Saturday, September 26, 2026
MiningNewsTerminal
Saturday, September 26, 2026 Admin

FTUR.V ·

High Priority Conductive EM Anomalies Identified IN Hornby Basin; Marketing Update

Sampling & Geoscience Results

HIGH PRIORITY CONDUCTIVE EM ANOMALIES IDENTIFIED IN HORNBY BASIN;

MARKETING UPDATE

VANCOUVER, B.C. , June 10, 202 5 – Future Fuels Inc. (TSXV: FTUR) ( FSE: S0J) (“ Future Fuels ” or the

“Company”) is pleased to announce that it has received the results from Southern Geoscience Consultants,

which includes a comprehensive review of all historical geophysical surveys completed across the

Company's significant land package in the Hornby Basin, Nunavut Territory (the “Project” or the “Hornby

Project”). The reinterpretation identified 2 2 high-priority uranium exploration targets that remain

untested by previous drilling programs.

"Our team has been hard at work digitizing and analyzing substantial amounts of data generated by some of

the world’s largest resource companies. With over 26,000 metres of historic drilling and numerous surveys, we

estimate the value of this work being in excess of C$15 million. The result of these efforts has positioned Future

Fuels for the next phase of exploration success in the Hornby Basin ,” commented Rob Leckie, President & CEO

of Future Fuels, “ This data analysis has identified nearly two dozen high priority targets that have yet to be

drill tested and supports our view that the Hornby Basin hosts large scale mineral deposits.”

The results of the comprehensive geophysical review identified 22 priority electro-magnetic ( EM)

conductor targets that have not been sufficiently tested by historical exploration programs. In addition, over

1,800 individual conductor picks and 130 conductor axes were identified, with each having the potential to

be upgraded to a target as the Company continues to integrate additional new and historical datasets.

Key Highlights

• Future Fiels has completed a c omprehensive review /assessment of geophysical surveys

representing over $15 million* in acquisition value at today’s costs.

• 22 high priority targets were identified across conductive zones broadly distributed

throughout the Project showing similarities to Mountain Lake characteristics and

unconformity-style mineralization.

• Over 120 new digit ized geological products were created for integration with VRIFY’s

artificial intelligence and machine learning models.

• Multiple conductive zones were identified that align with structural features in magnetic and

gravity data, indicating the presence of potential pathways for uranium-bearing fluids.

Strong undrilled electromagnetic conductors were identified 1km south of historical drilling at the

Wolf showing that intersected elevated boron - a critical uranium pathfinder element used in major

discoveries. Future Fuels plans to continue to utilise modern and recently available Artificial

Intelligence and Machine Learning methods to complete the first ever data-driven prospectivity

analysis of the Hornby Basin. This will result in the planning of an extensive targeted drilling

program at Mountain Lake and across the Project.

Program Overview

The work consisted of systematically reprocessing all available datasets, merging overlapping surveys where

possible, and generating a unified property-wide geophysical database. This integrated approach enables

Future Fuels to prioritise drill targets and design future exploration programs with a firm understanding of

the basin’s geophysical characteristics. The main phase of interpretation focused on reinterpreting the

MegaTEM and GeoTEM electro-magnetic datasets to identify conductive anomalies similar to these associated

with the Mountain Lake deposit and unconformity-type targets elsewhere in proven uranium districts.

The Hornby Project represents a unique opportunity in modern uranium exploration. Between 1998 and

2009, various operators conducted extensive airborne geophysical surveys across the property, including 10

magnetic surveys, 6 radiometric surveys, 8 electro magnetic surveys, and 2 gravity surveys. However, these

surveys were collected in a fragmented manner by different companies operating independently or through

joint ventures, with each operator focusing only on their specific land holdings. Critically, th ese datasets had

never been compiled, harmonized, or interpreted together as a unified exploration program.

Future Fuels recognized the extraordinary value of this fragmented data archive and understood that a

comprehensive re-interpretation could reveal previously unrecognized geological trends, anomalies, and

drill targets. By completing a property -wide data compilation and harmonization program, the Company

has generated multiple high -priority targets in a cost -effective manner while lever aging the substantial

historical exploration investment. This strategic approach became possible only after Future Fuels

consolidated the entire Hornby Basin under single ownership over the past year, providing unprecedented

access to integrate all historical exploration data across the complete property package.

Figure 1: the 22 EM targets generated are shown overlain on the GeoTEM and MegaTEM B-Field Z-Coil Channels 6.

The Results

The map presented in Figure 1 shows all targets overlain on the GeoTEM and MegaTEM B -field Z -coil

channel 6 grid The geophysical response patterns vary significantly across the land package due to

underlying geological differences, particularly in the southeast where dyke swarms create strong magnetic

interference. However, Helikian-aged sandstones cover the main portions of the license area, providing the

ideal geological environment for uranium mineralization similar to other Canadian uranium districts .

Within the sandstone basin sediments, there are 9 zones of elevated conductivity, shown by the white

circular features in the map. The Mountain Lake deposit sits on the margins of one of these zones, with a

larger zone to the west. Associated with this larger zone of conductivity, Southern Geoscience Consultants

identified 4 late to mid time anomalies. Of particular interest are targets HB -03 and HB -06 which are late

time responses and coincide with a diffuse magnetic signature. It’s hypothesised that this response observed

in the magnetics could be a result of hydrothermal alteration – a common characteristic of unconform ity

style deposits.

In the southeast area of the project are the two highest priority targets HB -01 and HB -02. The

electromagnetic anomaly occurs adjacent to historical geochemical anomalies and sits within a pronounced

magnetic low that is bordered by strongly magnetic rocks. This geological setting often indicates structural

control that can focus uranium -bearing fluids. Most significantly, historical drilling conducted

approximately 1km north of this target intersected elevated boron values reaching 200ppm in drill hole HB-

05-18. Boron is an important pathfinder mineral in uranium exploration and was important in the discovery

of Key Lake 1 in the 1970s, and Fission’s Triple R at Patterson Lake 2. While drilling successfully identified

Boron the drilling however was 1km north from the EM conductor targets and therefore, the actual anomaly

remains completely untested.

HB-02 occurs in the existing target area known as Contact Lake and the 3Ts showings. However, the new

electromagnetic interpretation reveals that these anomalies extend over a substantial 10km by 6km area,

and importantly, the strongest electromagnetic responses within this large zone have never been drill -

tested. This situation suggests that previous exploration programs may have focused on the periphery of

the main mineralized system rather than its core . The table below briefly describes the other targets

identified in this phase of re-processing.

Table 1: A brief descriptive summary of all the priority targets shown on the map in figure 1.

Comment Initial

Rank

Target

_ID

Large magnetic low bordered on both sides by strongly magnetic rocks, multiple

conductive late-time anomalies. Adjacent to geochemical and drilling results. 1 HB_01

Untested late time anomaly close to T3. 1 HB_02

Late-time anomaly in zone of fuzzy magnetic signature same region as Mountain Lake. 1 HB_03

Close to magnetically defined structure. 1 TZ B-2

Point at which 2 mid-time anomalies converge coincident with geochemical samples. 2 HB_04

Linear mid-time anomaly within magnetic low adjacent to magnetic bodies. 2 HB_05

Late-time anomaly, zone of fuzzy magnetic signature same region as Mountain Lake. 2 HB_06

Similar stratigraphic contact as Mountain Lake, anomalous magnetic body with poorly

defined conductive body to the NW. Untested. 2 HB_07

Single late-time anomaly adjacent to linear magnetic unit. 2 HB_08

Poorly defined conductive anomaly along contact near Mountain Lake. 2 HB_09

Mid-time conductor near showings associated with NE structure, gravity contact. 2 HB_10

Weak late-time conductive anomaly in magnetic low. 2 HB_11

Discrete late-time anomaly adjacent to dyke. 2 HB_12

Small discrete feature. 2 TZE

Looks to be formational conductor; possible Athabasca style analogue; this section

underlain by intrusive rocks. 2 TZ-A1

Conductive zone in area with shallow basement. 2 TZ-B1

Poorly defined conductive anomaly along structure near Mountain Lake. 2 HB_14

Small late time anomaly along contact of interpreted intrusive. 2 HB_15a

Early time anomaly along linear feature that is grows in strength. Near interpreted

intrusive contacts. 2 HB_15b

2 short mid to late time anomalies. 2 HB_16

Linear Mid time trend associated with change in broad magnetic amplitude. 2 HB_17

Linear mid-time anomaly in magnetic low between 2 moderate magnetic bodies. 3 HB_13

Looks to be formational conductor; possible Athabasca style analogue; this section

underlain by sedimentary rocks. 3 TZ A-3

Looks to be formational conductor; possible Athabasca style analogue; this section

underlain by sedimentary rocks. (partially overlap claims, not shown on map) 3 TZ-A2

Next Steps and Upcoming Catalysts

The results of the geophysical reprocessing are being integrated into Future Fuels’ machine learning AI

platform developed by VRIFY to refine, rank and prioritise the 2 2 targets. This exercise will also allow the

company to evaluate whether any of the 130 conductor axes warrant upgrading to a target. The highest

ranked targets are expected to provide drill targets and will feed into the permitting schedule.

o Utilise modern and recently available Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning methods to

complete the first ever data-driven prospectivity analysis of the Hornby Basin.

o Complete advanced remote sensing techniques to generate additional ranking metrics for the target

zones.

o Plan extensive targeted drilling programs at Mountain Lake and across the property.

o Future Fuels plans to release further information on the re -evaluation of more than 40 high -priority

uranium targets identified on the property in the coming months.

Supplementary Information – Secondary uranium geological models within the Hornby Basin

Stratabound type: Mountain Lake is in the class of stratabound sandstone -related deposits. Faulting in the

adjacent host rocks and in the deposit itself is considered an important controlling factor on ore genesis. The

geological model begins with an overlying black shale that acted as the uranium source, which was

subsequently covered by basaltic rocks of the Coppermine sequence. These basalts created elevated

geothermal gradients that drove hydrogeochemical circulation cells, causing uranium to leach from the black

shales. The resulting uranium-bearing fluids migrated through the underlying sandstone until encountering

topographic highs, where the uranium precipitated to form the deposit. From an exploration perspective,

deposits of this style typically produce relatively subdued geophysical responses due to the absence of strong

alteration assemblages or gangue minerals. The exploration challenge is further complicated because the

overlying black shales possess inherent electrical conductivity that can partially mask any conductive

response from the underlying mineralization. Despite these limitations, the 2006 GEOTEM survey

successfully identified a subtle electromagnetic response at Mountain Lake, demonstrating that this deposit

style can be detected using modern electro magnetic techniques. This success provided the foundation for

targeting similar electromagnetic signatures elsewhere in the basin during the current reinterpretation

program.

Unconformity type: The similarities between the Hornby Basin and the Athabasca basin (described in

previously described in the announcement on February 27, 2025) have established areas beyond the

Mountain Lake areas as being prospective for unconformity style mineralisation. The deposits of this style

are formed by extensive hydrothermal systems scavenging uranium from the surrounding basement and

basinal rocks. As these uranium -rich hydrothermal fluids migrate through the system until they encounter

specific geochemical bou ndaries at or near the basement -sediment unconformity, where abrupt changes in

temperature, pressure, or fluid chemistry cause uranium precipitation and the formation of high -grade ore

zones. The hydrothermal systems responsible for unconformity deposits t ypically exploit graphitic fault

zones and other structural conduits that facilitate efficient fluid circulation throughout the deposit -forming

process. These same graphitic structures that control ore formation also produce distinctive electromagnetic

signatures that can be detected through airborne geophysical surveys, while the associated hydrothermal

alteration creates additional geophysical responses in magnetic and other geophysical datasets.

Mountain Lake Uranium Deposit

The Mountain Lake Uranium Deposit is the most prominent uranium occurrence within the Hornby Project.

Initially discovered in 1976, this deposit has undergone extensive historical exploration, including over

26,000 meters of drilling across 209 drill holes. The deposit contains an estimated inferred historical

resource of 3,700 tonnes of U₃O₈ *, equivalent to approximately 8.16 million pounds of uranium, with an

average grade of 0.23% U₃O₈ with significant potential for expansion based on historical and mod ern

exploration data including drill hole 77Y-35 which returned 5.19% U₃O₈ over 0.90m, part of a 3.90m intercept

of 2.27% U₃O₈ which was not included in the historic resource and has yet to be followed up on (Hornby Bay

Exploration Ltd., 2004).

*This resource estimate constitutes a “historical estimate”, as that term is defined in National Instrument

43-101 Disclosure Standards for Mineral Projects (“NI 43 -101”). This information is derived from a

technical report entitled “Mountain Lake Property Nunavut”, dated February 15, 2005, filed by Triex Mineral

Corporation. A qualified person has not done sufficient work to classify the historical estimate as current

mineral resources or mineral reserves , and accordingly the estimates may not be relevant or reliable . The

Company is not treating the resource as current. For more information please refer to the Company’s

January 4, 2025 technical report (the “ Future Fuels Report ”), available under the Company’s profile at

www.sedarplus.ca.

Mineralization at Mountain Lake is predominantly hosted within sandstone units, with uranium

concentrated along structural traps such as faults and fracture zones. This stratabound and fracture -

controlled mineralization suggests a hydrothermal system influenced by structural complexities within the

basin. Historical data indicates strong potential for resource expansion both laterally and at depth,

supported by untested geophysical anomalies and favorable geological settings.

Figure 2: The three main uraniferous basins of Canada*

References

1Purepoint Uranium Corp,. May 2023

2 Fission Uranium Corp,. Feb 2017

Hornby Bay Exploration Ltd. (2004). Technical Report on the Uranium Resources at Hornby Bay Basin, Nunavut. Hornby Bay Exploration

Ltd.

Future Fuels Inc. (2025). NI 43-101 Technical Report on the Hornby Basin Uranium Project. Future Fuels Inc.

Jefferson, C.W., & Delaney, G.D. (2006). Uranium Deposits of Canada. Geological Association of Canada, Mineral Deposits Division, Special

Publication No. 5.

Thomas, D.J. (2004). Comparative Geological Frameworks of the Hornby, Athabasca, and Thelon Basins . Canadian Journal of Earth

Sciences, 41(4), 475-490.

Smith, J.P. (2003). Geophysical Survey Data and Uranium Assay Analysis in the Hornby Basin . Canadian Geological Survey Bulletin No.

315.

*An internal estimate

Marketing Update

Further to the Company’s March 11, 2025 news release, the Company announces that it has renewed its

marketing agreement with MCS Market Communication Service GmbH for an additional six month period,

on the same terms.

National Instrument 43-101 Disclosure

Nicholas Rodway, P. Geo, (NAPEG Licence # L5576) is a qualified person as defined by National Instrument

43-101 - Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Properties and is a consultant of the Company . Mr. Rodway has

reviewed and approved the technical content in this release.

About Future Fuels Inc.

Future Fuels’ principal asset is the Hornby Project, covering the entire 3,407 km² Hornby Basin in north -

western Nunavut, a geologically promising area with over 40 underexplored uranium showings, including

the historic Mountain Lake Deposit. Additionally, Future Fuels holds the Covette Property in Quebec’s James

Bay region, comprising 65 mineral claims over 3,370 hectares.

On behalf of the Board of Directors

FUTURE FUELS INC.

Rob Leckie

CEO and Director

[email protected]

604-681-1568

X: @FutureFuelsInc

www.futurefuelsinc.com

Forward Looking Statements

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Service Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of

the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

This news release contains forward -looking statements and other statements that are not historical facts.

Forward-looking statements are often identified by terms such as "will", "may", "should", "anticipate", "expects"

and similar expressions. All stateme nts other than statements of historical fact included in this news release

are forward -looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such

statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events co uld differ materially from those

anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the

Company's expectations include but are not limited to market conditions and the risks detailed from time to

time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators. The reader is cautioned that assumptions

used in the preparation of any forward-looking information may prove to be incorrect. Events or circumstances

may cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted, as a result of numerous known and unknown

risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company. The reader is

cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward -looking information, incl uding, but not limited to,

statements regarding the Hornby Project , the prospects of the mineral claims forming the Hornby Project,

which are not at an advanced stage of development, the Company's anticipated business and operational

activities, and the Co mpany's plans with respect to the exploration or advancement of the Hornby Project.

Factors that could cause actual results to vary from forward -looking statements or may affect the operations,

performance, development and results of the Company's business include, among other things, the Company's

ability to generate sufficient cash fl ow to meet its current and future obligations; that mineral exploration is

inherently uncertain and may be unsuccessful in achieving the desired results; that mineral explora tion plans

may change and be re -defined based on a number of factors, many of which are outside of the Company's

control; the Company's ability to access sources of debt and equity capital; competitive factors, pricing

pressures and supply and demand in th e Company's industry; and general economic and business. Such

information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be

incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward -looking s tatements

contained in this news release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. The forward -looking

statements contained in this news release are made as of the date of this news release and the Company will

update or revise publicly any of the included forward -looking statements as expressly required by applicable

law.