Total Graphite appoints Lycopodium to update Montepuez feasibility study
Original announcement by proactiveinvestors on
- Company
- Total Graphite PLC
- Ticker
- TGR
- Exchange
- Unavailable
- Region
- Mozambique
- Primary commodity
- Graphite
- Secondary commodities
- None reported
- Document categories
- Resource update, Other
- Extracted
- 2026-09-12 08:40:34 UTC
Analysis by Minestarters Atlas
Minestarters Atlas analysis
Summary
Total Graphite has appointed Lycopodium to update the feasibility study for its Montepuez graphite project in Mozambique. The project features a modular development approach and holds a mineral resource of 110.5 million tonnes at 8.2% total graphitic carbon.
Reasoning: The appointment of a specialist consultant to update a feasibility study is a key de-risking step toward construction and project financing.
Positive factors
- Appointment of Lycopodium to update feasibility study
- Existing infrastructure and site works in place
- Significant mineral resource base
- Strategic potential as feedstock for US anode project
Negative factors
- Key economic figures date from 2017 and lack inflation adjustment
Facts used in scoring: 1
Classification and evidence
Resource Updateneutral · Story-specific tag
Revised estimate for an existing resource — compare to prior to assess progress.
Why it applies: The announcement discusses the appointment of a consultant to update the feasibility study and implies a review of existing resource/project data.
Evidence · text
“appointed Lycopodium (ASX:LYL) Minerals Africa to review and update the feasibility work on its Montepuez project”
Extracted facts
Stored fact records: 1. Some facts used in scoring do not have a stored record.
Resource Estimates (1)
Fact 1Montepuez · graphiteTonnes: 110500000Grade: 8.2Grade Unit: %Contained Metal: 9100000Contained Unit: tHistorical resultNeeds review: historical_restatementView all detailsHide details
Identity
- Project
- Montepuez
- Commodity
- graphite
- Region
- mozambique
- Reported Region
- Mozambique
- Ticker
- TGR
Resource scope
- Estimate type
- resource
- Resource group id
- resource:ca7809a0f44aee1917af
Resource Data
- Tonnes
- 110500000
- Grade
- 8.2
- Grade Unit
- %
- Contained Metal
- 9100000
- Contained Unit
- t
Review
- Needs Review
- Yes
- Review Reason
- historical_restatement
- Historical
- Yes
- Historical Source Date
- 2017-10-01T00:00:00.000Z
Dates
- Event date
- 2026-09-12T00:00:00.000Z
Reasoning: Significant resource scale reported.
Positive factors
- Large tonnage resource
Evidence · text
“Montepuez holds mineral resources of 110.5 million tonnes at 8.2% total graphitic carbon”
Tags used in scoring
Cut-off Undisclosednegative
High-grade interval reported without stating the cut-off grade used for compositing.
Why it applies: no cutoff_grade was stated
No QP/CP Disclosurenegative
No Qualified Person or Competent Person named — lower credibility for the estimate. A QP/CP should be a member of a recognized professional association with relevant experience.
Why it applies: no Qualified or Competent Person is named anywhere in the release
Resource Updateneutral
Revised estimate for an existing resource — compare to prior to assess progress.
Why it applies: the release compares against a previous estimate
PFS-Supportingneutral
Resource estimate prepared to support a Pre-Feasibility Study — requires adequate M&I component.
Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports
DFS-Supportingneutral
Resource estimate prepared to support a Definitive Feasibility Study — requires high M&I confidence.
Why it applies: the release names the study this estimate supports
Stale Estimatenegative
Effective date is >2 years old — data currency concern, may not reflect current geological understanding.
Why it applies: effective date is 8.9 years before this release
How Atlas produces this analysis
Minestarters Atlas uses automated extraction to summarize mining announcements, identify reported measurements, and classify supporting evidence. Sentiment reflects the extracted narrative and classification rules; it is an interpretation, not a reported measurement. Evidence quotes and context are provided where available. Missing data, low-confidence results, and review flags indicate limitations. Check the original publisher announcement before relying on an interpretation.