Announcement PDF Spodumene Identified, LCT Pegmatite Confirmed for Badja Project, Yalgoo WA 19 September 2023 Following a review of its Badja Project’s structural and geochemistry datasets by eminent, consulting geologist, Mr Nigel Maund, EMU NL (ASX: EMU) (“EMU” or “the Company”) advises that a limited field survey conducted 4 September 2023 identified the presence of LCT (Lithium-Cesium-Tantalum) pegmatites. Assessment confirms spodumene crystals with LIBS 1 analyser equipment confirming anomalous lithium grade. HIGHLIGHTS  LCT pegmatite occurrence positively identified at Badja whilst testing prospectivity for LCT pegmatitic dyke swarms emanating from intrusive fractionated granite sources adjacent to Badja’s mafic lithologies.  Spodumene crystals in identified with characteristic pink fluorescence under long wavelength ultraviolet UV lamp.  Anomalous LIBS analyser lithium readings of 0.31% Li2O.  LCT pegmatite occurrences at Badja are thought to emanate from discrete highly fractionated, late-stage granite plutons. LIBS analyser testwork of sample rock, the UV fluorescing of spodumene and the visual identification of the crystal morphology support the presence of lithium-bearing spodumene crystals contained in mafic rock sample returned from the field. The LIBS analyser reading on the hand samples have obtained values of 1,426ppm Li (equivalent to 0.31% Li2 O), see Figure 1 below. 1 LIBS (Laser Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy) using Sci-Aps Z-903 LIBS with integrated argon purge, plus UV diagnostic testing of spodumene samples using a Analytik Jena 6W UV handheld UV lamp. Refer to JORC Table attached for further details Page | 1 Fig 1 – Hand-specimen of spodumene crystals in LCT pegmatite showing strong pink fluorescence, a characteristic feature under long-wavelength UV light. Mr Maund was commissioned in July 2023 to investigate the importance of the regional granite intrusive bodies surrounding the project area. 2 EMU’s geologists now posit that the late-stage, fractionated, intrusive granite plutons, identified primarily from airborne geophysical surveys, are the key drivers of high-grade gold and tungsten occurrences at Badja. The investigation by Mr Maund revealed major LCT Pegmatite pathfinder geochemistry and element associations in historic and recent EMU geochemistry data relevant in the context of his overall interpretation and an exploratory field trip was instigated. Mr Maund has global experience in the explora on for and discovery of lithium pegma tes among other commodi es. His study supports EMU’s view that the late-stage granite intrusions within the broad grani c suites adjacent to Badja project had a significant influence in the mineralisa on at Badja. The endowment of high-grade gold and tungsten mineralisa on discoveries made by EMU, and the historic Gnows Nest Gold Mine, have been emplaced through mul ple events of hydrothermal ac vity derived from these evolving and frac ona ng “granite intrusive stocks”. 2 Report by Mr Nigel Maund BSc (Hons)Lond., MSc, DIC, MBA, F.Aus.IMM, FAIG, F.SEG, FGS, MMSA, Consultant Economic Geologist “A Report on Badja Gold Project Area Near the Historic “Gnows Nest” Gold Mine, Wadgingarra Gold Field, Badja Sta on, Western Australia”, 25 August 2023 Page | 2 Fig 2 – Conceptual model for LCT pegma tes in the western and southern intrusive-mafic contacts at Badja. Mul -element geochemistry, par cularly the immobile elements (eg., Rb, Cs & Be) supports a late-stage frac onated granite source. Note loca on of sample and spodumene specimen reported in this announcement. Page | 3 Fig 3 – Mul -element geochemistry for Lithium (Li) + LCT pegma te pathfinder elements Rubidium (Rb) Caesium (Cs) & Beryllium (Be). Note strong presence along the southern intrusive contact and (postulated) NE-trending dyke swarms. Page | 4 RELEASE AUTHORISED BY THE BOARD For further informa on, please contact: Doug Grewar Chief Execu ve Officer Emu NL info@emunl.com.au Investors can sign into our interac ve investor hub and join in on the conversa on with Emu NL. h ps://investorhub.emunl.com.au/auth/signup EMU Investorhub QR Code Page | 5 Emu NL ABN 50 127 291 927 ASX Codes: EMU and EMUCA 10 Walker Ave West Perth, WA 6005 T +61 8 9226 4266 E info@emunl.com.au PO Box 1112 West Perth, WA 6872 Fully paid shares (listed) 1,450,021,079 (including 18.6m the subject of the ATM which EMU can buy back for nil consideration) Contributing Shares (listed) 40,485,069 paid to $0.03, $0.03 to pay, no call before 31 December 2023 Contributing Shares (Unlisted) 35,000,000 paid to $0.0001, $0.04 to pay, no call before 31 December 2025 Options (unlisted) 172,453,621 options to acquire fully paid shares, exercisable at $0.01 each, on or before 7 October 2024 Performance Rights (Unlisted) 48,571,429 performance rights in relation to acquisition of Gnows Nest project Directors: Peter Thomas Non-Executive Chairman Terry Streeter Non-Executive Director Gavin Rutherford Non-Executive Director Tim Staermose Non-Executive Director Investor enquiries: Doug Grewar CEO M +61 419833604 E info@emunl.com.au COMPETENT PERSON’S STATEMENT The informa on in this report that relates to explora on results is based on, and fairly represents informa on and suppor ng documenta on prepared by Nigel Maund, a Competent Person who is a Fellow of the Australian Ins tute of Geoscien sts and a Fellow of Australian Ins tute of Mining and Metallurgy. Mr Maund is a consul ng geologist commissioned by EMU NL and has sufficient experience in the ac vity which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the 2012 edi on of the “Australasian Code for Repor ng of Explora on Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves”. Mr Maund consents to the inclusion herein of the ma ers based upon his informa on in the form and context in which it appears. FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS As a result of a variety of risks, uncertain es and other factors, actual events and results may differ materially from any forward looking and other statements herein not purpor ng to be of historical fact. Any statements concerning mining reserves, resources and explora on results are forward looking in that they involve es mates based on assump ons. Forward looking statements are based on management’s beliefs, opinions and es mates as of the respec ve dates they are made. The Company does not assume any obliga on to update forward looking statements even where beliefs, opinions and es mates change or should do so given changed circumstances and developments. NEW INFORMATION OR DATA EMU confirms that it is not aware of any new informa on or data that materially affects the informa on included in the original market announcements and, in the case of es mates of Mineral Resources, which all material assump ons and technical parameters underpinning the es mates in the relevant market announcement con nue to apply and have not materially changed. The Company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not materially changed from the original market announcement. Page | 6 JORC Code 2012 Edition Table 1: Section 1 - Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Sampling techniques  Nature and quality of sampling (eg cut channels, random chips, or specific specialised industry standard measurement tools appropriate to the minerals under investigation, such as down hole gamma sondes, or handheld XRF instruments, etc). These examples should not be taken as limiting the broad meaning of sampling.  The lithium-based exploration in LCTpegmatites described in this announcement is recent (2023) work conducted by Emu personnel and Consultant Economic Geologist Mr Nigel Maund.  Include reference to measures taken to ensure sample representivity and the appropriate calibration of any measurement tools or systems used.  Aspects of the determination of mineralisation that are Material to the Public Report.  In cases where ‘industry standard’ work has been done this would be relatively simple (eg ‘reverse circulation drilling was used to obtain 1 m samples from which 3 kg was pulverised to produce a 30 g charge for fire assay’). In other cases, more explanation may be required, such as where there is coarse gold that has inherent sampling problems. Unusual commodities or mineralisation types (eg submarine nodules) may warrant disclosure of detailed information.  The soil and rock chip geochemistry referenced in this work was carried out by Emu NL within the confines of the Badja Project over the period 2020-2023.  All sample positions were located in the field with a handheld Garmin GPS.  UV diagnostic testing of spodumene samples was conducted using a Analytik Jena 6W UV handheld UV lamp.  LIBS (Laser Induced Breakdown spectroscopy) was conducted using a SciAps brand Z-903 handheld analyser. Appropriate use of CRM pucks (standards) was made during and after the sample readings.  Surface sampling was carried out by Company personnel following protocols and QAQC procedures as per current industry practice. See further details below.  Soil samples: Sampling undertaken in a nominal 100 x 50m grid-based spacing along East-West orientated lines (100m line spacings and 50m sample spacings). All samples were collected by scraping off the top 20cm aeolian/colluvium material and digging a 20-40cm pit below this from which a 1000g minus 2mm (sieved) sample was obtained. This was split into a 1kg portion for laboratory analysis and a smaller 250g sample for in-house pXRF analysis and storage. Emu samples total 1153 samples and this is added to a further 4470 historical samples which were processed and levelled by a consultant geochemist for meaningful comparison.  Rock chip samples: Sampling undertaken in various campaigns with 1-2kg of insitu rock chips collected over discrete points, Page | 7 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary channels, panels or other method as described in the sample data sheet.  All surface samples were prepared and assayed by ALS Geochemistry, located in Malaga, Perth. (i) Soil samples prepared by PUL-32 (pulverise entire sample) and analysed by 25g aqua regia digest, method AuME-TL43 (ii) Rock samples prepared by method PREP-31Y in which a split of 250g was pulverised and analysed for gold by Au-ICP21 (30g fire assay) and multielements ME-MS61 (33 element 4-acid digest ICP-AES finish). Drilling techniques  Drill type (eg core, reverse circulation, open-hole hammer, rotary air blast, auger, Bangka, sonic, etc) and details (eg core diameter, triple or standard tube, depth of diamond tails, face-sampling bit or other type, whether core is oriented and if so, by what method, etc).  No drilling undertaken in the work undertaken for this announcement. Drill sample recovery  Method of recording and assessing core and chip sample recoveries and results assessed.  Not applicable.  Measures taken to maximise sample recovery and ensure representative nature of the samples.  Whether a relationship exists between sample recovery and grade and whether sample bias may have occurred due to preferential loss/gain of fine/coarse material. Logging  Whether core and chip samples have been geologically and geotechnically logged to a level of detail to support appropriate Mineral Resource estimation, mining studies and metallurgical studies.  Whether logging is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Core (or costean, channel, etc) photography.  Geological logging of soil and rock chip samples was completed on a visual basis with parameters which include: - Colour Grain size Llithology type Weathering Mineralogy.  The total length and percentage of the relevant intersections logged. Subsampling techniques  If core, whether cut or sawn and whether quarter, half or all core taken.  If non-core, whether riffled, tube sampled,  No drilling completed.  Geostats and/or OREAS brand QA/QC certified reference samples, blanks and Page | 8 Criteria and sample preparation JORC Code explanation rotary split, etc and whether sampled wet or dry.  For all sample types, the nature, quality and appropriateness of the sample preparation technique.  Quality control procedures adopted for all sub-sampling stages to maximise representivity of samples. Commentary field duplicates were routinely inserted at a rate of 1 in 15 with every batch submitted for assay.  The sample size is appropriate for the mineralization style, application and analytical techniques used.  Measures taken to ensure that the sampling is representative of the in-situ material collected, including for instance results for field duplicate/second-half sampling.  Whether sample sizes are appropriate to the grain size of the material being sampled. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests  The nature, quality and appropriateness of the assaying and laboratory procedures used and whether the technique is considered partial or total.  LIBS: A Sci-Aps Z-903 field portable LIBS analyser was used for testing of pegmatite samples and spodumene crystals evident in hand specimens.  For geophysical tools, spectrometers, handheld XRF instruments, etc, the parameters used in determining the analysis including instrument make and model, reading times, calibrations factors applied and their derivation, etc.  Soils: ALS’s trace-level exploration analytical technique AuME-TL43 is a partial digestion in aqua regia of a 25g sample of the pulverised soil sample (this compares to 0.25g in most other techniques). The technique is considered a partial digest, but fully acceptable and repeatable for oxidised surface soil samples.  Nature of quality control procedures adopted (eg standards, blanks, duplicates, external laboratory checks) and whether acceptable levels of accuracy (ie lack of bias) and precision have been established.  Rocks: standard 30g fire assay and 4-acid digest multi-element techniques are industry norms for rock chip samples. These are considered total digestion.  The assay techniques employed, the detection limits offered and the QA/QC procedures in place are considered fully appropriate for the soil and rock sampling reported. Verification of sampling and assaying  The verification of significant intersections by either independent or alternative company personnel.  The use of twinned holes.  Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification, data storage (physical and electronic) protocols.  Discuss any adjustment to assay data.  Assays are as reported from the laboratory and stored in the company database, managed by an independent database consultant.  Field data was collected on site either on a company Toughbook (laptop computer) or on field sample books and later uploaded to the database.  No adjustment has been made to the Page | 9 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary assay data as reported by the laboratory.  LIBS data displayed as Li (ppm) was converted to Li2O% using a conversion factor of 2.153 (i.e., Li2O% = Li (ppm) x 2.153 Location of data points  Accuracy and quality of surveys used to locate drill holes (collar and down-hole surveys), trenches, mine workings and other locations used in Mineral Resource estimation.  Specification of the grid system used.  Soil and rock sample positions were located using a handheld GPS system with an accuracy of +/- 5m and stored in the company database. All coordinates are referenced to MGA Zone 50, Datum GDA94.  Quality and adequacy of topographic control. Data spacing and distribution  Data spacing for reporting of Exploration Results.  Whether the data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied.  Soil sampling was undertaken on a GPScontrolled grid (nominally 100m line spacing x 50m sample spacing).  Rock samples were collected where rock was exposed at surface.  Whether sample compositing has been applied. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure  Whether the orientation of sampling achieves unbiased sampling of possible structures and the extent to which this is known, considering the deposit type. Sample security  The measures taken to ensure sample security.  Each sample was placed into a prenumbered calico bag (soils and rocks), and securely tied off and placed into a larger “polyweave” bag for dispatch to the lab. Samples were transported to the laboratory by company personnel. Audits or reviews  The results of any audits or reviews of sampling techniques and data.  Continuous improvement, internal reviews of sampling techniques and procedures are ongoing. No external audits have been performed on the methodology to date.  No sampling bias is known.  If the relationship between the drilling orientation and the orientation of key mineralised structures is considered to have introduced a sampling bias, this should be assessed and reported if material. Page | 10 JORC Code 2012 Edition Table 1: Section 2 - Reporting of Exploration Reports Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status  Type, reference name/number, location and ownership including agreements or material issues with third parties such as joint ventures, partnerships, overriding royalties, native title interests, historical sites, wilderness or national park and environmental settings.  The tenure hosting the Badja Project and the location of the spodumene sample reported in this news release is owned 100% by EMU NL (or its subsidiary companies Coruscant Minerals Pty Ltd, Emu Resources Pty Ltd & Emu Exploration Pty Ltd ):  The project comprises a total of ten granted tenements (see listing below): M59/739 Coruscant Minerals E59/2315 Coruscant Minerals P59/2071 Emu Exploration P59/2072 Emu Exploration P59/2073 Emu Exploration P59/2074 Emu Exploration P59/2068 Emu Exploration E59/2495 Emu Exploration E59/2817 Emu Resources E59/2836 Emu Resources  The security of the tenure held at the time of reporting along with any known impediments to obtaining a licence to operate in the area.  All works undertaken and reported in this ASX announcement were completed within these tenements.  The project tenements are all in good standing. Exploration done by other parties  Acknowledgment and appraisal of exploration by other parties.  Historical prospecting, sampling and drilling activities have been undertaken in different areas within the project tenements intermittently by multiple third parties over a period of at least 30 years. Geology  Deposit type, geological setting and style of mineralisation.  The project lies within an attenuated portion of the Yalgoo-Singleton greenstone belt bound by the Badja and Walgardy intrusive granitoid batholiths of the Youanmi Terrane. The Gnows Nest and Monte Cristo prospects comprise the areas where Emu NL have reported Mineral Reserve Estimates (MRE) within lode-hosted orogenic gold deposits, similar to many of the gold occurrences in the Yalgoo region, and within the WA Yilgarn Craton. The areas of interest described in this announcement pertain to pegmatite occurrences located on the western granite/greenstone intrusive contact. Page | 11 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary Drill hole Information  A summary of all information material to the understanding of the exploration results including a tabulation of the following information for all Material drill holes:  No drilling undertaken in the work undertaken for this announcement. o easting and northing of the drill hole collar o elevation or RL (Reduced Level – elevation above sea level in metres) of the drill hole collar o dip and azimuth of the hole o down hole length and interception depth o hole length.  If the exclusion of this information is justified on the basis that the information is not Material and this exclusion does not detract from the understanding of the report, the Competent Person should clearly explain why this is the case. Data aggregation methods  In reporting Exploration Results, weighting averaging techniques, maximum and/or minimum grade truncations (eg cutting of high grades) and cut-off grades are usually Material and should be stated.  Not applicable.  Where aggregate intercepts incorporate short lengths of high-grade results and longer lengths of low-grade results, the procedure used for such aggregation should be stated and some typical examples of such aggregations should be shown in detail.  The assumptions used for any reporting of metal equivalent values should be clearly stated. Relationship between mineralisation widths and intercept lengths  These relationships are particularly important in the reporting of Exploration Results.  Not applicable.  If the geometry of the mineralisation with respect to the drill hole angle is known, its nature should be reported.  If it is not known and only the down hole lengths are reported, there should be a clear statement to this effect (eg ‘down hole length, true width not known’). Diagrams  Appropriate maps and sections (with  Refer to maps and figures in body of the Page | 12 Criteria JORC Code explanation Commentary scales) and tabulations of intercepts should be included for any significant discovery being reported These should include, but not be limited to a plan view of drill hole collar locations and appropriate sectional views. Balanced reporting  Where comprehensive reporting of all Exploration Results is not practicable, representative reporting of both low and high grades and/or widths should be practiced to avoid misleading reporting of Exploration Results. announcement.  Geological interpretations are based on current knowledge and will change with further exploration.  Key findings and location information has been reported in body of text. Assays are being awaited.  Reporting is considered balanced. Other substantive exploration data  Other exploration data, if meaningful and material, should be reported including (but not limited to): geological observations; geophysical survey results; geochemical survey results; bulk samples – size and method of treatment; metallurgical test results; bulk density, groundwater, geotechnical and rock characteristics; potential deleterious or contaminating substances.  Geological interpretations have been taken from published maps, geophysical interpretation, historical and ongoing exploration. Further work  The nature and scale of planned further work (eg tests for lateral extensions or depth extensions or large-scale step-out drilling).  Further field programmes and follow-up work will be assessed pending laboratory analytical results.  Diagrams clearly highlighting the areas of possible extensions, including the main geological interpretations and future drilling areas, provided this information is not commercially sensitive. - END - Page | 13