Pure Energy Minerals Limited occupies a distinctive niche among lithium developers focused on brine resources in Nevada’s Clayton Valley. The company’s holdings include extensive claim blocks and an inferred resource reported in lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). Corporate efforts in 2024–2025 have prioritized process development with global engineering partners and structured earn-in arrangements aimed at de‑risking project execution. This profile compiles operational facts, project metrics, technology partnerships, market positioning and investor references to enable straightforward comparison with peers such as Albemarle, Livent and Ganfeng Lithium. Links to regulatory filings, third‑party databases and investor resources are embedded to support due diligence. The following sections present a data‑first company table, detailed project analysis for the Clayton Valley asset, an assessment of processing and test‑work partnerships, a comparative market context against other lithium companies, and governance, ESG and investment considerations.
Pure Energy Minerals company overview and structured data table — key facts and financial touchpoints
This section provides a concise, table-centric reference that summarizes corporate identity, leadership, lithium asset metrics and public market and investor resources. The format is designed for rapid comparison with other directory entries and aligns with standardized fields used across industry databases.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Company Name | Pure Energy Minerals Limited |
| Ticker(s) & Exchange(s) | PE (TSX.V) / PEMIF (OTC) |
| Country | Canada |
| Headquarters | Vancouver, British Columbia |
| Founded | Prior to 2012 (renamed Pure Energy Minerals Limited in October 2012) |
| CEO | Joseph E. Mullin |
| Employees | Small, project‑focused team (headcount varies with contractors) |
| Sector / Sub-Sector | Mining / Lithium brine exploration & development; battery materials processing |
| Market Cap (USD) | Variable — refer to live quotes: MarketBeat PE quotes and StockAnalysis PEMIF |
| Revenue / Net Income | Pre‑production stage — no material operating revenue reported in recent public filings; see investor materials: company investor page |
| Lithium Production (tonnes LCE/year) | Not yet commercial — development stage; inferred resource base under evaluation |
| Main Mines / Projects | Clayton Valley Project (flagship lithium brine project in Esmeralda County, Nevada) |
| Project Locations | Clayton Valley, central Esmeralda County, Nevada, USA — adjacent to North America’s only producing lithium operation |
| Proven & Probable Reserves | Inferred resource reported: ~218,000 tonnes LCE (refer to technical reports and company MD&A) |
| Processing Facilities | Pilot and test facilities at process testing and engineering stage with partners such as Tenova Advanced Technologies |
| Exploration Stage | Advanced exploration / development (junior developer advancing to feasibility and partnership phases) |
| Key Partnerships / Clients | Engineering and process testing partners; earn‑in arrangements (e.g., SLB earn‑in); ongoing engagement with large technology providers |
| Stock Index Membership | TSX Venture Exchange listing; OTC quotation for US investors |
| ESG / Sustainability Initiatives | Focus on resource efficient extraction, reduced water footprint strategies, and engaging with independent environmental advisors |
| Website | https://pureenergyminerals.com/ and investor hub: /investors |
Quick reference links and third‑party data providers commonly used by analysts are listed below for verification and cross‑reference.
- Company investor portal: pureenergyminerals.com/investors
- Regulatory and profile snapshots: Yahoo Finance profile and Hargreaves Lansdown
- Industry databases: PitchBook, CB Insights, and Crunchbase
- Market screening: MarketScreener
- OTC investor page: StockAnalysis PEMIF
Lists like the above support investor workflows when comparing Pure Energy against peers such as Lithium Americas, Piedmont Lithium and Orocobre. The table and links together form a structured dataset suitable for directory comparison and initial due diligence. Key takeaway: Pure Energy is a project‑stage lithium brine developer with a defined inferred resource and active processing partnerships, positioned for further technical de‑risking and potential strategic earn‑ins.
Section insight: The company’s corporate footprint is small and project‑focused, but access to international engineering partners and adjacent geology provides a clear pathway to advancing Clayton Valley toward a development decision.
Clayton Valley Project: resource inventory, land tenure and development milestones for Pure Energy Minerals
The Clayton Valley Project is Pure Energy’s primary asset and demands specific attention to claims, resource metrics and proximity to existing infrastructure. The project area comprises a large set of mineral claims and historic exploration footprints, as well as an inferred resource quantified in lithium carbonate equivalent.
Project footprint, claim holdings and geography
The company’s Clayton Valley ground covers approximately 950 claims across ~23,360 acres (9,450 hectares). That tenure is geographically placed in central Esmeralda County and sits roughly halfway between Reno and Las Vegas, Nevada — a region with established brine reservoirs and a history of lithium exploration.
- Proximity advantage: Adjacency to the only currently producing lithium operation in North America provides logistical and permitting context advantages.
- Claim continuity: The contiguous claim blocks allow for phased exploration and potential staged development.
- Access and infrastructure: Road connections and proximity to regional suppliers reduce early capital intensities for site preparation.
Clayton Valley’s playa systems present classical brine host conditions. The exploration program has focused on brine sampling, shallow drill campaigns, pump tests and geophysical surveys to support resource estimation.
Resource estimate and technical scope
Publicly disclosed technical information reports an inferred mineral resource of approximately 218,000 tonnes LCE. This figure serves as an early‑stage inventory estimate rather than proven reserves and requires further infill drilling, hydrological modelling and metallurgical testing to progress along the classification scale (inferred → indicated → measured).
- Resource classification: Inferred — implies lower confidence and the need for additional data.
- Next steps to advance resource: infill drilling, long‑term pump tests, and leachability/metallurgy trials.
- Regulatory step: progressing to NI 43‑101 or similar feasibility documentation for reserve conversion.
Development milestones and recent activity
Development milestones include completion of reconnaissance and technical programs, process testing partnerships, and advancing earn‑in agreements with third parties that introduce technical capacity and financing pathways. Notably, SLB completed an earn‑in for the Clayton Valley Project as part of a strategic arrangement, bringing a major industry contractor into the project at a testing and evaluation level. The company has also engaged Tenova Advanced Technologies for process testing and engineering design phases.
- Completed baseline exploration and resource reporting supporting the ~218,000 t LCE inferred resource.
- Process testwork and bench scale pilot programs with Tenova and other partners ongoing.
- Third‑party earn‑in agreements (e.g., SLB) intended to share technical risk and capital burden.
| Metric | Detail |
|---|---|
| Claim count | ~950 claims |
| Area | ~23,360 acres / 9,450 hectares |
| Inferred resource | ~218,000 tonnes LCE (publicly reported estimate) |
| Project stage | Advanced exploration / pre‑feasibility work |
| Nearby producing mine | North America’s sole producing lithium operation (adjacent) |
Analysts should interpret the inferred resource as an early inventory that is meaningful for comparative screening but insufficient alone to support reserve‑based financing. The continuing test programs, coupled with SLB’s involvement and Tenova’s engineering work, are intended to answer critical questions on recoveries, capex intensity and operating parameters. The Clayton Valley Project’s location gives Pure Energy both geological credibility and logistical potential, but geological complexity, hydrology and brine chemistry remain the core technical uncertainties to resolve.
- Permitting complexity: environmental baseline studies and water rights are focal points for permitting timelines.
- Hydrogeological risk: brine aquifer connectivity and sustainable extraction rates must be demonstrated.
- Processing uncertainty: different brine chemistries demand tailored recovery flowsheets and chemical usage plans.
Section insight: Clayton Valley holds credible inferred LCE and strategic location, but conversion to a development-ready project depends on successful process optimisation, robust hydrological studies and staged capital planning.
Processing technology, partnerships and test‑work strategy for lithium brine extraction
Process selection and engineering determine whether a brine resource becomes an economically sustainable producer. Pure Energy’s strategy emphasizes collaborative testing with engineering partners to evaluate resource‑specific processing solutions that can improve recoveries and reduce environmental footprints.
Key technology partnerships and their roles
Pure Energy has engaged with recognised process engineering firms for pilot‑scale testing and flowsheet development. Tenova Advanced Technologies is a named partner for process testing, engineering and design stages. In addition, strategic arrangements and earn‑in agreements with industry contractors such as SLB introduce expertise in large‑scale subsurface fluid management and execution.
- Tenova Advanced Technologies: bench and pilot testwork, engineering design support for brine concentration and lithium extraction flowsheets.
- SLB (service company earn‑in): subsurface and drilling competency, potential capital and technical contributions under defined earn‑in terms.
- Other lab partners: independent metallurgical labs and environmental consultants conducting leachability and evaporation or direct‑extraction trials.
The company is exploring both conventional evaporation pathways and newer direct lithium extraction (DLE) concepts that promise faster cycle times, smaller land footprint and reduced evaporation ponds. Pilot‑scale campaigns typically evaluate lithium recovery rate, impurity removal, reagent consumption and concentrate or carbonate crystallisation pathways.
Technical testwork priorities and metrics
Testwork programs are structured to answer a core set of questions that drive project economics. These include brine chemistry variability, achievable lithium recoveries, reagent and energy intensity, and by‑product or waste streams handling.
- Recovery rate targets — target recoveries that make commercial sense versus reagent and CAPEX penalties.
- Scalability — pilot results must be scalable to full‑plant design with predictable cost escalation.
- Water and environmental footprint — minimisation of evaporation pond area or alternative low‑footprint DLE routes.
Risk mitigation through partnerships and phased testing
Partnerships with established engineering vendors enable phased risk transfer. Earn‑in agreements often link partner expenditure to milestones, allowing capital‑intensive tasks to be co‑funded while providing Pure Energy with technical validation.
- Phased de‑risking reduces the probability that early capital is spent before technical viability is confirmed.
- Third‑party validation supports project financing discussions with lenders or strategic investors.
- Strategic partners can accelerate permitting and EPCM readiness by contributing technical packages suited to regulatory frameworks.
Brine Processing Options — Clayton Valley
| Select row | Method | Typical Recovery (%) | Land Footprint (ha/Mt) | Typical CapEx Intensity (USD/t LCE) | Key Environmental Issues |
|---|
David Miller is a financial writer and analyst who has spent more than ten years studying how natural resources shape the global economy. His work often gravitates toward lithium and other battery metals, not just because of their financial weight, but because of their role in the world’s energy transition and the shift toward cleaner technologies.
Having followed the rise of electric vehicles and renewable energy from both an investment and environmental perspective, David believes that telling the story of each company matters. Behind every market cap or production figure, there are people, communities, and long-term projects that define how the lithium supply chain evolves.
In this directory, his goal is to provide profiles that are accurate, comparable, and accessible, but also written with an awareness of the bigger picture: how each company contributes to the future of energy, mobility, and sustainability.