhydrite (CaSO4), carnallite (KMgCl3·6H2O), and sylvite (KCl) are the
most common evaporite minerals in the Paradox Formation. Halite is the most common
salt, totaling over ten thousand feet of thickness in some wells (Mayhew and Heylman,
1966). Anhydrite is also common in dolomite and black shale in the clastic breaks that
separate the salt beds.
Depths to the base of the Paradox Formation range from 3,500 feet to over 15,000 feet,
depending on the structure and the topographic location (Mayhew and Heylman, 1965).
The Paradox Formation is almost entirely in the subsurface, coming to surface only in
some salt-cored anticlines in the eastern part of the area, but these are not known to
contain lithium-rich brines. As previously noted in section 7.2 (Structure) of this report,
the top of salt is generally encountered between 2200 and 2500 feet below ground level
in the vicinity of the ABM claims. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 34
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
The method of extraction of the lithium from the brines is foreseen to be by Direct
Lithium Extraction (DLE) and reinjection of the processed brine back into the
subsurface. This method has been gaining favor in the lithium industry over the last
several years because it does not involve the use of evaporation ponds. DLE uses a
much smaller footprint than evaporation ponds and is therefore more acceptable from
an environmental standpoint. As yet, ABM has not done any testing for the possibility
of using DLE and will not be able to do any testing until samples of brine are acquired
from the target formations.
8.1 Brines
The brines were not considered important until 1962, when Southern Natural Gas
intersected the brine zone and a very substantial flow of brines under tremendous
pressure. A second well was drilled 500 feet (152 meters) northeast of the first well and
encountered flows estimated to be in excess of 50,000 barrels of brine per day. The
brine was at a temperature of 145°F (62.8°C).
Many of the early oil and gas wells drilled into the brine zones encountered over-pressured brines and some well blowouts resulted. There are several instances of wells
with shut-in pressures between 3,000 and 4,000 psi. The brines tend to be super
saturated with a large area of the basin reporting more than 400,000 ppm total
dissolved solids (40% solids). In addition to lithium, there is potential to produce other
minerals from the brines, including magnesium, boron, bromine and potassium salts.
There is also potential for the production of oil and gas.
Partial analyses are available from over 200 brine samples taken from wells in southeastern
Utah (Mayhew and Heylman, 1965). Analyses from 17 wells are recorded below (Tables 8.1-
8.20). As can be seen, the composition of the brines varies considerably in the different
parts of the basin. Most of the wells are somewhat distant from the LVL claims but are
important in that they show some of the levels of the different elements in the brines found
in the Paradox Formation. Brine analyses shown in these tables are not necessarily
indicative of brines to be tested from beneath the ABM claims. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 35
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.1 - Amerada Petroleum No. 2 Green River
Section 2, T22S, R16E, Grand County, Paradox Formation. Analysis by California
Testing Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Bicarbonate 919
Borate 2,362
Calcium 76,176
Carbonate 0
Chloride 249,600
Magnesium 9,484
Sodium 58,301
Sulfate 49
Silica 10
Total solids 397,061
pH 6.3
Table 8.2 - British-American No. 1 Gov’t.-Norwood
Section 15, T40S, R22E., San Juan County, Paradox Formation, Desert Creek zone,
5802-5812 feet. Analysis by Core Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Barium 0
Bicarbonate 220
Calcium 25,600
Carbonate 0
Chloride 171,820
Magnesium 2,916
Sodium 78,513
Sulfate 4,185
Total Solids 283,402
pH 5.0
Specific Gravity (70ºF) 1.17 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 36
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.3 - California Oil No. 1, Navajo 177
Section 3, T40S, R24E, San Juan County, Paradox Formation, 5612-1622 feet. Analysis
by Chemical and Geological Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Bicarbonate 255
Calcium 24,200
Carbonate 0
Chloride 182,000
Magnesium 5,073
Sodium 80,872
Sulfate 286
Total solids 304,500
pH 5.4
Specific Gravity (70ºF) 1.18 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 37
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.4 - Delhi-Taylor No. 2, Seven Mile
Section 18, T25S, R21E, Grand Cony. Paradox Formation (From Hite, 1963).
Compound Concentration, ppm
Aluminum 66
Ammonia 849
Bicarbonate 1,010
Boron 660
Bromine 3,080
Calcium 52,700
Chloride 241,000
Copper 6
Fluorine 25
Iodine 42
Iron 750
Lead 6
Lithium 66
Magnesium 39,200
Manganese 260
Potassium 18,800
Sodium 5,990
Sulfate 4
Zinc 60
Total solids 366,000 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 38
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.5 - Humble No. 1 Rustler Dome
Section 4, R29, R20E, San Juan County. Mississippian 4905-5076 feet. Analysis by Core
Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Calcium 12,000
Chloride 208,740
Magnesium 4,860
Sodium 115,335
Sulfate 6,770
Total solids 348,681
pH 5.0
Specific Gravity 1.2 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 39
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.6 - King Oil No. 2 Big Flat
Section 11, T26S, R19E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, 6196-6220 feet. Analysis by
Chemical and Geological Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Ammonia 1,330
Borate (B4O7) 2,922
Bromine 1,150
Calcium 40,742
Chloride 259,106
Lithium 173
Magnesium 47,789
Potassium 41,957
Sodium 25,966
Sulfate 754
Total solids 421,889
Table 8.7 - Pure Oil No. 1 Hobson-USA
Section 30, T26S, R20E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, 5425-5435 feet. Analysis by
Ethyl Corporation.
Compound Concentration, ppm
Boron 1,260
Bromine 1,612
Calcium 55,740
Chlorine 249,300
Lithium 134
Magnesium 31,350
Potassium 25,500
Sodium 22,000
Strontium 1,300
Sulfate 23 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 40
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.8 - Pure Oil No. 1 Hobson-USA
Section 30, T26S, R20E, Grand County. Paradox Formation. Analysis of solids collected
from tubing. Analysis by Titanium Metals.
Compound Concentration, (%)
Boron 0.19%
Bromine 3.42
Calcium 1.23
Chloride 70.70
Copper 0.001
Iron 0.20
Lithium 0.002
Magnesium 1.20
Potassium 12.25
Sodium 10.60
Strontium 0.50
Sulfate 0.0
Table 8.9 - Pure Oil No. 2 Big Flat
Section 14, T26S, R19E, Grand County. Mississippian, approximately 7,200 feet.
Analysis by Ethyl Corporation.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Boron 780
Bromine 2,041
Calcium 41,800
Chlorine 210,500
Lithium 81
Magnesium 33,100
Potassium 21,000
Sodium 9,100
Sulfate 31 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 41
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.10 - Roberts Brine Well
Section 9, T26S, R20E, Grand County. Paradox Formation (sample collected from
drippage at well head). Analysis by Ford Chemical Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 0
Boron 20,000
Bromine 2,500
Calcium 3,000
Carbonate 200
Chlorine 53,000
Iodine 450
Magnesium 34,000
Phosphate 15
Potassium 33,000
Sodium 43,000
Sulfate 500
Total solids 250,000
pH 6.1 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 42
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.11 - Southern Natural No. 1 Long Canyon
Section 9, T26S, R20E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, Cane Marker, 7050-7075
feet. Brine produced with oil, collected from separator. Analysis by Ford Chemical
Laboratory.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 1,600
Boron 600
Bromine 3,000
Calcium 34,000
Carbonate 2,200
Chloride 45,000
Iodine 300
Magnesium 21,000
Phosphate 2,000
Potassium 20,000
Sodium 13,000
Sulfate 1,800
Total solids 388,000
pH 4.8 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 43
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.12 - Southern Natural No. 1 Long Canyon
Section 9, T26S, R20E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, clastic zone 31. Analysis by
U.S. Geological Survey.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 1,400
Bromine 6,100
Calcium 65,800
Chloride 29,800
Lithium 500
Magnesium 45,500
Nitrate 6
Potassium 23,400
Rubidium 700
Sodium 9,800
Sulfate 80
Total solids 439,000
pH 6.0
Specific Gravity (24ºC) 1.37
Table 8.13 - Suburban Storage No. 1
Section 26, T25S, R21E, Grand County. Paradox Formation. Sample taken from zone in
which storage cavity was washed. This zone includes one bed of sylvite and one bed of
carnallite.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 110
Calcium 648
Carbonate 0
Chloride 182,730
Magnesium 1,388
Potassium 7,460
Sodium 116,923
Total solids 322,059
Specific Gravity (60ºF) 1.21 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 44
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.14 - Superior No. 22-34 Salt Wash
Section 34, T22S, R17E, Grand County. Mississippian, 10,053-10,173 feet. Analysis by
Superior Oil Company.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 169
Calcium 5,563
Carbonate 0
Chloride 152,698
Magnesium 1,383
Sodium & Potassium 90,949
Sulfate 1,768
Total solids 251,719
pH 6.7
Specific Gravity (60ºF) 1.18
Table 8.15 - Superior No. 14-5 Bowknot
Section 5, T26S, R17E, Emery County. Mississippian, 6,270-6,350 feet. Analysis by Core
Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Barium 0
Bicarbonate 146
Calcium 240
Carbonate 0
Chloride 171,820
Magnesium 266
Sodium 110,004
Sulfate 240
Total solids 283,720
pH 5.0 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 45
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.16 - Texaco No. 2 Navajo AC
Section 34, T40 S, R26 E, San Juan County. Paradox Formation (Ismay zone).
Analysis by Core Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Barium 0
Bicarbonate 488
Calcium 3,600
Carbonate 0
Chloride 205,900
Iron 0
Magnesium 7,533
Sodium 115,455
Sulfate 200
Total Solids 333,176
pH 4.5
Specific Gravity (66ºF) 1.13
Table 8.17 - Texaco No. 1 Smoot (Salt Wash field)
Section 17, T23S, R17E, Grand County. Mississippian, 8785-8876 feet. Analysis by
Rocky Mountain Engineering Company.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 951
Calcium 2,865
Carbonate 0
Chloride 190,640
Magnesium 1,801
Sodium 119,418
Sulfate 4,320
Total Solids 324,656
pH 6.0
Specific Gravity (70ºF) 1.14 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 46
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.18 - Tidewater No. 74-11 Big Flat
Section 11, T26S, R19E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, interval 5920-5950.
Analysis by Chemical and Geological Laboratories.
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Bicarbonate 890
Calcium 32,900
Chloride 132,810
Magnesium 23,800
Sodium & Potassium 36,283
Sulfate 323
Total Solids 338,952
pH 5.7
Table 8.19 - Tidewater No. 74-11 Big Flat
Section 11, T26S, R19E, Grand County. Paradox Formation, clastic zone 31.
Analysis by U.S. Geological Survey.
Compound Concentration, (%)
Calcium Chloride 11.36
Magnesium Chloride 15.31
Potassium Chloride 4.32
Total Chloride 22.40
Total Sulfate 0.04 |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 47
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Table 8.20 - White Cloud #2 (aka. Roberts Brine Well)
Section 9, T26S, R20E Grand County. Analysis by the U. S. Geological Survey (Gwynn,
2008).
Compound Concentration, (ppm)
Sodium 28,500
Potassium 47,000
Lithium 1,700*
Calcium 46,700
Magnesium 43,600
Total Halides as Chorine 184,200
Specific Gravity (23ºC) 1,282
*According to a website release by the TRU Group (trugroup.com), the
1,700 ppm Li value quoted above for the White Cloud #2 well brine is
incorrect. They present evidence from unpublished sources that the value
is off by a factor of 10 and the actual value should be 170 ppm Li. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 48
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
8.2 Wells Located on the Subject Property
Seven oil and gas wells have been drilled on the property now held by ABM according to
records of the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining. Unfortunately, no analyses of the
brines from these wells have been found in the literature. Six of the wells have been
plugged and abandoned. One well is being used as a water disposal well. The seven
wells are:
Table 8.21 - Oil & gas wells drilled within the LVL claim block.
API Drilled By Well Name Location Year
Drilled
TD
(ft)
Current
Status Sec 1/4
Sec
Elev
(ft)
43-037-
30029
Union Oil Little Valley Federal
#1
18 SWSE 6318 1969 9100 P&A
43-037-
30464
Cordillera Corp Federal 1-20 20 NENE 6750 1980 9555 Disposal
43-037-
15768
Pubco Petroleum Lisbon Federal 2-21F 21 SENW 6864 1961 9560 P&A
43-037-
30436
Mesa Petroleum Lisbon Federal 21-3 21 NWNE 6710 1978 9953 P&A
43-037-
10944
Pubco Petroleum Lisbon Federal 3-
27C
27 NENW 6679 1962 9580 P&A
43-037-
10807
Pacific Natural
Gas
Little Valley #1 28 SWNW 6521 1963 9712 P&A
43-037-
10808
Pacific Natural
Gas
Little Valley #2 29 SESE 6528 1964 8964 P&A
43-037-
10667
Lone Star
Producing
Federal Utah A-1 18 NENE 6676 1966 10328 P&A
All the wells are in Township 30S, Range 25E of the Salt Lake Principal Meridian except
the Lone Star well located in Township 31S, Range 26E of the Salt Lake Principal
Meridian. The Superior Fed 88-21P Well does not appear in this table since it was not
drilled for oil and gas, but for potash. Data for potash exploration are not posted by the
Utah Geological Survey. The locations of the oil and gas wells occurring on the ABM
claims are shown in Figure 8.1. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 49
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 8.1 – Oil and gas wells occurring on the ABM claims. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 50
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
9. Exploration
There has been no exploration conducted on the property by ABM or its predecessors
other than the gathering and assimilation of data from all available sources.
A thorough review of 40 historic well files and corresponding well log data was
conducted in the fall and winter of 2022-2023. Formation tops were picked in 23 of the
available 40 wells that penetrated some or all of the Paradox salts/clastics and/or the
Leadville Limestone. Nearly one third of the wells did not penetrate the salts/clastics.
Figure 9.1 is a stratigraphic column and type log using the Southern Natural Gas Long
Canyon #1 well as an example. This well does not occur within the ABM claims area. It
only serves as an example of the stratigraphic section present throughout most of the
Paradox Basin. Structure contour maps of the zones have been generated but are
currently proprietary. The primary targets include Clastic Zones 17 and 31, as well as the
Leadville Limestone. These zones have been shown by historical records and recent
production to have free flowing brines with high lithium concentrations – above 200
ppm Li.
Secondary targets are Clastic Zones 19, 29, 33, and 39. These zones have been recently
identified by Anson Resources’ drilling and testing (see Section 13 on Adjacent
Properties) to contain supersaturated brines with elevated lithium concentrations. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 51
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 9.1 – Stratigraphic column and type log for the units showing (Pennsylvanian)
clastic and salt section (Mayhew and Heylmann 1965).
Leadville Limestone -
Figure from Mayhew and
Roughly 250’ below salt
Heylmann, 1965, Concentrated brines of the
Moab Region Utah Geological Bulletin – GR Neutron Log Southern Natural
Gas Long Canyon 1 (9-T26S-R20E).
LA SAL LIMESTONE-Roughly 1000’ above salt
Salt 16
Clas�c 17
GOTHIC SHALE
C MARKER
Clas�c Zones13, 15, 17, 19,
21, 23, 25 or 27produced 340
ppm lithium brine during
coring opera�ons in open hole
between 2400’ MD to 3430’
MD in Superior 88-21
Peterson Federal in Sec�on
21, T-26S and R-20E.
Depth of zone was not
reported but based on casing
and well total depth, the
zones men�oned above are all
prospec�ve under the current
claim area.
Stra�graphic
column and
type log
Southern Natural Gas Long Canyon #1
T 26 S & R 20E, Sec�on 9
35 Miles NE of ABM Claims |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 52
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
10. Drilling
No drilling has been conducted by ABM or its predecessors. Drilling has been
conducted by oil and gas and by potash interests on and in the area surrounding the
LVL claims, which has provided much of the information for this report. ABM is in the
process of permitting 2 appraisal wells in Lisbon Valley. Assuming no significant delays
are encountered during the review process, the wells will be scheduled for drilling as
early as 2023Q4 and 2024Q1. It is important to note that two historical wells within or
in close proximity to the claims block took kicks and presumably encountered high
pressure brines or gases during drilling or coring operations within the clastic/salt
sections. The Superior 88-21 Federal in Section 21 T 30S and R25E (discussed in section
6) encountered a high-pressure brine between 2500 and 3400 feet measured depth and
the Pure Oil Spiller Canyon #1 in Section 16, T30S and R 25E (less than 1500 feet from
northern claim boundary) encountered high pressure while drilling the Cane Creek
Marker (Clastic 43) at 4700 feet measured depth. The chemistry of the brine from the
Superior 88-21 well is discussed further in this report. There is no sample data reported
from the Pure Oil Spiller Canyon #1 well. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 53
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
11. Sample Preparation, Analyses and Security
No sampling has been conducted by ABM or its predecessors. No information is
available concerning the procedures used by the oil and gas or potash companies for
sample preparation, analytical techniques or security for the lithium analyses stated in
this report. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 54
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
12. Data Verification
Data used in this report is mostly from published information and, in a few cases, from
unpublished sources. Where possible, the author and the other experts have made
efforts to verify the sources of the data. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 55
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
13. Mineral Processing and Metallurgical Testing
No metallurgical testing has been conducted by ABM and none can be conducted until
brine samples can be collected from wells drilled or re-entered on the subject property.
The summary below shows some aspects of the anticipated type of processing
envisioned by ABM for extraction of lithium and possibly other commodities from the
brines. ABM’s technical team and third-party consultants are reviewing and pursuing
available technologies based on the water chemistry from the Superior Oil Company
Peterson 88-21 Federal well referenced in Table 6.1
The use of open ponds for evaporation and concentration of lithium brines is nominally
inexpensive, however, the evaporation process is time consuming, land intensive and
wasteful of water. The development of new brine resources from undeveloped lithium
brine deposits is likely to meet significant environmental and social barriers to
implementation, particularly in the US, and evaporation ponds are not considered
environmentally sustainable.
Over the past decade many direct lithium extraction (DLE) technologies have arisen due
to intense research and economic drive to separate lithium from other ions in a feed
solution. These processes can involve organic and inorganic sorption reagents based on
polymers, membranes, manganese, titanium, or aluminum oxides and form the
backbone of DLE extraction technologies. These materials are utilized in DLE projects in
China and Argentina to extract lithium from geological brines. Many of these projects
have come online over the past 10 years and have been operating successfully producing
battery grade lithium materials. It is estimated that approximately 12% of the world’s
lithium supply in 2019 was produced using direct lithium extraction technology.
Direct lithium extraction from a brine relies on the ability of a material to “pluck”
lithium ions out of a complex geochemical soup, while leaving all other salts and metals
in solution. Shown in Figure 13.1 is a typical process flow diagram for a DLE process.
DLE technologies are broadly grouped into three main categories: adsorption, ion
exchange, and solvent extraction. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 56
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 13.1 - Process flow diagram of a typical lithium extraction process.
• Adsorption physically absorbs LiCl molecules onto the surface of a sorbent from a
lithium loaded solution. The lithium is then stripped from the surface of the
sorbent with water.
• Ion exchange takes lithium ions from the solution and replaces them with a
different positively charged cation that is contained in the sorbent material. An
acidic (or basic) solution is required to strip the lithium from the material and
regenerate the sorbent material.
• Solvent extraction removes lithium ions from solution by contacting the solution
with an immiscible fluid (i.e., oil or kerosene) that contains a extractant that
attaches to lithium ions and brings them into the immiscible fluid. The lithium is
then stripped from the fluid with water or chemical treatment.
Regardless of the method, the product is a solution of LiCl which is concentrated and
processed into the final battery grade lithium compounds (LiOH∙H2O or Li2CO3) upon
the addition of electricity or chemical inputs.
It is recognized that direct lithium extraction will have higher upfront capital costs than
evaporation ponds. A technoeconomic analysis (Warren, 2021) of several brine projects
was published in 2021 evaluating several DLE projects. These projects had submitted a
Preliminary Economic Assessments (PEA) to Canadian stock exchanges or a Pre-Feasibility Studies (PFS) to Australian stock exchanges (public availability determined
by company boards of directors). The range of brine types and lithium extraction
processes reviewed herein the report suggest an OPEX near $4,000/mt lithium |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 57
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
carbonate equivalent (LCE) is achievable with modeled prices assumed to be
>$11,000/mt Li2CO3 and >$12,267/mt LiOH·H2O.
Evaporative technology is 22.5 m3 and 50 m3 per tonne Li2CO3 for Salar de Atacama and
Salar de Olaroz, respectively (Orocobre, 2021) (SQM, 2022). With this as a reference,
Livent, which has an active DLE production in the Salar del Hombre Muerto since 1996
does not report its freshwater usage. The overall water use of the entire facility is
reported as 71 m3 per tonne Li2CO3. (Livent, 2021) The freshwater requirements will be
assessed and could change depending on the different methods/materials and if water is
recovered during the DLE process. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 58
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
14. Adjacent Properties
There is no known lithium production in the Paradox Basin. The Cane Creek potash
mine is located 32 miles (51 kilometers) northwest of the LVL claim group. The mine
has been operating since 1965, initially as an underground room and pillar style mine.
It was converted to a solution mining operation in 1970. It currently produces 700 to
1000 tons per day of potash from the same sedimentary units that underly ABM’s
project. The author has not verified the information about the Cane Creek potash mine
and the mineralization reported at the mine is not necessarily indicative of
mineralization found on the property that is the subject of this report.
Anson Resources, an Australian company whose properties are primarily west of Moab,
Utah, has been active over the past few years in the Paradox Basin. Anson has re-entered four abandoned oil and gas wells and performed extensive testing of the wells’
brine recovery performance and methods for recovering the lithium and bromine from
the brines. According to their website, www.ansonresources.com , they have completed
a Definitive Feasibility Study (DFS) on September 8, 2022, and have identified
substantial indicated and inferred resources of Lithium Carbonate Equivalent (LCE) and
Bromine (Br2) as shown in Table 13.1.
Table 14.1 – Anson Resources announced resources from their DFS.
Category Brine (Mt) Li (ppm) Br (ppm) Contained LCE
(‘000t)
Contained
Br2
(‘000t)
Indicated 530 123 3,474 346 1,840
Inferred 1,038 125 3,308 692 3,434
The financial highlights of the DFS were announced as:
Table 14.2 – Financial highlights from the Anson Resources DFS.
Scenario Pre-Tax (USD) Post-Tax (USD)
NPV (7%) IRR NPV (7%) IRR
Base Case $1,306m 47% $922m 37%
These calculations do not take into account the potential replenishment of the brine
zones. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 59
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
In 2022, Anson Resources reported flow rates from Clastic Zone 31 on the order of 4000
BSWPD with lithium concentrations of 183 and 216 ppm (respectively); from one-hour
tests of Skyline Unit 2 and Long Canyon #2 wells; Anson also reported formation
porosities of 20% and tests indicating greater than 1500 mD permeabilities. Given the
tight nature of the zones, fracture porosity is strongly indicated. Both wells offset the
Southern Natural Gas Long Canyon #1. The Clastic 31 zone is present and mappable in
the ABM claims area and is located at shallower depths compared to Cane Creek and Big
Flat fields in Grand County to the north of Lisbon Valley where the highest known Li
Concentration of 500 ppm occurred from the Southern Natural Gas Long Canyon #1
well.
The location of ABM’s property relative to Anson’s and the Cane Creek Potash Mine is
shown in Figure 13.1.
The author of the report herein has been unable to verify the information in the Anson
Resources announcement and the mineralization is not necessarily indicative of the
mineralization on the property that is the subject of this technical report. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 60
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Figure 14.1 – The location of ABM’s Lisbon Lithium Project relative to Anson’s project
and the Cane Creek Potash Mine. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 61
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
15. Other Relevant Data and Information
There are no other relevant data and information that must be presented at this time. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 62
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
16. Interpretation and Conclusions
There is abundant evidence from oil, gas and potash wells drilled in the Paradox Basin
that indicates that there is a high probability of identifying and producing super
saturated brines from beneath the ABM property position. The geology of the area of
the ABM claims and of the Paradox Basin as a whole is quite complex although zones
that have been targeted and proven by Anson Resources exist and they are mappable
within and beyond the claims area. It is not likely that the same zones vary significantly
in terms of reservoir quality and thickness as evidenced by log analysis, however these
parameters have not been confirmed by actual testing by ABM. Given the extensive
folding in vicinity of the Lisbon Valley Dome formation, it is believed but not yet
confirmed that fracture porosity and permeability may be enhanced within the clastic
zones that underly the current claims position.
The only way to determine if the lithium enriched brines exist and can be economically
produced from the target zones is to drill exploration wells to produce and test brine
from the targeted zones. American Battery Materials intends to drill two
exploratory/appraisal wells within its claims position and is currently waiting permit
approval. The estimated spud dates for the two wells is expected to be 6-12 months for
this report’s effective date.
From the author’s review of the data, it is believed that there is a substantial indication
that lithium mineralization in brines occurs beneath the subject property. The existing
evidence is based on ABM’s well log analysis and the Hite (1978) study, as well as a
substantial number of other studies with lithium analyses from the Paradox Basin.
Hite’s report presents a geologically sound picture of the potential brine target. The
occurrence of the Superior Fed 88-21P well within the ABM claim block and the
recorded lithium value in the Hite study are strong incentives to pursue the exploration
effort. There is also substantial evidence that other valuable minerals besides lithium,
such as potassium, magnesium, calcium chloride, iodine, bromine and boron, may be
recoverable from the brines, as well.
The abandoned/existing oil well re-entry and brine testing program by Anson Resources
has resulted in that company’s Definitive Feasibility Study. The same stratigraphic units
have been shown to exist beneath the ABM land position and there is clear evidence
from Hite (1978) that the brines in the Paradox Formation contain high lithium
concentrations. These are considered to be evidence that the Lisbon Lithium project has
potential to become an economically viable undertaking. It is anticipated that the target
grades and tonnages for the Lisbon Lithium Project will be similar to those reported by |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 63
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Anson Resources, i.e., approximately 1 billion tonnes of brine at +100 ppm Li for a
potential 1 million tonnes of LCE. As in the case with Anson Resources and their
anticipated recovery of bromine, other elements and salts may well be economically
recoverable. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 64
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
17. Recommendations
It is recommended that ABM drill and complete two appraisal wells and perform
comprehensive testing on key horizons within the Paradox clastic members and
Leadville (Mississippian) Limestone. Individual formations should be evaluated for
overall reservoir quality, bottom hole pressures and flow rates from conventional
completions. Any extracted brines should be tested to determine lithium and other
important mineral concentrations and to prove the economic viability of a pilot and
permanent production program. The company has identified an appraisal and
development program that is proprietary. This information will be disclosed in an
advanced technical report after the appraisal wells are drilled and individual zones are
identified and fully evaluated. ABM has retained a third-party consulting firm to assist
with drilling, completion, and review of test results for the two appraisal wells. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 65
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
18. References
Byerly, P. Edward and Joesting, H. R., 1959, Investigations of the Lisbon Valley Area, Utah
and Colorado, USGS Professional Paper 316-C, p. 39-50.
Doelling, Hellmut H., 2002, Geologic map of the Moab and eastern part of the San Rafael
Desert 30’ X 60’ quadrangles, Grand and Emery Counties, Utah, and Mesa County,
Colorado: Utah Geol. Surv. Geologic Map 180.
Durgin, Dana, 2011, Technical Report, Geology and Mineral Resources, Green Energy
Project, Grand County, Utah, USA, 34 p.
Gwynn, Wally, 2008, Various Reports and Letters Regarding the White Cloud Property,
Grand County, Utah, Utah Geologic Survey files, 67 pages.
Hintze, L.F., 1974, Geologic Map of Utah: Brigham Young University Geology Studies—
Special Publication 2.
Hite, R.J., 1961, Potash-bearing Evaporite Cycles in the Salt Anticlines of the Paradox Basin,
Colorado and Utah: U. S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 424-D, p. D135-D138.
Hite, R.J., 1978, The Geology of the Lisbon Valley Potash Deposits, San Juan County, Utah:
U. S. Geological Survey Open File Report 78-148.
Hite, R.J., and Buchner, D.H., 1981, Stratigraphic correlations, facies concepts, and cyclicity
in Pennsylvanian rocks of the Paradox Basin, in Wiegand, D.L., ed., Geology of the Paradox
Basin: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists Guidebook, p. 147-159.
Hite, R.J., Anders, D.E., and Ging, T.G., 1984, Organic–rich source rocks of Pennsylvanian
age in the Paradox Basin of Utah and Colorado, in Woodward, Jane, Meissner, F.F., and
Clayton, J.L., eds., Hydrocarbon source rocks of the Greater Rocky Mountain Region: Rocky
Mountain Association of Geologists Guidebook, p. 255-274.
Hite, R.J., 1961, Potash-bearing evaporite cycles in the salt anticlines of the Paradox Basin,
Colorado, and Utah: U.S. Geological Survey Prof. Paper 424-D, p. D135-D138.
Kelley, V.C., 1958, Tectonics of the region of the Paradox Basin: Intermountain Assoc.
Petroleum Geologists Guidebook, 9th Annual Field Conference, p. 31-38. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 66
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
Livent, 2021, Sustainability Report: Retrieved from https://livent.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Livent_2021SustainabilityReport-English.pdf
Mattox, R. B. 1968, Salt Anticline Field Area, Paradox Basin, Colorado and Utah: Geol. Soc.
Of America Special Paper 88, pp. 5-16.
Mayhew, E.J., and Heylman, E.B., 1965, Concentrated Subsurface Bines in the Moab
Region, Utah: in Special Studies 13, Utah Geological and Mineralogical Survey, 30 p.
_____, 1966, Complex Salts and Brines of the Paradox Basin: in Jon L. Rau, Editor, Second
Symposium on Salt, Vol. One, The Northern Ohio Geological Society, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio,
p. 221-235.
Munk, LeeAnn and Chamberlain, C. Page, 2011, Final Technical Report: G10AP00056 –
Lithium Brine Resources: A Predictive Exploration Model: USGS Mineral Resources
External Research Program.
Munk, LeeAnn; Hynek, Scott A.; Bradley, Dwight C.; Boutt, David; Labay, Keith; and
Jochens, Hillary, 2016: Soc. of Econ. Geol., Reviews in Econ. Geol, V. 18, pp. 339-365.
Nuccio, V.F., and Condon, S.M., 1996, Burial and Thermal History of the Paradox Basin,
Utah and Colorado, and Petroleum Potential of the Middle Pennsylvanian Paradox
Formation: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2000-O, p. O1-O41.
Orocobre, 2021, Sustainability Report: Retrieved from
https://www.orocobre.com/wp/?mdocs-file=7259.
Pipiringos, G.N., and O’Sullivan, R.B., 1978, Principal unconformities in Triassic and
Jurassic rocks, Western Interior United States; a preliminary survey: U.S. Geological Survey
Professional Paper 1035-A, 29 p.
Rasmussen, L., and Rasmussen, D.L., 2009, Burial history analysis of the Pennsylvanian
petroleum system in the deep Paradox Basin Fold and Fault Belt, Colorado and Utah, in
Houston, W.S., Wray, L.L., and Moreland, P.G., editors, The Paradox Basin revisited—new
developments in petroleum systems and basin analysis: Rocky Mountain Association of
Geologists Special Publication, p. 24-94.
Rasmussen, D.L., 2014, Namakiers in Triassic and Permian formations in the Paradox Basin
(USA) with comparisons to modern examples in the Zagros Fold Belt, Iran, in MacLean, |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 67
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
J.S., Biek, R.F., and Huntoon, J.E., editors, Geology of Utah’s Far South: Utah Geological
Association Publication 43, p. 689-756.
Severy, C.L., Kline, M.H., and Allsman, P.T, 1949, Investigations of the Thompson
magnesium well: U.S. Bureau of Mines Rept. Inv. 4496.
Spanjurs, Raymond P., 2015, Inferred Resource Estimate of Lithium, Clayton Valley
South Project, Clayton Valley, Esmeralda County, Nevada, USA: Technical Report for NI
43-101, Prepared on Behalf of Pure Energy Minerals Ltd.
SQM, 2022, Sustainability report: Retrieved from
https://www.sqmlithium.com/en/nosotros/producion-sustentable/.
Stewart, J.H., Poole, F.G., and Wilson, R.F., 1972, Stratigraphy and origin of the Triassic
Moenkopi Formation and related strata in the Colorado Plateau region: U.S. Geological
Survey Prof. Paper 691, 195 p.
Tweto, Ogden, 1987, Rock units of the Precambrian basement in Colorado: U.S.Geological
Survey Prof. Paper 1321-A, 54 p.
Warren, I., 2021, Techno-economic analysis of lithium extraction from geothermal brines,
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden CO: NREL/TP-5700-79178.Wengerd, S.A.,
and Metheny, M.L., 1958, Pennsylvanian System of Four Corners region: Am. Assoc.
Petroleum Geologists Bull., v. 42, p. 2048-2106. |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 68
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
19. Certificate of the Author
I, Bradley C. Peek, MSc., CPG do hereby certify that:
1. I am currently employed as a Consulting Geologist at 438 Stagecoach Lane, NewCastle,
Colorado 81647, USA
2. This certificate applies to the Technical Report titled “ABM Lisbon Lithium Project, San
Juan County, Utah, USA” with the effective date July 6, 2023 (the “Technical Report”).
3. I graduated in 1970 from the University of Nebraska with a Bachelor of Science degree
in Geology and in 1975 from the University of Alaska with a Master of Science degree in
Geology.
4. I am a member in good standing with the Society of Economic Geologists and the
American Institute of Professional Geologists (Certified Professional Geologist #11299).
5. I have continuously practiced my profession for 52 years in the areas of mineral
exploration and geology. I have explored copper, lead, zinc, silver and gold in 10 states
of the USA and 8 foreign countries. I managed a waterflood oilfield in Oklahoma in the
1980s. I have spent most of 2016 through 2023 exploring for lithium deposits in the
USA, including in the Clayton Valley, Nevada and in the Paradox Basin of Utah.
6. I visited the American Battery Materials Lisbon Lithium Project area most recently on
May 7, 2023, and on several occasion prior to that date, having lived in Moab, UT from
2006 to 2010 and consulted for the Lisbon Valley Copper Mine in 2007.
7. I wrote the report entitled “ABM Lisbon Lithium Project, San Juan County, Utah, USA”
and take full responsibility for all sections of the report, including the conclusions
reached and the recommendations made.
8. I am independent of American Battery Materials Inc. and hold no stock in the
company.
9. I have had no prior involvement with the property that is the subject of the Technical
Report Summary.
10. I have read the definition of “Qualified Person” set out in 17 CFR 229.1300 and certify
that by reason of my education, professional affiliation, and past relevant work
experience, I fulfill the requirement to be an independent qualified person for the
purposes of this Technical Report Summary.
11. I have read the SME Guide for Reporting Exploration Information, Mineral Resources
and Mineral Reserves and believe the report has been prepared in compliance with the
Guide.
Bradley C. Peek, CPG
438 Stage Coach Lane Dated: July 6, 2023
New Castle, Colorado 81647, USA |
| American Battery Materials, Inc. Lisbon Valley Lithium
Technical Report Summary San Juan County, Utah
Page 69
Lisbon Valley Lithium Project Prepared for
20. Consent of Competent Person
I, Bradley C. Peek, consent to the disclosure of the information in the Technical Report
Summary, ABM Lisbon Lithium Project, San Juan County, Utah, USA that is dated July
6, 2023 and confirm that the information for which I am responsible is based on, and
fairly and accurately reflects, in the form and context in which it appears, the
information in my supporting documentation relating to the exploration information.
Dated this _6th _ Day of July 2023
American Institute of Professional Geologists, CPG # 11299
Bradley C. Peek |
Exhibit 99.1
AMERICAN BATTERY
MATERIALS ACQUIRES SUBSTANTIAL MINING CLAIMS TO INCREASE DOMESTIC PRODUCTION OF LITHIUM
Company Releases Updated Technical Report
Detailing Claim Expansion to 14,300 Acres
GREENWICH, Conn., July 24, 2023 -- American
Battery Materials, Inc. (OTC Pink: BLTH) (“ABM”, the “Company”), an environmentally responsible
minerals exploration and development company focused on direct lithium extraction (DLE) and other critical minerals for the global energy
transition, today announced that it has acquired and staked additional lithium mining claims adjacent to its Lisbon Valley Project, located
in San Juan County, Utah.
The newly acquired mining claims expand ABM’s
strategic land position to approximately 14,300 acres, a seven-fold increase from its current position of 2,000 acres. The Company’s
actions follow the release of a new Technical Report Summary focused on ABM’s Lisbon Valley Project, highlighting the scope
of the opportunity and progress toward direct lithium extraction.
“The results of our latest Technical Report
Summary validated our belief that there are substantial lithium deposits in brine to be extracted from the Lisbon Valley,” said
Sebastian Lux, Co-Chief Executive Officer of ABM. “Expanding access to lithium deposits further diversifies our portfolio and represents
a critical step in the pursuit of our mission to become a leader in the commercial production of lithium in the U.S. Our continued investment
and progress on our strategic roadmap reflect our commitment to creating shareholder value while providing domestic support for our country’s
initiative for a green future.”
The new claims have been registered with the Bureau
of Land Management. ABM now holds a total of 743 placer claims over 14,320 acres, comprised of (i) the 102 original claims held by ABM;
and, (ii) the 641 new claims. ABM will continue to seek additional opportunities to increase its claims, properties, and projects.
Proposed Business Combination
On June 2, 2023, ABM and Seaport Global Acquisition
II Corp. (NASDAQ: SGII) (“SGII”), a publicly-listed special purpose acquisition company, announced the signing of a definitive
merger agreement for a business combination (the “Proposed Business Combination”) that will result in ABM becoming a wholly-owned
subsidiary of SGII. The combined company is expected to be renamed “American Battery Materials Holdings”, and its common stock
and warrants are expected to be listed on the Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”).
About American Battery Materials, Inc.
American Battery Materials, Inc., (OTC Pink:
BLTH), is a U.S.-based environmentally responsible critical minerals exploration and development company focused on Direct Lithium Extraction
(DLE) as well as other minerals for refining, processing, and distribution to support the country’s urgent critical minerals
need to bolster long-term energy transition and the electrification of the US domestic and global economy. For more information,
visit www.americanbatterymaterials.com. The information contained on, or that may be accessed through, this website is not
incorporated by reference into, and is not a part of, this communication.
To receive American Battery Materials, Inc. company
updates via email, visit the Contact page of our web site, www.americanbatterymaterials.com/contact.
About Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp.
Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp. is a blank
check company formed for the purpose of effecting a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization
or similar business combination with one or more businesses. Although SGII’s efforts to identify a prospective business combination
opportunity will not be limited to a particular industry, it intends to focus on companies undergoing transformational, transitional,
or reorganizational business strategies.
Additional Information about the Proposed Business
Combination and Where to Find It
In connection with the Proposed Business Combination,
SGII intends to file a preliminary and definitive proxy statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). SGII’s
stockholders and other interested persons are advised to read, when available, the registration statement on Form S-4, which will include
a proxy statement/prospectus of SGII (“the S-4”), as well as other documents filed with the SEC in connection with the Proposed
Business Combination, as these materials will contain important information about ABM, SGII and the Proposed Business Combination. When
available, the S-4 will be mailed to stockholders of SGII as of a record date to be established for voting on, among other things, the
Proposed Business Combination. Stockholders will also be able to obtain copies of the S-4 and other documents filed with the SEC that
will be incorporated by reference therein, without charge, once available, at the SEC's website at www.sec.gov. The information
contained on, or that may be accessed through, the websites referenced in this communication is not incorporated by reference into, and
is not a part of, this communication.
Participants in Solicitation
SGII and its respective directors and executive
officers may be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies from SGII’s stockholders in connection with the Proposed Business
Combination. SGII’s and ABM’s stockholders and other interested persons may obtain, without charge, more detailed information
regarding the directors and officers of SGII and ABM in SGII's Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 4, 2023 and ABM’s
Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC on April 21, 2023. Information regarding the persons who may, under SEC rules, be deemed
participants in the solicitation of proxies to SGII stockholders in connection with the Proposed Business Combination will be set forth
in the proxy statement for the Proposed Business Combination when available. Additional information regarding the interests of participants
in the solicitation of proxies in connection with the Proposed Business Combination will be included in the Form S-4 that SGII intends
to file with the SEC.
Forward Looking Statements
This press release includes certain statements
that are not historical facts but are forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor provisions under the United States Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements generally are accompanied by words such as "believe," "may,"
"will," "estimate," "continue," "anticipate," "intend," "expect," "should,"
"would," "plan," "predict," "potential," "seem," "seek," "future,"
"outlook," and similar expressions that predict or indicate future events or trends or that are not statements of historical
matters. All statements, other than statements of present or historical fact included in this communication, regarding SGII’s Proposed
Business Combination with ABM, SGII's ability to consummate the transaction, the benefits of the transaction and the combined company's
future financial performance, as well as the combined company's strategy, future operations, estimated financial position, estimated revenues
and losses, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. These statements are based
on various assumptions, whether or not identified in this communication, and on the current expectations of the respective management
of SGII and ABM and are not predictions of actual performance. These forward-looking statements are provided for illustrative purposes
only and are not intended to serve as, and must not be relied on as, a guarantee, an assurance, a prediction or a definitive statement
of fact or probability. Actual events and circumstances are difficult or impossible to predict and will differ from assumptions. Many
actual events and circumstances are beyond the control of SGII or ABM. Potential risks and uncertainties that could cause the actual results
to differ materially from those expressed or implied by forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, changes in domestic
and foreign business, market, financial, political and legal conditions; the inability of the parties to successfully or timely consummate
the business combination, including the risk that any regulatory approvals are not obtained, are delayed or are subject to unanticipated
conditions that could adversely affect the combined company or the expected benefits of the business combination or that the approval
of the stockholders of SGII or ABM is not obtained; failure to realize the anticipated benefits of business combination; risk relating
to the uncertainty of the projected financial information with respect to ABM; the amount of redemption requests made by SGII's stockholders;
the overall level of consumer demand for lithium; general economic conditions and other factors affecting; disruption and volatility in
the global currency, capital, and credit markets; ABM's ability to implement its business and growth strategy; changes in governmental
regulation, ABM's exposure to litigation claims and other loss contingencies; disruptions and other impacts to ABM’s business, as
a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and government actions and restrictive measures implemented in response, and as a result of the proposed
transaction; ABM's ability to comply with environmental regulations; competitive pressures from many sources, including those, having
more experience and better financing; changes in technology that adversely affect demand for lithium compounds; the impact that global
climate change trends may have on ABM and its potential mining operations; any breaches of, or interruptions in, SGII's or ABM’s
information systems; fluctuations in the price, availability and quality of electricity and other raw materials and contracted products
as well as foreign currency fluctuations; changes in tax laws and liabilities, tariffs, legal, regulatory, political and economic risks.
More information on potential factors that
could affect SGII’s or ABM's financial results is included from time to time in SGII's and ABM’s public reports filed
with the SEC, including their Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K as well
as the S-4 that SGII plans to file with the SEC in connection with SGII’s solicitation of proxies for the meeting of
stockholders to be held to approve, among other things, the proposed business combination. If any of these risks materialize or
SGII's or ABM's assumptions prove incorrect, actual results could differ materially from the results implied by these
forward-looking statements. There may be additional risks that neither SGII nor ABM presently know, or that SGII and ABM currently
believe are immaterial, that could also cause actual results to differ from those contained in the forward-looking statements. In
addition, forward-looking statements reflect SGII's and ABM's expectations, plans or forecasts of future events and views as of the
date of this communication. SGII and ABM anticipate that subsequent events and developments will cause their assessments to change.
However, while SGII and ABM may elect to update these forward-looking statements at some point in the future, SGII and ABM
specifically disclaim any obligation to do so, except as required by law. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon
as representing SGII's or ABM's assessments as of any date subsequent to the date of this communication. Accordingly, undue reliance
should not be placed upon the forward-looking statements.
No Offer or Solicitation
This communication shall neither constitute an
offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities, nor shall there be any sale of securities in any jurisdiction in
which the offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful prior to the registration or qualification under the securities laws of any such
jurisdiction. This communication does not constitute a solicitation of a proxy, consent or authorization with respect to any securities
or in respect of the Proposed Business Combination. No offering of securities shall be made except by means of a prospectus meeting the
requirements of Section 10 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended from time-to-time, or an exemption therefrom.
Investor Relations Contacts:
American Battery Materials, Inc.
Investor Relations
Email: ir@americanbatterymaterials.com
Tel: (800) 998-7962
or
MZ Group
Michael Kim
(737) 289-0835
ABM@mzgroup.us
Exhibit 99.2
| INVESTOR PRESENTATION | July 2023 | v6.0.0
Extracting American Lithium
OTC: BLTH |
| Safe Harbor
The statements contained in this presentation that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Words
such as “may”, “will”, “could”, “should”, “expect”, “plan”, “project”, “intend”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “predict”, “potential”, “pursuant,” “target”, “continue”, and similar
expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements. Statements herein that are not historical statements, including statements regarding ABM’s plans,
objectives, opportunities, future financial performance and operating results and any other statements regarding ABM’s future expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, financial
conditions, assumptions or future events or performance (including, without limitation, the proposed business combination with Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp. and ABM’s
ability to consummate the transaction, the benefits of the transaction and the combined company’s future financial performance) that are not historical facts, are forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to numerous risks, uncertainties, and
assumptions, many of which are beyond ABM’s control, and which could cause actual results to differ materially from the results expressed or implied by these statements.
These statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict, and include, without limitation, results of
litigation, settlements and investigations; actions by third parties, including governmental agencies; volatility in customer spending; global economic conditions; ability to hire and
retain personnel; loss of, or reduction in business with, key customers; difficulty with growth and integration of acquisitions; product liability; cybersecurity risk; anti-takeover
measures in our charter documents; and, the uncertainties created by the ongoing impact of COVID-19. These and other important risk factors are described more fully in our
reports and other documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“the SEC”), including under (i) “Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors”, in our Annual Report on Form 10-
K for the year-ending December 31, 2022 filed with the SEC on April 21, 2023; and, (ii) subsequent filings. Undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking
statements herein, which are based on information available to us on the date hereof. Except as otherwise required by applicable law, we undertake no obligation to publicly
update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether because of new information, future events, or otherwise.
This presentation contains additional trade names, trademarks, and service marks of others, which are the property of their respective owners. ABM does not intend its use or
display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks, or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement, or sponsorship by, those other companies.
© 2023 American Battery Materials, Inc.
OTC: BLTH | 2 |
| Investment Highlights
Market opportunity
Comparable Differentiation
Financial Highlights
Management Team
Global Opportunity
OTC: BLTH | 3
A U.S.A. asset on 14,260 acres of super-saturated 340+ ppm Lithium brine in
Utah’s mineral rich Paradox Basin using an environmentally friendly direct lithium
extraction process (DLE)
Defining a faster time to market with assets located in state & federal mining
zoned districts that includes access to an existing energy and logistical
Infrastructure.
Positioned with a jurisdictional and extraction process advantage that allows
access to both the U.S critical mineral supply chain as well as all other global
markets.
An underleveraged company that operates in an industry with low extraction
costs and capital expenditures
Leadership team of experienced natural resource extraction, geological
engineering and global commodity logistics executives and operators, with a
track record of de-risking through strategic & government partnerships. |
| An environmentally responsible minerals
exploration and development company
• Focused on direct lithium extraction (DLE) and other minerals
critical to the global energy transition
• Spearheading the effort to domestically support the U.S.’s urgent
need for critical minerals
Corporate Overview
OTC: BLTH | 4
743 mineral rights on 14,260
acres with 8 wells and
existing infrastructure in Utah
Technical reports indicate
assets are mineral rich with
supersaturated lithium brines
Li
DLE reduces the industry’s
environmental footprint
Expert team with 100+ years
of oil, gas & mineral
extraction and drilling
experience |
| Lithium Demand is Far Outpacing Supply
Global Lithium Supply & Demand1
Kilotons lithium carbonate equivalent
1Mined production volume. Forecasted potential production accounts for historical utilization rates as a result of external disruptions and economic curtailments (7%) – modeled at 93% of available capacity. Production includes
volumes which may not have been refined, including stockpiled direct shipping ore and spodumene concentrate.
Source: MineSpans; McKinsey lithium demand model
Despite an abundance of
rich domestic sources,
the US is almost
entirely dependent on
foreign sources of
lithium.
OTC: BLTH | 5
2025
0
2015 2020 2030
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
Demand, high case
Demand, base case
Unannounced supply
Secondary supply
Confirmed supply
Additional
early-stage supply
Transformation to a clean
energy economy requires
U.S. lithium
independence.
What the data shows is that we are
at just the beginning of a
generational challenge, not one
that’s going to be solved in the
2020s.”
- Simon Moores, CEO, Benchmark |
| Global Lithium Market Pricing
Lithium Prices Continue To Rise
Price of battery-grade lithium carbonate per metric ton
1Prices for 2010-2021 are annual averages from the U.S. Geological Survey. Prices for 2022 is from S&P Global Commodity Insights on
May 4,2022.
Chart: Canary Media | Source: U.S. Geological Survey
Lithium Carbonate DDP China Yuan/mt spot
price in January 2023 up nearly 550% from
March 2021. $41,727 (July 2023) 1,2
Battery-grade lithium prices continue to rise
driven by strong electric vehicle (EV) demand
Governments are phasing out internal
combustion engines in favor of EVs, resulting in
increased demand for metals needed to
produce EV batteries
Even with increased lithium carbonate
production, supply is expected to fall woefully
short of demand in coming years
Global lithium pricing expected to normalize
after a period of fluctuating market speculation,
however, demand is expected to grossly
outstrip supply
USD
OTC: BLTH | 6 1 Fastmarkets, Battery material price data 2 Tradingeconomics.com price data
As the world transitions to a clean energy economy, global demand
for these critical minerals is set to skyrocket by 400-600 percent
over the next several decades…
…and, for minerals such as lithium and graphite used in electric
vehicle (EV) batteries, demand will increase as much as 4,000
percent.”
– Tesla Chairwoman Robyn Denholm
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2023 |
| 3. U.S.
4. Finland
5. Norway
6. Germany
7. South Korea
8. Sweden
9. Japan
10. Australia
11. France
12. U.K.
13. Czechia
14. Poland
15. Hungary
1. China
2. Canada
The U.S. Domestic Lithium Supply Crisis
BNEF 2022 global lithium-ion battery supply chain ranking
Chart: BloombergNEF.
The U.S. is 2nd in global battery demand, but only 6th
in raw materials necessary to provide the supply
American dependency
on foreign lithium has
reached crisis levels
The U.S. currently
produces less than 5%
of the global lithium
supply
The U.S. government has
mandated that it extracts
itself from foreign supply
dependency
No U.S. company is at
production level using
ESG friendly direct lithium
extraction methods
New EV rebates require
minimum U.S. sourced
lithium quantities to be
used in the manufacturing
of batteries
CA, NY, and VA are
the first states to
require that all new
cars sold in 2035 be
electric vehicles
OTC: BLTH | 7
is strongly positioned to meet the required
U.S. Li production with proven mineral rich assets in
southern Utah
6
9
18
21
17
21
13
2
24
26
23
24
26
1
3
4
15
10
6
2
9
3
15
10
15
10
5
6
1
8
16
2
1
4
10
3
8
9
5
7
11
15
13
17
6
5
1
3
7
6
2
12
13
10
8
11
16
14
9
4
2
11
7
2
5
8
8
11
5
4
18
15
20
1
10
Country
(Overall Ranking)
Raw
Materials
Battery
Manufacturing ESG
Industry,
Innovation &
Infrastructure
Downstream
Demand |
| Recent Industry Transactions
Mergers & Acquisitions
• Lithium Americas (LAC) acquires
100% of Millennial Lithium for
$482MM
• SZZL SPAC merges with
European Lithium. $750MM to the
equity to the asset.
Date
• January 2022
• October 2022
Off-Take transactions
• European Lithium / Critical
Minerals & BMW. $15MM
• Piedmont Lithium & Tesla
Tons
• 50,000 TPA
• 125,000 tons
(SC6)
Financings
• LG Chem invests in Piedmont
Lithium (PLL).
• GM makes $600mm equity
investment in Lithium Americas.
• Anson Resources issues
US $35mm common stock
• Lilac Solutions raises $150mm
valuation – BMW
Valuation
• $1.2B
• $3B
• US $250MM
• $450MM
pre-$
US DOE & DOD grants
• Lilac Solutions
• Piedmont Lithium
• Albermarle
Amount
• $50MM
• $141.7MM
• $150MM
OTC: BLTH | 8
Financing
Off-Take Transactions
Mergers & Acquisitions
US DOE & DOD grants
Date
Tons
Valuations
Amount
Volume and Scale of growth opportunity demonstrated by recent industry moves |
| Growth & Development Strategy
Acquisition
Geo/Entry study
Permitting
Site Drill
SK-1300 report.
Extraction Pilot
Production
PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 PHASE 5
2023
Launching project in the early stages
of a global lithium super cycle
forecasted to expand significantly for
20+ years
Partner with leading brine extraction
(DLE) technologies that are fastest
into production, most efficient, cost
effective and can deliver at the
highest extraction rates
Become a vertically integrated,
leading service provider for the critical
mineral extraction process for owners
Continue the acquisition, exploration
and extraction of significant US lithium
resources in historically proven
territories.
OTC: BLTH | 9 |
| Lisbon Valley, Utah
DLE Project
Mining process currently accounts for roughly half the carbon footprint
of a battery cell and the best way to reduce the carbon footprint of
minerals is to stop shipping them across 9,000 kilometers of ocean
before refining them.”
-Tesla Chairwoman Robyn Denholm
OTC: BLTH | 10 |
| Flagship Lithium DLE Project
DLE mitigates
environmental
concerns relating to
lithium extraction
Technical reports show
Paradox Basin
supersaturated brines of
500 ppm Li (2661 ppm
LCE)
Li
Developed
infrastructure,
including high voltage
electrical, roads and
access to rail lines
Located in Eastern Utah consisting
of 743 mineral rights across
14,260 Acres of Federal land, including
8 existing re-entry well candidates
Historical data shows supersaturated
brine (40% minerals, 60% water) with
reported Lithium values ranging from
81 to 500ppm and estimated flows
2,000-4,000 barrels of daily
production brine per well
OTC: BLTH | 11
Lisbon Valley, Utah
ABM’s property position consists of
743 placer mining claims staked in
one contiguous group on U.S.
Government lands administered by
the U.S. Bureau of Land Management
(BLM) |
| Project
location
The Uniquely-Positioned Paradox Basin
With over 300+ climate friendly days and a
fully developed infrastructure, the Paradox
Basin is one of the most attractive places
in the U.S. for a successful and efficient
extraction process.
25 miles southwest of Moab
Not adjacent to any national parks or recreational sites
Area is a mix of federal, state and private lands
High desert climate with year-round access
Historically rich industrial and natural resource
extraction area
OTC: BLTH | 12 |
| Lisbon Assets Technical Report
The brines were not thought to be important until 1962, when
Southern Natural Gas intersected the brine zone with a very
substantial flow of brines under tremendous pressure.
There is abundant evidence from oil and gas and potash wells
drilled in the Paradox Basin that indicate that there is a high
probability of intersecting super saturated brines.
It is believed that there is a substantial indication that lithium
mineralization in brines occurs beneath the subject property.
There is also substantial evidence that other valuable minerals
besides lithium, such as potassium, magnesium, calcium chloride,
bromine and boron, may be recoverable from the brines, as well.
– Prepared by Peek Consulting, Inc.
July 6, 2023
Compound/Element % ppm
Na2O 9.24 92,400
K2O 2.91 29,100
Li2O 0.073 730
CaO 1.30 13,000
MgO 7.44 74,400
CO2 0.056 560
SO3 0.021 210
B2O3 0.84 8,400
P2O5 0.0009 9
Cl 19.44 194,400
Br 0.32 3,200
I 0.003 30
Specific Gravity 60/60°F = 1.261
pH = 5.5
Target compounds/minerals
OTC: BLTH | 13 |
| Geotech Engineering & The Lisbon Valley
ABM has retained RESPEC Company LLC as its geotech, engineering and
resource management partner to assist in the exploration and development
of its Lisbon Valley properties.
RESPEC provides services to the energy industries from grassroots
exploration to operating mine settings.
Project focus is directed on services, drill program design, full procurement
drilling and well completion to various brine and disposal projects.
With more than 50 years of experience in service to the extraction, mining
and oil and gas market worldwide, RESPEC has performed extensive
geological and engineering work in the Paradox Basin stratigraphy.
OTC: BLTH | 14 |
| Positioned as a Lower Risk Industry Profile
Infrastructure
Geology
Permitting
Time to Market
Market Demand
OTC: BLTH | 15
• Fully developed infrastructure for
logistical and energy needs
• USGS open file report data confirm brines
of 340ppm+ Lithium
• Utah based project meets both U.S. critical
mineral and Global requirements
• Access to both State and Federal
lands in a mining zone 60+ miles
from National parks
• DLE Brine with smaller footprint,
capex and permitting requirements
1. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/lithium-marketUS
• Electrical, Gas, Solar and
Wind power available
• Paradox Basin is a proven
Li geological resource
• US Li CAGR is 11.9%1
through 2030
• Utah is a historically pro-mining
state that fully supports
extraction of natural resources
• ABM permitting process has
started with the completion of
archeological studies |
| Direct Li Extraction
& the American
Environment
DLE offers significant promise of increasing supply, reducing the industry’s
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) footprint, and lowering costs, with
already announced capacity contributing to around 10 percent of the 2030 lithium
supply, as well as to other less advanced projects in the pipeline.”
– McKinsey & Company
OTC: BLTH | 16 |
| DLE vs. Traditional Lithium Mining
American dependency on foreign lithium has reached crisis levels.
DLE addresses this critical need without destroying the earth.
ABM will deploy DLE in selective brine extraction to
provide a cost-effective, efficient, faster-to-production,
and significantly more environmentally friendly method
versus traditional mining practices.
Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE)
Traditional Lithium mining faces major hurdles with important
considerations of environmental damage, regulatory issues,
controversial mining practices and territorial litigation.
The environmental toll has often been overlooked in part
because there is a race underway among the United
States, China, Europe and other major powers.”
– NYTimes
Underground brine
Conventional evaporation ponds
(~2 years)
ABM Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE)
(~2 h)
Li2CO3
Mg/Ca
removal
Boron
removal LiCl
OTC: BLTH | 17
ESG |
| The Engineering Behind DLE
Targeting Highly Efficient Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) Technology
ABM is
evaluating
leading DLE
technology
companies
• The most technologically advanced approach
for DLE from brines is adsorption of lithium
using inorganic sorbents
• Extraction of lithium with inorganic molecular
sieve ion-exchange sorbents appears to offer
one of the most immediate pathways for
the development of economic lithium
extraction
Competitive
advantages of
the
technology
• Reduced impurities – by over 99%
• Rapid and high recovery
• Low energy consumption
• No evaporation
• Lower water consumption
• Not weather dependent
• Smaller environmental footprint
Extraction of brine
Re-injection of
lithium deprived
brine
Li Salts
Saline Aquifer
Produced Brine Components
Direct Lithium
Extraction
Lithium
Injection
well
Production
well
x x
L
i
F
e
S
i
F
e
N
a
M
g
N
a
M
g
N
a
C
a
S
i
C
a
L
i
M
g
S
i C
a
F
e
L
i
L
i
L
i
L
i
F
e
N
a
M
g
C
a
S
i
Lithium deprived spent brine
Pumping of native brine
Saline Aquifer
Non-evaporitic
Extractive
Method X
Solar Panel
OTC: BLTH | 18 |
| DLE lowers
greenhouse gas
emissions, leaving a
substantially lower carbon
footprint than traditional
extraction methods
DLE reduces the
land requirements
by over 97% when
compared to evaporation
and hard-rock projects
DLE reduces waste
production with no
tailings, ponds or open
pits, and returns 100%
of the brine brought
to the surface to similar depths
in a closed loop system
DLE extracts brackish
water far below the
water table and with
salinity levels that
significantly exceed any
acceptable levels for
human or animal consumption
DLE reduces the
overall amount of time
needed for the lithium
extraction process
DLE removes the
need for large fresh
water sources
Environmental & Economic Advantages of DLE
Closed Loop DLE
Production from geothermal deposits could be the holy grail of sustainable
lithium production, providing both clean geothermal energy and a source of
lithium. Fastmarkets estimates put 168 ktpa LCE of geothermal capacity in
the pipeline, with potential for a further 280 ktpa LCE from one project
alone.”
– Fastmarkets
OTC: BLTH | 19 |
| Accelerated Time to Market with DLE
Potential aggregate delay
Extraction process
Infrastructure buildout
Permit acquisition process
Land Acquisition
8-15
7-12
6-9
3-4
Crustal
Project
Spod-umene
Project
Brine
Project
This significant advantage in
positioning will allow ABM to select the
very best of developing technology in
brine extraction, leading to cost and
production efficiencies.
This ultimately allows ABM to
shorten its time to market over other
resource-heavy mining projects,
pointing to an anticipated shorter
return on investment.
ABM is positioned far
ahead of new and
developing lithium
projects, including area
selection, permitting
and partner selection.
ABM has the significant
advantage of being one
of the first to market
with a U.S. brine that is
available for DLE brine
extraction pilot programs.
DLE extraction methods
have successfully
been utilized in other
industries such as
Water Treatment and Oil
Waste for decades.
OTC: BLTH | 20
Est. Project Length in Years |
| Management
& Advisory
Team
Sebastian Lux
Co-CEO | MBA, MSAS
25 years in business dev. with multinational
companies; Co-founded Genuine Origin, a
division of Volcafe & ED&F Man; Created
multiple disruptive international logistic
commodity supply chains.
Agustin Cabo
Director of Finance | CFA, MBA
Chartered Financial Analyst with 13 years of
experience in finance across equity research,
investment management, corporate finance
and accounting.
Scott Avanzino
COO | MS Geology
Oil and gas development and marine
construction expert with 25 years of
experience in exploration geology,
wellsite operations, marine logistics and
operations.
Brad Peek
Geologist | MS Geology |Qualified
Person
35 years experience in project management,
mineral exploration and in computer
applications in mineral exploration and mining
and water engineering - qualified person.
Ryan Zarkesh
DLE Chemist | PhD inorganic
Chemistry
20 years expert in inorganic and DLE
process chemistry. Previously Co-Founder
and Dir. of Chemistry of of Lilac Solutions
where he developed materials and
manufacturing processes for the lithium
mining industry.
OTC: BLTH | 21
David Graber
Co-CEO | Chairman | MBA
Managing Principal of Cobrador Capital,
LLC,. He was Managing Director, Invest.
Banking at New Century Capital Partners
and National Securities Corporation, Sr. VP
and Director at Donaldson, Lufkin &
Jenrette and Credit Suisse First Boston |
| Board
of Directors
Adam Lipson
MD Neuroscience
Managing partner as a neurosurgeon at
IGEA Brain, Spine & Orthopedics in New
York City and New Jersey. He has over a
decade of experience as a private investor
in over 20 biotechnology and biomedical
device companies
Justin Vorwerk
MBA, AB Economics
Has held positions as a Managing Director
in Investment Banking with Goldman Sachs,
The Royal Bank of Scotland, Deutsche
Bank Securities, as well as Donaldson,
Lufkin & Jenrette, and Credit Suisse.
FINRA Series 7,63,24
Andrew Suckling
MA
Non
-Executive Chairman of Cadence
Minerals the Non
-Executive Director of
Macarthur Minerals and a board member of
the privately held company, IronMan Ltd.
Dylan Glenn
Senior Director At Eldridge Partners. former
Chairman of Guggenheim KBBO Dubai.
Special Assistant to President George W.
Bush on economic policy. Former Director
Renewable Energy Group now a division of
Chevron
David Graber
MBA
Managing Principal of Cobrador Capital,
LLC,. He was Managing Director, Invest.
Banking at New Century Capital Partners
and National Securities Corporation, Sr. VP
and Director at Donaldson, Lufkin &
Jenrette and Credit Suisse First Boston
Jared Levinthal
J.D.
Attorney, Partner with Lightfoot Franklin &
White, PLLC in Houston, Texas. Mr.
Levinthal is a graduate of the University of
Texas School of Law and is a graduate of
Tulane University.
OTC: BLTH | 22
Sebastian Lux
MBA, MSAS, AB Economics
25 years in business dev. with multinational
companies; Co
-founded Genuine Origin, a
division of Volcafe & ED&F Man; Created
multiple disruptive international logistic
commodity supply chains. |
| Upcoming Milestones for Corporate Actions
Recent Key
Accomplishments
Acquired the rights to 743 federal
mining claims in the Lisbon Valley
of Utah.
Completed SK1300 compliant
technical report.
Signed agreement to merge with
Seaport Global Acquisition II Corp.
(NASDAQ: SGII).
Eliminated over $11MM of debt
through note conversions.
Completed name and symbol
change.
Milestones for Next
6-Months
Up-list to OTC QB.
Uplist to NASDAQ through
closing of merger with SGII.
Begin application process for
federal loan programs.
Pursue off-take partner.
Complete drill permits for
exploration wells.
Actively pursue additional land &
project acquisitions.
Milestones Beyond Next
6-Months
Meet exploratory well drilling
objectives.
Complete 43-101/SK-1300.
Begin permitting process for phase
one facility.
Finalize drill programs and initiate
extraction operations.
Select DLE extraction partner with
potential for a Joint Venture.
OTC: BLTH | 23 |
| OTC: BLTH | 24
OTC: BLTH (July 21, 2023)
Share Price $0.014
Market Cap $46.226M
Avg. Volume (3 month avg.) 1.0M
Cash Balance $650,000
Debt $500,000
Shares: Issued & Outstanding 3,301,910,170
Unexercised Warrants (85%* owned by insiders) 159,000,000
Options Granted 0
Fully Diluted 3,687,483,646
Insider & Key Stakeholder Ownership 65%
Financial &
Share
Structure |
| Investment Highlights
Market opportunity
Comparable Differentiation
Financial Highlights
Management Team
Global Opportunity
OTC: BLTH | 25
A U.S.A. asset on 14,260 acres of super-saturated 340+ ppm Lithium brine in
Utah’s mineral rich Paradox Basin using an environmentally friendly direct lithium
extraction process (DLE)
Defining a faster time to market with assets located in state & federal mining
zoned districts that includes access to an existing energy and logistical
Infrastructure.
Positioned with a jurisdictional and extraction process advantage that allows
access to both the U.S critical mineral supply chain as well as all other global
markets.
An underleveraged company that operates in an industry with low extraction
costs and capital expenditures
Leadership team of experienced natural resource extraction, geological
engineering and global commodity logistics executives and operators, with a
track record of de-risking through strategic & government partnerships. |
| OTC: BLTH | 26
500 West Putnam Avenue | Suite 400
Greenwich, CT 06831| USA
Company
+1-800-998-7962
IR@AmericanBatteryMaterials.com
Investor Relations
Brooks Hamilton
MZ North America
+1-949-546-6326
ABM@mzgroup.us
americanbatterymaterials.com |
BoxScore Brands (PK) (USOTC:BOXS)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jun 2024 to Jul 2024
BoxScore Brands (PK) (USOTC:BOXS)
Historical Stock Chart
From Jul 2023 to Jul 2024