试论边界品位及其合理性──以排山楼金矿为例

摘要：边界品位自５０年代由原苏联引入之后，各部门、各系统对其技术经济内涵的理解大相径庭，制定边界品位时方法各异，不同方法得出的同一矿床边界品位差值可达３．５～５倍，难免造成资源效益的损失。边界品位著仅作为纯技术标准以规划次经济资源──表外矿．则不必专门制定下达，各矿床选矿试验的尾矿品位即是标准；若作为经济标准，则与最低工业品位的经济目标矛盾或重复。边界品位在我国当前技术经济条件下已失去存在的价值．

DISCUSSION ON REASONABLENESS OF BOUNDARY GRADE-TAKING PAISHANLOU GOLD DEPOSIT FOR EXAMPLE

fter the boundary grade was brought in China from fore--Russia in 1950s, people in different departments have understood its technological and economical meaning in different means. About six methods have been used to make the boundary grade, but the results are very different. The difference of the boundary grades of the same deposit obtained from those methods may be 3. 5-5 times. If we enclose the mineral kingdom using these boundary grade indexes, it would be true that the mineral resource would be reduced almost half one. If the boundary grade is only as a pure technological index to distinguish the economical-uneconomical mineral resource, it may exist but must not be made speciallyl if as economic index, it must contradict to the economic goal of the least industrical grade index.The author consideres that the boundary grade is no use in China now.