investment in the chilean mining industry portfolio …...investment in the chilean mining industry...

Investment in the Chilean mining

industry

Portfolio of projects, 2018-2027

DEPP 05/2018

Intellectual Property Register © N° 295.314

Investment in the Chilean mining industry – Portfolio of projects, 2018-2027

I

Comisión Chilena del Cobre

Executive Summary


II


Executive Summary

For private companies and the government, it is important to have a projection of the future development of mining activity in the country, based on information about investment over the next ten years, including not only copper but also gold, silver, iron, lithium and industrial minerals. For over 12 years, this has, therefore, been a fundamental line of work of the Chilean Copper Commission (COCHILCO).

In its 2018 version, this survey of mining investment considers projects with start-up dates in the decade from 2018 to 2027 of which there are 44, valued at a total of US$65,747 million.

This figure is the result of adjustments to reflect the start-up in 2017 of seven initiatives out of the 47 considered in the previous survey, an investment reduction of US$1,948 million due to CAPEX optimizations in some projects, the exit from the portfolio of two industrial minerals projects that are seeking to improve their engineering and the entry of six new projects valued at US$5,902 million. These cautious changes in mining investment are an unequivocal signal of a year of stabilization in the industry, with a view to growing in the coming years in line with substantial improvements in world market conditions and our country’s economic development.

2017 portfolio vs. 2018 portfolio

Source: Estimated by COCHILCO.

This is best seen when comparing projects with a higher probability of materialization within the

expected timeframe and those where this probability is lower. The first group, which corresponds

to base and probable initiatives, totals US$36,257 million, with 25 projects that represent 55.1% of

the total portfolio.

64,85647 projects

- 7762 projects

- 2,2867 projects

- 1,9487 projects

+5,9026 projects

65,74744 projects

0,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2017 portfolio Restructured Start operation Investmentadjust.

New projects 2018 PORTFOLIO

MUS$


III


The second group of possible and potential projects, which are more prone to be affected by

changes in market conditions, corresponds to 19 initiatives valued at US$29,490 million and

represents 44.9% of the total portfolio.

Out of six new projects incorporated this year, three are in copper mining: the Collahuasi

Complementary Installations 170 ktpd project for US$302 million; the Zaldívar Operational

Continuity project for US$100 million; and the NuevaUnión Phases II and III projects for US$3,700

million. The others are the Salares Norte gold project of Gold Fields, valued at US$1,000 million, and

two lithium projects: SQM Salar’s brownfield Lithium Carbonate Expansion to 180 ktpy project for

US$450 million (which would complement the Salar del Carmen Expansion project included in the

2017 portfolio) and Maricunga Salts Production, a greenfield project by SIMCO SpA, a company in

the Errázuriz Group, for US$350 million.

Copper mining continues to predominate in the 2018 portfolio, with 32 projects that, at US$59,103

million, account for 89.9% of the total investment. Although this is down on the 2017 portfolio (36

projects for US$59,235 million), the contribution that these projects would make in terms of output

is larger than in 2017 and, indeed, the largest in the last three years, following the sharp drop in

investment seen in 2014.

Historical copper portfolios and their contribution to output


Along with copper, investment in lithium stands out this year, with four projects valued at US$1,280

million and representing 1.9% of the portfolio.

43,2

13

55,3

28

55,8

752.2

3.33.5

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

0,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

Mt

fin

e co

pp

er

MU

S$

Investment in copper Contribution to copper output


IV


Contents


V


Contents

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................... II

Contents ............................................................................................................................................ V

List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. VIII

List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. VIII

Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2

1. Investment in the Chilean mining industry, 2018-2027 ............................................................. 4

1.1. Conditionality of investment.............................................................................................. 5

1.1.2. Indirect determinants of conditionality ................................................................... 7

1.2. Investment by region ......................................................................................................... 8

1.3. Origin of investment ........................................................................................................ 12

2. Estimate of annual distribution of investment in portfolio projects ........................................ 15

2.1. Distribution of investment in copper mining ................................................................... 16

2.2. Distribution of investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals ...................................... 17

3.1. Contribution to copper output ......................................................................................... 20

3.2. Contribution to output of molybdenum, gold, silver and iron .......................................... 21

3.3. Contribution to output of lithium and other industrial minerals ...................................... 22

4. Comparison of mining investment portfolios to 2018 ................................................................. 24

4.1. Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios ......................................................................... 24

4.2. Historical comparison of portfolios .................................................................................. 29

5. Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 34

Origin of investment ........................................................................................................ 34

Purpose of investment ..................................................................................................... 34

Region of Chile ................................................................................................................. 35

Maximum contribution to output .................................................................................... 35

Conditionality of investment............................................................................................ 36

APPENDIX 1: Methodology .............................................................................................................. 38

1. Coverage .................................................................................................................................. 38

2. Attributes of projects and condition of materialization .......................................................... 38

2.1. Condition of materialization ............................................................................................ 38

2.2. Type of project ................................................................................................................. 39


VI


2.3. Stage of advance .............................................................................................................. 40

2.4. Environmental permits (SEA) ........................................................................................... 40

2.5. Start-up date .................................................................................................................... 40

3. Investment by Codelco and sources of information ................................................................ 41

4. Private-sector investment and sources of information ........................................................... 42

5. Methodological criteria for estimating start-up date .............................................................. 42

APPENDIX 2: Description of investment projects in copper mining ................................................ 44

1. State copper mining ................................................................................................................ 44

1.1. Codelco structural projects - www.codelco.cl .................................................................. 44

2. Large-scale private copper mining sector ................................................................................ 48

2.1. Antofagasta Minerals - www.antofagasta.co.uk .............................................................. 48

2.2. BHP - www.bhp.com ........................................................................................................ 50

2.3. Capstone Mining - www.capstonemining.com ................................................................ 51

2.4. Doña Inés de Collahuasi - www.collahuasi.cl ................................................................... 52

2.5. Freeport McMoRan - www.fcx.com ................................................................................. 53

2.6. Goldcorp / Teck - www.nuevaunion.cl ............................................................................. 54

2.7. KGHM - www.sgscm.cl ..................................................................................................... 55

2.8. Lundin Mining - www.sgscm.cl ........................................................................................ 56

2.9. Mantos Copper ................................................................................................................ 57

2.10. Teck - www.teck.com .......................................................................................... 58

3. Medium-scale copper mining sector ....................................................................................... 59

3.1. Central Asia Metals PLC - www.centralasiametals.com ................................................... 59

3.2. COPEC - www.empresascopec.cl ..................................................................................... 60

3.3. Hot Chili - www.hotchili.net.au ........................................................................................ 61

3.4. Pucobre - www.pucobre.cl ............................................................................................... 61

4. Metallurgical plants ................................................................................................................. 62

4.1. Ecometales - www.ecometales.cl .................................................................................... 62

4.2. ENAMI – www.enami.cl ................................................................................................... 63

4.3. Molymet – www.molymet.cl ........................................................................................... 64

APPENDIX 3: Description of investment projects in gold and silver mining .................................... 65

1. Rio2 Limited - www.rio2.com .................................................................................................. 65


VII


2. Gold Fields – www.goldfields.com........................................................................................... 66

3. Kingsgate Consolidate Ltd. - www.kingsgate.com.au .............................................................. 67

4. Kinross - www.kinross.com ..................................................................................................... 68

APPENDIX 4: Description of investment projects in iron mining ..................................................... 69

1. Admiralty Resources ................................................................................................................ 69

2. Andes Iron - www.conocedominga.cl ...................................................................................... 70

APPENDIX 5: Description of investment projects in industrial minerals .......................................... 71

1. Albemarle ................................................................................................................................ 71

2. SQM S.A. - www.sqm.cl ........................................................................................................... 72

3. SIMCO SpA ............................................................................................................................... 75

APPENDIX 6: Units of measurement and abbreviations .................................................................. 76


VIII


List of Figures

Figure 1: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by condition ..................................................... 5

Figure 2: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by probability of materialization ...................... 6

Figure 3: Investment portfolio by region, copper mining and other mining ...................................... 9

Figure 4: Investment portfolio by region and condition of projects ................................................. 10

Figure 5: Investment portfolio by country of origin (MMUS$ and %) .............................................. 12

Figure 6: Annualized investment, materialized and pending, by type of mining .............................. 15

Figure 7: 2017 portfolio vs. 2018 portfolio ....................................................................................... 25

Figure 8: Investment portfolios surveyed by COCHILCO, 2006-2018 ............................................... 29

Figure 9: Projects starting operation between 2006 and 2017 ........................................................ 30

Figure 10: New projects entering the portfolio between 2007 and 2018 ........................................ 30

Figure 11: Historical copper portfolios and their contribution to output ......................................... 31

Figure 12: Capital intensity per copper project vs. capital intensity per ton of fine Cu contributed 31

List of Tables

Table 1: Portfolio of mining projects in Chile, 2018-2027 .................................................................. 4

Table 2: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by sector and condition of projects................... 5

Table 3: Investment portfolio by determinants of conditionality....................................................... 7

Table 4: Investment portfolio by type of project and end product .................................................... 8

Table 5: Investment in copper mining by region and condition of projects ..................................... 11

Table 6: Investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals by region and condition of projects ....... 12

Table 7: Investment in copper mining by country of origin and condition (MMUS$) ...................... 13

Table 8: Investment in gold, iron lithium and industrial minerals by country of origin and condition

(MMUS$) .......................................................................................................................................... 13

Table 9: Annualized mining investment in Chile, 2018-2027, by probability of materialization and

sector ............................................................................................................................................... 16

Table 10: Annual distribution of investment in copper mining by condition of projects (MMUS$) . 17

Table 11: Annual distribution of investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals by condition of

projects (MMUS$) ............................................................................................................................ 18

Table 12: Copper projects and maximum output ............................................................................. 20

Table 13: Projects contributing to molybdenum, gold, silver and iron output by 2028 ................... 21

Table 14: Projects contributing to output of lithium and other industrial minerals ......................... 22

Table 15: Principal changes in investment portfolio, 2018 vs. 2017 ................................................ 26

Table 16: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by condition of projects ................................... 26

Table 17: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by mining sector .............................................. 26

Table 18: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by mining sector and condition of projects ..... 27

Table 19: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by region.......................................................... 28

Table 20: Conditions of materialization of a project ........................................................................ 39

Investment in the Chilean mining industry – Portfolio of projects, 2018 -2027 1


Introduction



Introduction

This study, which corresponds to an update of the annual report on investment in the Chilean mining

industry over the next decade, seeks to provide relevant information about the mining projects that

currently exist in Chile, together with a new forecast for investment during the next decade, based

on information disclosed by the projects’ owners.

The structure of the study is as follows:

a) Analysis of the investment required for the portfolio of projects in copper mining, gold and

silver mining, iron mining and some industrial minerals, with respect to the conditionality of

the initiatives and their purpose, the regional distribution of the investment and its country of

origin. A description of each of the projects can be found in Appendix 2 (copper mining),

Appendix 3 (gold and silver mining) and Appendix 4 (industrial minerals: lithium, iodine,

nitrates, potassium salts and titanium oxide).

b) An estimate of the investment flow represented by the portfolio, indicating the amounts

already invested, the annualized flow for the next five years and the amount to be invested

subsequently. This forecast is, however, only a reference and does not represent a commitment

on the part of the projects’ owners.

c) An estimate of the portfolio’s maximum contribution to output of copper, molybdenum,

gold, iron, lithium and industrial minerals. A more detailed analysis of the outlook for copper

production is part of a different line of work of COCHILCO.

d) A comparison of the changes between the present and previous portfolios with respect to

the amount of investment, number of projects, conditionality of the projects, purpose of the

investment and the regional distribution of projects. In addition, earlier surveys and their

evolution to date are reviewed as regards the materialization of the projects, the new projects

that entered each portfolio and their relation with the price of copper, the main commodity

considered here.

Finally, the study sets out the main conclusions that can be drawn from the information presented.

It should be noted that a project’s inclusion in the portfolio, after fulfilling the necessary conditions,

is not a guarantee of its materialization on the terms and in the timeframe planned by the company,

but does show the interest of the state and the large and medium-scale private mining sectors in

our geological resources, our mining market and our long-term mining policy.

Investment in the Chilean mining industry – Portfolio of projects, 2018-2027 3


Chapter 1:

Investment in the Chilean mining industry



1. Investment in the Chilean mining industry, 2018-2027

This section provides general information about the projects considered in the 2018-2027 portfolio.

It comprises 44 initiatives valued at US$65,747 million as shown in Table 1, which also includes the

amount of the investment, its conditionality, its purpose and the region in which it would be located,

among other information.

Table 1: Portfolio of mining projects in Chile, 2018-2027

Start-up date

Project Operator Mining sector

Region Type of project

Condition Stage of advance

Environ. permits

Investment (MMUS$)

2018-2022 OTHER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Codelco Chile State - Cu Several Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 2,907 2018-2022 FURE PROJECTS Codelco Chile Met. plants Several Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 1,972 2018-2022 TAILINGS DAMS Codelco Chile State - Cu Several Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 1,380 2018-2022 INFORMATION PROJECTS Codelco Chile State - Cu Several New POSSIBLE Feasibility N/A 1,375

2018 MOLYNOR EXPANSION Molynor Met. plants Antofagasta Expansion BASE Implementation EIA approved 240 2018 CANDELARIA 2030 CCM Candelaria Large min. - Cu Atacama Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 460

2019 MARIPOSA Admiralty Minerals Chile PTY LTD Iron Atacama New BASE Implementation EIA approved 70 2019 LA NEGRA PLANT EXPANSION - PHASE 3 Rockwood Litio Ltda. Lithium Antofagasta Expansion BASE Implementation EIA approved 300 2019 PEDRO DE VALDIVIA DIS. & REF. PLANT SQM Nitratos S.A. Ind. min. Antofagasta Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 140 2019 CHUQUICAMATA SUBTERRÁNEA Codelco Chuquicamata Div. State - Cu Antofagasta Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 5,554 2019 ORCOMA SQM Ind. min. Tarapacá New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 230 2019 COLLAHUASI COMPL. INST. 170 KTPD Doña Inés de Collahuasi Large min. - Cu Tarapacá Expansion PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 302 2019 PLAYA VERDE Copper Bay Med. min. - Cu Atacama New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA submitted 95

2020 SALAR DEL CARMEN EXPANSION SQM Salar S.A. Lithium Antofagasta Expansion BASE Implementation EIA approved 180 2020 SPENCE GROWTH OPTION Pampa Norte Large min. - Cu Antofagasta New BASE Implementation EIA approved 3,300 2020 MANTOS BLANCOS CONC. DE-BOTTLE Mantos Copper Large min. - Cu Antofagasta Expansion BASE Implementation EIA approved 181 2022 DIEGO DE ALMAGRO CM Sierra Norte S.A. Med. min. - Cu Atacama New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 597 2020 LOS PELAMBRES MARG. EXPAN. PHASE I Minera Los Pelambres Large min. - Cu Coquimbo Expansion PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 1,050 2020 CONCENTRATE LEACHING Ecometales Limited Met. plants Antofagasta New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 370 2020 SALARES NORTE Gold Fields Salares Norte SpA Gold Atacama New POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA submitted 1,000 2020 MARICUNGA SALTS PRODUCTION SIMCO SpA Lithium Atacama New POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA submitted 350

2021 MINE-PLANT TRANSPORT Codelco Andina Div. State - Cu Valparaíso Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 1,321 2021 MANTOVERDE DEVELOPMENT Mantos Copper Large min. - Cu Atacama New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 832 2021 NUEVA ESPERANZA – ARQUEROS Laguna Resources Chile Gold Atacama New POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA submitted 250 2021 CERRO MARICUNGA Atacama Pacific Gold Gold Atacama New POSSIBLE Feasibility Without EIA 587 2021 RAJO INCA Codelco Salvador Div. State - Cu Atacama Expansion POTENTIAL Prefeasibility Without EIA 817 2021 PRODUCTORA SM El Águila Ltda. Med. min. - Cu Atacama New POTENTIAL Prefeasibility Without EIA 725

2022 CENTINELA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT (*) Minera Centinela Large min. - Cu Antofagasta New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 4,350 2022 ZALDÍVAR OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY CM Zaldívar SpA Large min. - Cu Antofagasta Replacement PROBABLE Feasibility EIA submitted 100 2022 SANTO DOMINGO Santo Domingo SCM Large min. - Cu Atacama New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 1,700 2022 QUEBRADA BLANCA HYPOGENE CM Teck Quebrada Blanca Large min. - Cu Tarapacá New PROBABLE Feasibility EIA approved 4,700 2022 LITHIUM CARBONATE EXP. 180 KTPY SQM Salar S.A. Lithium Antofagasta Expansion POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA submitted 450 2022 LA COIPA PHASE 7 Kinross Minera Chile Ltda. Gold Atacama Replacement POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA approved 200 2022 SIERRA GORDA EXPANSION 230 KTPD Sierra Gorda SCM Large min. - Cu Antofagasta Expansion POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA approved 2,000 2022 LOS PELAMBRES MARG. EXP. PHASE II Minera Los Pelambres Large min. - Cu Coquimbo Expansion POSSIBLE Feasibility Without EIA 500 2022 EL ESPINO Pucobre Med. min. - Cu Coquimbo New POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA approved 624 2022 NUEVA PAIPOTE Fundición Hernan Videla Lira Met. plants Atacama Expansion POSSIBLE Feasibility Without EIA 646

2023 NEW MINE LEVEL Codelco Div. El Teniente State - Cu O'Higgins Replacement BASE Implementation EIA approved 3,926 2023 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASE I NuevaUnión SpA Large min. - Cu Atacama New POTENTIAL Feasibility Without EIA 3,500 2023 DOMINGA Andes Iron SpA Iron Coquimbo New POTENTIAL Feasibility Without EIA 2,888

2024 RT SULFIDES PHASE II Codelco Radomiro Tomic Div. State - Cu Antofagasta New POSSIBLE Feasibility EIA approved 2,154

2026 EL ABRA CONCENTRATOR (e) CCM El Abra Large min. - Cu Antofagasta New POTENTIAL Feasibility Without EIA 5,000 2026 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASES II & III NuevaUnión SpA Large min. - Cu Atacama New POTENTIAL Feasibility Without EIA 3,700 2026 ANDINA EXPANSION Codelco Andina Div. State - Cu Valparaíso Expansion POTENTIAL Prefeasibility Without EIA 2,725

Total investment in 2018-2027 portfolio (MMUS$) 65,747

Source: Compiled by COCHILCO using public information about each project.

This information is used for a more detailed analysis of the portfolio as follows: Section 1.1 reviews

the conditionality of projects; Section 1.2 looks at investment by region, analyzed according to the



target mining sector and the projects’ conditionality; and Section 1.3 analyzes the investment by

country of origin.

1.1. Conditionality of investment

Using the concept of conditionality of the investment, developed by COCHILCO on the basis of the

association and interaction between different variables that affect the development of investment

projects1, it is possible to assess with a little more accuracy the likelihood of implementation within

the timeframe estimated by their owners and respective engineering teams. Figure 1 shows the

distribution of investment by condition while Table 2 shows its distribution by mining sector and

condition.

Figure 1: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by condition


Table 2: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by sector and condition of projects

SECTOR TOTAL BASE PROBABLE POSSIBLE POTENTIAL

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

CODELCO 9 22,159 5 15,088 0 0 2 3,529 2 3,542

Large-scale private 15 31,675 3 3,941 7 13,034 2 2,500 3 12,200

Medium-scale private 4 2,041 0 0 2 692 1 624 1 725

Industrial plants 4 3,228 2 2,212 1 370 1 646 0 0

Subtotal copper 32 59,103 10 21,241 10 14,096 6 7,299 6 16,467

Gold and silver 4 2,037 0 0 0 0 4 2,037 0 0

Iron 2 2,958 1 70 0 0 0 0 1 2,888

Lithium 4 1,280 2 480 0 0 2 800 0 0

Industrial minerals 2 370 1 140 1 230 0 0 0 0

Subtotal other minerals 12 6,645 4 690 1 230 6 2,837 1 2,888


1 For more information about the methodology, see Appendix 1, “Attributes of projects and condition of materialization”.

BASEMMUS$ 21,931

33.4%14 projects

PROBABLEMMUS$ 14,326

21.8%11 projects

POSSIBLEMMUS$ 10,135

15.4%12 projects

POTENTIALMMUS$ 19,355

29.4%7 projects

Probability of materialization



Based on the likelihood that the projects can or cannot be implemented in the timeframe estimated

by the mining company, it is possible to classify them as base or probable in a subgroup referred to

as “with a higher probability of materialization” or as possible or potential in a subgroup referred to

as “with a lower probability of materialization”.

Figure 2: Investment in the Chilean mining industry by probability of materialization

Source: Calculated by COCHILCO.

The first subgroup of projects “with a higher probability of materialization” includes 25 base or

probable projects, representing an investment of US$36,257 million:

- 14 base projects with an investment of US$21,931 million in which Codelco continues to be

the predominant player, accounting for 68.8% of this investment;

- 11 probable projects valued at US$14,326 million of which the large-scale private mining

sector accounts for 91%.

The second subgroup of projects “with a lower probability of materialization” includes 19 projects

for a total of US$29,490 million:

- 12 possible projects valued at US$10,135 million of which Codelco and large-scale private

companies together account for 59.5% while copper mining as a whole accounts for 72%;

- 6 potential projects valued at US$19,355 million of which large-scale copper mining accounts

for 63%.

WITH HIGHER PROBABILITYMUS$ 36,257

55%25 projects

WITH LOWER PROBABILITYMUS$ 29,490

45%19 projects



1.1.1. Determinants of investment conditionality

For the sake of a better understanding of the classification of projects by conditionality, the table

below shows the variables affecting a project’s probability of materialization.

Table 3: Investment portfolio by determinants of conditionality

Variable

2018-2027

Investment (MMUS$)

% of total N° projects

Type of project

New 34,697 52.8% 21

Replacement 17,960 27.3% 10

Expansion 13,091 19.9% 13

Stage of project

Implementation 21,931 33.4% 14

Feasibility 39,549 60.2% 27

Prefeasibility 4,267 6.5% 3

Environmental permits

RCA approved 41,040 62.4% 27

EIA/DIA suspended 2,888 4.4% 1

EIA/DIA submitted 2,245 3.4% 6

Without EIA/DIA 19,574 29.8% 10

Investment and materialization period

2018-2022 41,854 63.7% 37

After 2022 23,893 36.3% 7


As can be observed, 52.8% of the initiatives correspond to new projects and the remaining 47.2% to

replacement or expansion projects. In addition, 60.2% are at the feasibility stage while 33.4% are

already being implemented.

Environmental permits are required for the construction phase and 62.4% of the portfolio has

completed this stage. When compared to projects in implementation, it can be seen that there is a

remnant of 13 projects that have not yet begun construction. These projects are the group that

requires more attention and analysis on the part of the authorities.

Finally, 63.7% of the portfolio will be implemented within the next five years, leaving only

seveninitiatives for the following five years.

1.1.2. Indirect determinants of conditionality

The other variables that it is useful to consider, although they do not have a direct bearing on

conditionality, are whether a project is brownfield or greenfield and the end product sought by the

initiative (Table 4).



Table 4: Investment portfolio by type of project and end product

Variable

2018-2027

Investment (MMUS$)


Type of project

Brownfield 40,290 61.3% 25

Greenfield 25,458 38.7% 19

End product

Copper concentrate 48,177 73.3% 21

SX-EW cathodes 470 0.7% 2

Mixed 7,598 11.6% 6

Molybdenum 240 0.4% 1

Gold and silver 2,037 3.1% 4

FURE (ER anodes/cathodes) 2,618 4.0% 2

Iron concentrate and pellet feed 2,958 4.5% 2

Lithium carbonate/hydroxide 1,280 1.9% 4

Iodine/nitrates 370 0.6% 2


A lack of greenfield projects is apparent in the table above, which shows that only 38.7% of initiatives

are of this type. This is in line with the thesis that most current projects are geared to operational

continuity, rather than to increasing output. This is the case not only for copper, but also gold,

lithium and industrial minerals.

The table also shows that 73.3% of projects would produce copper concentrate, rather than SX-EW

cathodes via leaching, highlighting the change in the production structure of Chile’s copper industry

(without considering the 11.6% of mixed oxide and sulfide projects). In the case of industrial

minerals, production of nitrates and iodine has been displaced by lithium carbonate and hydroxide

projects, reflecting the boom in electromobility and the use of lithium in batteries. In all, thanks to

the development of copper sulfide deposits, copper continues to be the most important sector in

the portfolio.

1.2. Investment by region

Figure 3 shows the regional distribution of investment in the copper, gold, silver, iron and industrial

minerals sectors.



Figure 3: Investment portfolio by region, copper mining and other mining


The Antofagasta Region continues to lead mining investment, accounting for 42.6% of the portfolio.

Out of investment in this region, 96.2% corresponds to copper. The Antofagasta Region is followed

by the Atacama Region, with 24.7% of the portfolio. Here, copper is also important, accounting for

84.9% of investment. The O’Higgins Region takes third place, with a 9.1% share of investment, all of

MUS$ 5,232

MUS$ 28,025

MUS$ 16,247

MUS$ 5,062

MUS$ 5,190

MMUS$ 5,992

0,000 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000

Arica y Parinacota

Tarapacá

Antofagasta

Atacama

Coquimbo

Valparaíso

Santiago

O'Higgins

Copper Other minerals

0



which corresponds to copper. It is important to note that 75.3% of investment corresponds to

northern Chile where 92.4% of it would be in copper.

A more detailed analysis can be seen in the distribution of investment by region and conditionality

(Figure 4).

Figure 4: Investment portfolio by region and condition of projects


ProbableMUS$ 5,232

100%

Tarapacá

BaseMUS$ 13,037

47%

ProbableMUS$ 4,820

17%

PossibleMUS$ 5,168

18%

PotentialMUS$ 5,000

18%

Antofagasta

BaseMUS$ 740

4%

ProbableMUS$ 3,224

20%Possible

MUS$ 3,54122%

PotentialMUS$ 8,742

54%

AtacamaProbable

MUS$ 1,05021%

PossibleMUS$ 1,124

22%

PotentialMUS$ 2,888

57%

Coquimbo

BaseMUS$ 2,329

45%

PossibleMUS$ 135

3%

PotentialMUS$ 2,725

52%

Valparaíso

BaseMUS$ 5,825

97%

PossibleMUS$ 167

3%

O'Higgins



According to the data collected, copper mining accounts for 89.9% of the portfolio, with 28 projects

corresponding to Codelco, large and medium-scale private copper mining companies and state and

private metallurgical plants.

Table 5: Investment in copper mining by region and condition of projects

REGION Total Base Probable Possible Potential

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

% of total investment

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Tarapacá 5,002 2 7.6% 0 0 5,002 2 0 0 0 0

Antofagasta 26,955 10 41.0% 12,417 4 4,820 3 4,718 2 5,000 1

Atacama 13,790 10 21.0% 670 1 3,224 4 1,155 1 8,742 4

Coquimbo 2,174 3 3.3% 0 0 1,050 1 1,124 2 0 0

Valparaíso 5,190 2 7.9% 2,329 1 0 0 135 0 2,725 1

O'Higgins 5,992 1 9.1% 5,825 1 0 0 167 0 0 0

TOTAL 59,103 28 89.9% 21,241 7 14,096 10 7,299 5 12,767 6


As shown in Figure 3, most investment in copper mining corresponds to the Antofagasta Region and

63.9% of this investment has a higher probability of materialization in the timeframe estimated by

the projects’ owners (base + probable projects), with seven initiatives valued as shown in Table 5.

The Atacama Region is the second most important destination for investment in copper mining.

However, 71.8% of this investment has a lower probability of materialization in the expected

timeframe (possible + potential projects).

The O’Higgins and Valparaíso Regions take third and fourth place in copper investment, respectively.

In the former, 97.2% of the investment has a higher probability of materialization while, in the latter,

the figure drops to 44.9%. In both regions, Codelco, with its divisional growth and environmental

improvement projects, plays a key role.

The Tarapacá Region takes fifth place, thanks to the Quebrada Blanca Hypogene Project and the

Collahuasi Complementary Installations 170 ktpd project, both of which are probable and poised to

begin construction work. The Coquimbo Region also has a portfolio of projects but this is still at the

stage of engineering studies and has a lower probability of materialization within the expected

timeframe (51.7% of projects are possible or potential).

Table 6 shows the regional distribution of investment in the gold, iron, lithium and industrial

minerals sectors.



Table 6: Investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals sectors by region and condition of projects

REGION

Total Base Probable Possible Potential

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

% of total investment

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)

N° projects

Tarapacá 230 1 0.4% 0 0 230 1 0 0 0 0

Antofagasta 1,070 4 1.7% 620 3 0 0 450 1 0 0

Atacama 2,457 6 4.0% 70 1 0 0 2,387 5 0 0

Coquimbo 2,888 1 4.7% 0 0 0 0 0 0 2,888 1

TOTAL 6,645 12 10.7% 690 4 230 1 2,837 6 2,888 1


Investment in other mining sectors accounts for 10.7% of the 2018-2027 portfolio with 12 projects,

located between the Tarapacá and Coquimbo Regions.

Projects in sectors such as gold, iron, lithium and industrial minerals are mostly possible or potential

(86.2% and seven projects), indicating that sectors other than copper still represent a higher risk of

projects not being implemented in the timeframe envisaged in their engineering studies.

1.3. Origin of investment

Chile stands out as a mining country in which local public and private investment in the industry is

important. However, Chile has an open economy and, as discussed in the next chapter, there is an

important group of international companies that invest in Chile, either as the direct owners of an

operation or as partners of the operators of new initiatives.

Figure 5: Investment portfolio by country of origin (MMUS$ and %)

(*) United Kingdom, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and Switzerland.


The investment in the 2018-2027 portfolio has its origin in 11 countries, led by Chile where Codelco

and Antofagasta Minerals together account for 82% of investment. Chile is followed by Canada, with

Teck, Goldcorp and Capstone Mining accounting for 84.5% of the inflow from this country.

ChileMUS$ 39,385

60%

CanadaMUS$ 13,510

21%

AustraliaMUS$ 4,200

6%

USMUS$ 2,850

4%

JapanMUS$ 1,669

3%

Others*MUS$ 4,134

6%



The third most important source of investment is Australia, represented principally by BHP which,

through its Spence Growth Option project, accounts for 78.6% of Australian investment.

Australia is followed by the United States, with Freeport McMoRan and its El Abra Mill project

(89.5% of US investment). Japan is in fifth place, with Sumitomo accounting for 59.4% of investment

from that country.

Finally, the group of “others” comprises the United Kingdom, Poland, South Africa, South Korea,

Taiwan and Switzerland, which together account for 5% of the investment envisaged in the portfolio.

Table 7 and 8 show a breakdown of the figures in Figure 5, separating copper from other minerals.

Table 7: Investment in copper mining by country of origin and condition (MMUS$)

Country of origin

Amount % of

investment Base Probable Possible Potential

Chile 35,645 54.22% 17,300 7,109 5,099 6,137

Canada 12,404 18.87% 368 4,836 0 7,200

Australia 3,880 5.90% 3,300 0 0 580

US 2,550 3.88% 0 0 0 2,550

Japan 1,648 2.51% 92 456 1,100 0

United Kingdom 1,233 1.88% 181 1,052 0 0

Poland 1,100 1.67% 0 0 1,100 0

South Korea 510 0.78% 0 510 0 0

Switzerland 133 0.20% 0 133 0 0

TOTAL 59,103 89.9% 21,241 14,096 7,299 16,467


Table 8: Investment in gold, iron, lithium and industrial minerals by country of origin and condition (MMUS$)

Country of origin

Amount % of

investment Base Probable Possible Potential

Chile 3,740 5.69% 211 152 489 2,888

Canada 1,107 1.68% 102 74 931 0

South Africa 1,000 1.52% 0 0 1,000 0

Australia 320 0.49% 70 0 250 0

US 300 0.46% 300 0 0 0

Taiwan 158 0.24% 0 0 158 0

Japan 21 0.03% 7 5 9 0

TOTAL 6,645 10.1% 690 230 2,837 2,888




Chapter 2:

Estimate of annual distribution of investment in

portfolio projects



2. Estimate of annual distribution of investment in portfolio projects

This chapter provides a breakdown by year of the investment to be materialized over the next ten

years. For reasons of clarity, the information is grouped according to when the investment would

be materialized defining three principal periods:

- Before 2018: US$10,501 million, equivalent to 16% of the portfolio, corresponds to projects

materialized before 2018 but which have yet to start operation.

- Short and medium-term: US$42,748 million, or 65% of the portfolio, would be materialized

in 2018-2022 when 37 of the 43 projects that make up the portfolio would start operation.

- Long-term: US$12,498 million, or 19% of the portfolio, would be materialized in 2023-2027

when the last seven projects in the portfolio would start operation.

Figure 6 shows the annual flow of the investment estimated for 2018-2027, separating copper from

“other minerals” (gold, iron, lithium and industrial minerals).

Figure 6: Annualized investment, materialized and pending, by type of mining


Estimating the investment likely in each particular year provides a clearer picture of the outlook.

However, in order to increase the robustness of the analysis, it is necessary to contrast the annual

amounts with the investment’s conditionality, based on the public information available. Table 9

shows a first estimate of annualized investment according to probability of materialization for the

state mining sector (copper) and the private sector (copper, gold, iron, lithium and industrial

minerals).

87%

92%

88% 85%83% 95%

100%

13%

8%

12% 15%

17%5%

10,501

5,568

10,515 10,382

8,782

7,500

12,498

0,000

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

Before 2018 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 - 2027

MU

S$

Copper Other minerals

0



Table 9: Annualized mining investment in Chile, 2018-2027, by probability of materialization and sector

SECTOR AND CONDITION Before 2018

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Subtotal

2018-2022 2023-2027

TOTAL % of

investment

TOTAL 10,501 5,568 10,515 10,382 8,782 7,500 42,747 12,498 65,747 100%

Base + Probable 8,413 4,859 8,302 6,436 3,857 3,355 26,809 1,034 36,256 55.1%

Possible + Potential 2,088 709 2,213 3,946 4,925 4,145 15,938 11,464 29,491 44.9%

STATE MINING 5,233 3,238 3,765 3,408 2,274 2,875 15,560 3,983 24,777 100%

Base + Probable 4,879 2,918 3,007 2,512 1,650 1,920 12,007 174 17,060 68.9%

Possible + Potential 354 320 758 896 624 955 3,553 3,809 7,717 31.1%

PRIVATE MINING 5,268 2,330 6,750 6,974 6,509 4,625 27,187 8,515 40,970 100%

Base + Probable 3,534 1,941 5,295 3,924 2,207 1,435 14,802 860 19,196 46.9%

Possible + Potential 1,734 389 1,455 3,050 4,302 3,190 12,385 7,655 21,774 53.1%


As shown in Figure 2, 55% of the total portfolio corresponds to investment with a higher probability

of materialization. However, analysis of annualized investment profiles by sector indicates that,

although the private mining sector makes the largest contribution to total investment, investment

by the state sector has a higher probability of materialization in the next decade (68.9% of the base

+ probable portfolio), highlighting its importance in national investment.

Moreover, it can be seen that 23.2% of the investment more likely to materialize has already been

implemented and 73.9% will materialize within the next five years.

2.1. Distribution of investment in copper mining

Table 10 shows the annual flow of investment in copper mining by sector: Codelco, large-scale and

medium-scale private mining and metallurgical plants, ranking the investment from greater to lesser

probability of materialization within the timeframe indicated by the projects’ owners.



Table 10: Annual distribution of investment in copper mining by condition of projects (MMUS$)

COPPER MINING AND CONDITION

Before 2018

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Subtotal

2018-2022 2023 - 2027

TOTAL % of

investment

TOTAL 9,115 5,097 9,206 8,784 7,286 7,116 37,489 12,498 59,102 100%

Base 5,786 3,542 4,687 3,482 1,650 1,920 15,281 174 21,241 35.9%

Probable 2,506 1,030 3,141 2,916 2,207 1,435 10,729 860 14,095 23.8%

Possible 515 386 780 1,181 1,799 1,115 5,261 1,523 7,299 12%

Potential 308 139 598 1,205 1,630 2,646 6,218 9,941 16,467 28%

CODELCO 5,201 2,411 3,065 2,986 1,930 2,583 12,975 3,983 22,159 100%

Base 4,879 2,115 2,431 2,377 1,425 1,687 10,035 174 15,088 68.1%

Possible 239 252 381 334 250 550 1,767 1,523 3,529 15.9%

Potential 83 44 253 275 255 346 1,173 2,286 3,542 16.0%

LARGE-SCALE MINING 3,257 1,669 4,816 4,545 4,707 4,166 19,903 8,515 31,675 100%

Base 742 549 1,680 970 0 0 3,199 0 3,941 12.4%

Probable 2,326 950 2,711 2,545 2,207 1,435 9,848 860 13,034 41.1%

Possible 55 95 220 450 1,250 431 2,446 0 2,500 7.9%

Potential 135 75 205 580 1,250 2,300 4,410 7,655 12,200 38.5%

MEDIUM-SCALE MINING 436 90 385 750 305 75 1,605 0 2,041 100%

Probable 157 55 190 290 0 0 535 0 692 33.9%

Possible 189 15 55 110 180 75 435 0 624 30.6%

Potential 90 20 140 350 125 0 635 0 725 35.5%

MET./IND. PLANTS 221 927 940 503 344 292 3,006 0 3,228 100%

Base 165 878 576 135 225 233 2,047 0 2,212 68.5%

Probable 24 25 240 81 0 0 346 0 370 11.5%

Possible 32 24 124 287 119 59 613 0 646 20.0%


The table above indicates that copper projects for US$9,115 million have already been

implemented, leaving US$37,489 million for implementation over the next five years and US$12,498

million for 2023 onwards.

Out of the US$35,336 million in initiatives more likely to be implemented within the timeframe

anticipated by their owners, around 23.5% has already been implemented and around US$26,010

million is scheduled for 2018-2022, leaving US$1,034 million for 2023 onwards.

The projects with a lower probability of materialization within the expected timeframe represent an

investment of US$11,479 million over the next five years, leaving US$11,464 million for

materialization as from 2023. Only 3.5% of the total investment envisaged in this group has already

been implemented, reflecting the fact that projects are still at an early stage.

2.2. Distribution of investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals

Table 11 summarizes annual investment in the gold, iron and industrial minerals sectors.



Table 11: Annual distribution of investment in gold, iron and industrial minerals by condition of projects (MMUS$)

TYPE OF MINING AND CONDITION

Before 2018

2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 Subtotal

2018-2022 2023 - 2027

TOTAL % of

investment

TOTAL 1,386 471 1,309 1,598 1,497 384 5,259 0 6,645 100%

Base 98 234 320 38 0 0 592 0 690 10.4%

Probable 23 53 154 0 0 0 207 0 230 3.5%

Possible 292 164 655 1,180 447 100 2,546 0 2,837 42.7%

Potential 374 20 180 380 1,050 284 1,914 0 2,888 43.5%

GOLD 265 129 515 860 247 22 1,773 0 2,037 100%

Possible 265 129 515 860 247 22 1,773 0 2,037 100.0%

IRON 988 36 220 380 1,050 284 1,970 0 2,958 100%

Base 14 16 40 0 0 0 56 0 70 2.4%

Potential 974 20 180 380 1,050 284 1,914 0 2,888 97.6%

INDUST. MINERALS 134 306 574 358 200 78 1,516 0 1,650 100%

Base 84 218 280 38 0 0 536 0 620 37.6%

Probable 23 53 154 0 0 0 207 0 230 13.9%

Possible 27 35 140 320 200 78 773 0 800 48.5%


In the case of gold and iron mining, a trend seen over the past three years persists and projects are

concentrated in the subgroup with a lower probability of materialization within the expected

timeframe. For gold, investment of US$2,037 million is expected, divided into four projects of which

the last would be implemented in 2022. For iron, there are two projects worth a total of US$2,958

million of which one would be implemented in 2019 and the other not before 2023.

In the case of industrial minerals, 51.5% of the investment is base or probable. In recent years, this

sector has been driven by lithium mining, which accounts for 77.6% of the investment expected in

this subgroup.



Chapter 3:

Portfolio’s maximum contribution to output,

2018



3. Portfolio’s maximum contribution to output, 2018

The amount of investment involved in the portfolio of mining projects surveyed annually by

COCHILCO is important. However, the investment’s impact on future output, with the resulting

supply chain development, is of even greater importance.

Based on the information available for the different projects, this chapter seeks to estimate the

maximum contribution they could make to the country’s mining output.

3.1. Contribution to copper output

The initiatives related to copper production are shown in Table 12.

Table 12: Copper projects and maximum output

Start-up date

Project Sector Condition Operator Product Annual Cu production

capacity (ton)2

2018 CANDELARIA 2030 Large min. - Cu BASE Lundin Mining Cu in conc. 33,000

2019 CHUQUICAMATA SUBTERRÁNEA State - Cu BASE Codelco Cu in conc. 360,000

2019 COLLAHUASI COMP. INSTAL. 170 KTPD Large min. - Cu PROBABLE Doña Inés de Collahuasi Cu in conc. 94,000

2019 PLAYA VERDE Med. min. - Cu PROBABLE Copper Bay Cu in conc. & SX-EW cathodes 8,640

2020 SPENCE GROWTH OPTION Large min. - Cu BASE BHP Cu in conc. 198,000

2020 MANTOS BLANCOS CONC. DE-BOTTLE. Large min. - Cu BASE Mantos Copper Cu in conc. 19,000

2020 DIEGO DE ALMAGRO Med. min. - Cu PROBABLE Copec Cu in conc. & SX-EW cathodes 43,600

2020 LOS PELAMBRES MARG. EXPAN. PHASE I Large min. - Cu PROBABLE AMSA Cu in conc. 66,000

2020 LEACHING OF CONCENTRATE Met. plants PROBABLE Codelco Fine Cu in PLS 60,000

2021 MANTOVERDE DEVELOPMENT Large min. - Cu PROBABLE Mantos Copper Cu in conc. 87,000

2021 RAJO INCA State - Cu POTENTIAL Codelco Cu in conc. 70,000

2021 PRODUCTORA Med. min. - Cu POTENTIAL Hot Chili Cu in conc. & SX-EW cathodes 59,200

2022 CENTINELA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT (*) Large min. - Cu PROBABLE AMSA Cu in conc. 270,000

2022 ZALDÍVAR OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY Large min. - Cu PROBABLE AMSA SX-EW cathodes 126,000

2022 SANTO DOMINGO Large min. - Cu PROBABLE Capstone Mining Cu in conc. 168,300

2022 QUEBRADA BLANCA HYPOGENE Large min. - Cu PROBABLE Teck Cu in conc. 270,000

2022 SIERRA GORDA EXPANSION 230 KTPD Large min. - Cu POSSIBLE KGHM International Cu in conc. 120,000

2022 LOS PELAMBRES MARG. EXPAN. PHASE II Large min. - Cu POSSIBLE AMSA Cu in conc. 44,000

2022 EL ESPINO Med. min. - Cu POSSIBLE Pucobre Cu in conc. 35,000

2022 NUEVA PAIPOTE Met. plants POSSIBLE ENAMI Cu anodes 70,000

2023 NEW MINE LEVEL State - Cu BASE Codelco Cu in conc. 330,000

2023 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASE I Large min. - Cu POTENTIAL NuevaUnión SpA Cu-Mo-Au in conc. 175,000

2023 DOMINGA Iron POTENTIAL Andes Iron Pellet Feed (Fe) / Cu in conc. 21,000

2024 RT SULFIDES PHASE II State - Cu POSSIBLE Codelco Cu in conc. 250,000

2026 EL ABRA CONCENTRATOR (Ex EL ABRA MILL) Large min. - Cu POTENTIAL Freeport McMoRan Cu in conc. 300,000

2026 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASES II & III Large min. - Cu POTENTIAL NuevaUnión SpA Cu-Au in conc. 75,000

2026 ANDINA EXPANSION State - Cu POTENTIAL Codelco Cu in conc. 150,000


As shown in the table above, production of copper concentrate predominates. As a result, out of

the estimated maximum of 3.53 million tons of fine copper that the projects included in the portfolio

2 Reference production capacity based on public information; corresponds to the maximum achievable by the operation, not an estimate

of constant output.



would contribute by 2028, 95.8% would correspond to concentrate. This contribution from

concentrate would also be associated with other minerals such as molybdenum, gold and silver.

It should be borne in mind that this new output cannot simply be added to existing production

because it is necessary to take into account the natural decline in output at existing operations. In

other words, an important part of the portfolio corresponds to replacement projects or “new”

projects that completely redesign the production method of an existing operation.

3.2. Contribution to output of molybdenum, gold, silver and iron

The change in the production matrix of copper projects discussed above implies that they would

also have an impact on output of minerals such as molybdenum, gold and silver and, in some cases,

iron. A summary of their contribution, in the form of primary and secondary production, is shown

in Table 13.

Table 13: Projects contributing to molybdenum, gold, silver and iron output by 2028

Start-up date

Project Sector Region Condition Operator Product Annual

production capacity

Unit

2018 MOLYNOR EXPANSION Met. plants Antofagasta BASE Molymet Mo oxide 50,600 ton Mo

2019 MARIPOSA Iron Atacama BASE Admiralty Resources Fe conc. 64,260 ton Fe conc.

2020 SALARES NORTE Gold Atacama POSSIBLE Gold Fields Dore 7,860 kg Au

2020 SPENCE GROWTH OPTION Gran Min. - Cu Antofagasta BASE BHP Mo Conc. 7,500 ton Mo

2021 NUEVA ESPERANZA - ARQUEROS Gold Atacama POSSIBLE Kingsgate Consolidate Ltd. Doré 250 / 100 kg Au / ton Ag

2021 CERRO MARICUNGA Gold Atacama POSSIBLE Rio2 Limited Doré 8,900 kg Au

2022 LA COIPA PHASE 7 Gold Atacama POSSIBLE Kinross Doré 6,200 kg Au

2023 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASE I Gran Min. - Cu Atacama POTENTIAL NuevaUnion SpA Mo-Au in conc. 1,700 / 4,800 ton Mo / kg Au

2023 DOMINGA Iron Coquimbo POTENTIAL Andes Iron Pellet feed 7,200,000 ton Fe

2026 NUEVAUNIÓN PHASES II & III Gran Min. - Cu Atacama POTENTIAL NuevaUnion SpA Au in conc. 2,850 kg Au


As seen in the table above, the largest contribution to molybdenum production would come from

the Spence Growth Option project and NuevaUnión Phase I project, which together would account

for a maximum contribution of 9,200 tons by 2028. The Molynor expansion project is not included

because it would only contribute capacity for refining molybdenum concentrate.

In the case of iron, the contribution of the projects included in the portfolio would reach 64,260

tons of Fe concentrate and 11 million tons of Fe mineral in pellet feed, giving a total of some 7.24

million tons of fine iron, assuming a grade of 65% at both operations.

Finally, in the case of gold, the maximum contribution of primary production from the three

initiatives included in the portfolio is estimated to reach 23,210 kg by 2028 while secondary

production from the NuevaUnión Phases I, II and III projects would reach 7,650 kg, giving a total

maximum contribution of 30,860 kg towards the end of the decade. Only the Nueva Esperanza

project indicates that it would produce silver, contributing around 100 tons contained in doré by

2028.



3.3. Contribution to output of lithium and other industrial minerals

The portfolio includes six projects of this type of which four correspond to lithium, highlighting the

importance acquired recently by this segment as compared to the iodine and nitrates more

traditionally produced in Chile.

Table 14: Projects contributing to output of lithium and other industrial minerals

Start-up date

Project

Sector Region Condition Operator Product Annual production

capacity Unit

2019 LA NEGRA PLANT EXPANSION – PHASE 3

Lithium Antofagasta BASE

Rockwood (Albemarle)

Carbonate 42,700 ton Li2CO3

2019 PEDRO DE VALDIVIA DIS. & REF. PLANT

Ind. Min. Antofagasta BASE SQM Refined NO3 420,000 ton

2019 ORCOMA

Ind. Min. Tarapacá PROBABLE SQM Iodine and NO3 salts 2,500 / 320,325 ton I / ton NO3

2020 SALAR DEL CARMEN EXPANSION

Lithium Antofagasta BASE SQM Lithium carbonate/hydroxide

22,000 / 26,000 ton Li2CO3 / ton LiOH

2020 MARICUNGA SALTS PRODUCTION

Lithium Atacama POSSIBLE SIMCO Lithium carbonate/ hydroxide/K chloride

5,700 / 9,100 / 38,900 ton Li2CO3 / ton LiOH / ton KCL

2022 LITHIUM CARBONATE EXPANSION 180 KTPY

Lithium Antofagasta POSSIBLE SQM Lithium carbonate 110,000 ton Li2CO3


As shown in Table 14, the contribution to lithium output would consist in some 180,400 tons of

Li2CO3 and 35,100 tons of LiOH by 2028, with SQM accounting for 73% and 74% of the increase in

lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide, respectively.

In the case of other industrial minerals, contribution to output is estimated at 2,500 tons for iodine,

320,325 tones for nitrates and 38,900 tons for potassium chloride.



Chapter 4:

Comparison of mining investment portfolios to

2018



4. Comparison of mining investment portfolios to 2018

This chapter examines the evolution of the investment portfolio and compares the current portfolio

with previous ones. It is first analyzed with respect to the 2017 portfolio (section 4.1) before going

on to review the evolution of earlier portfolios, examining the growth of the investment volume of

portfolios since 2006 compared to other variables (section 4.2).

As indicated in Chapter 1, the portfolio of mining projects in Chile as updated to August 2018

includes 44 initiatives, down from the 47 projects in the portfolio reported in July 2017,3 4 but with

an increase of US$892 million in the amount of investment involved.

4.1. Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios

The changes between the 2017 and 2018 portfolios as regards the projects’ likelihood of

materialization and timeframe and the investment involved are shown in Figure 7 and Table 15.

They include:

a) Seven projects valued at US$2,286 million, which were part of the 2017 portfolio, are

excluded in 2018 because they started operation in the intervening period.

b) Two projects included in 2017 are excluded in 2018 due to their restructuring. One of these

is the Cerro Blanco rutile and feldspar project, valued last year at US$380 million, which,

however, is likely to be reincorporated following its sale by US-based White Mountain

Titanium to an overseas financial group. The other initiative is the locally-owned iodine

Arbiodo project, valued at US$396 million, which has been postponed due to problems with

its concessions and land use.

c) Six new projects worth US$5,902 million are incorporated into the portfolio. Three are

copper mining projects: the Collahuasi Complementary Installations 170 ktpd project for

US$302 million, the Zaldívar Operational Continuity project for US$100 million and the

NuevaUnión project Phases II and III for US$3,700 million. The others are the Salares Norte

gold project of Gold Fields, valued at US$1,000 million, and two lithium projects: SQM

Salar’s brownfield Lithium Carbonate Expansion 180 ktpy project for US$450 million (which

would complement the Salar del Carmen Expansion project included in the 2017 portfolio)

and the Maricunga Salts Production greenfield project of SIMCO SpA, a member of the

Errázuriz Group, for US$350 million.

d) 18 initiatives, valued at US$21,898 million show no change with respect to 2017.

3 Considering Codelco’s “Other development projects” and “Information projects” in both cases.

4 See “Inversión en la minería chilena - Cartera de proyectos 2017-2026” (DEPP 14/2017).



e) In the case of Codelco’s four structural projects, the dates and likelihood of materialization

have not changed but the investment involved has been reduced by US$1,790 million.

However, the group of projects classified as “other Codelco investments” mean a net

increase of US$1,039 million over the next five years as compared to the 2017 portfolio.

f) The expected start-up of seven projects valued at US$9,916 million has been put back by

between one and two years, either because the owners have indicated that this will be the

case or because, based on the methodology explained in this report, COCHILCO estimates

that it will occur. None of these changes of start-up date affect the project’s likelihood of

materialization or the estimated investment.

g) In the case of five projects, the likelihood of materialization, value and/or start-up date have

changed, implying a net drop in investment of US$1,197 million.

Figure 7: 2017 portfolio vs. 2018 portfolio


64,85647 projects

- 7762 projects

- 2,2867 projects

- 1,9487 projects

+5,9026 projects

65,74744 projects

0,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

2017 portfolio Restructured Start operation Investmentadjust.

New projects 2018 PORTFOLIO

MUS$



Table 15: Principal changes in investment portfolio, 2018 vs. 2017

ITEM N° projects

Investment portfolio

2017 (MMUS$)

Investment portfolio

2018 (MMUS$)

Difference 2018 vs. 2017 (MMUS$)

Projects that started operation 7 2,286 0 -2,286

Projects that were restructured 2 776 0 -776

New projects incorporated into portfolio 6 0 5,902 5,902

Projects without changes 18 21,898 21,898 0

Projects with change only in value 4 11,636 9,846 -1,790

Projects only with delay of start-up date 7 9,916 9,916 0

Projects redefined changing likelihood of materialization/value and/or start-up date

5 11,749 10,552 -1,197

Other Codelco investments* 4 6,595 7,634 1,039

DIFFERENCE MMUS$ 64,856 65,747 892

(*) Includes “other development projects”, “information projects”, “FURE projects” and “tailings dams”.


The most important differences between the two portfolios by likelihood of materialization, mining sector and these two variables together as well as by region are shown in the tables below.

Table 16: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by condition of projects

Condition of materialization

2017 – 2026 2018 - 2027

Investment (MMUS$)

% of total N° projects Investment (MMUS$)


BASE 19,825 30.6% 15 21,931 33.4% 14

PROBABLE 12,573 19.4% 13 14,326 21.8% 11

POSSIBLE 13,951 21.5% 12 10,135 15.4% 12

POTENTIAL 18,506 28.5% 7 19,355 29.4% 7

BASE + PROBABLE 32,398 50.0% 28 36,257 55.1% 25

POSSIBLE + POTENTIAL 32,457 50.0% 19 29,490 44.9% 19


In 2017, projects with a higher probability of materialization (base + probable) in the timeframe

envisaged by their owners and those with a lower probability (possible + potential) were very similar

in amount. By comparison, in 2018, the group with a higher probability shows an increase of 5

percentage points, indicating the robustness of the investment portfolio for the next decade.

Table 17 shows that the importance of the copper sector is a result of the sum of the investments

of Codelco and large and medium-scale private companies and in metallurgical plants, included in

the portfolio as from 2014. It also shows that the portfolio of copper projects drops by almost 34.4%,



partly due to the start-up of the three initiatives indicated above as well as the three restructured

copper projects.

Table 17: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by mining sector

Mining sector 2017 - 2026 2018 – 2027

Difference in investment Investment

(MMUS$) % of total N° projects

Investment (MMUS$)


CODELCO 23,524 36.3% 9 22,159 33.7% 9 -5.8%

Large min. - Cu 29,763 45.9% 18 31,675 48.2% 15 6.4%

Med. min. - Cu 2,041 3.1% 4 2,041 3.1% 4 0.0%

Gold 1,037 1.6% 3 2,037 3.1% 4 96.5%

Metallurgical plants 3,907 6.0% 5 3,228 4.9% 4 -17.4%

Iron 2,958 4.6% 2 2,958 4.5% 2 0.0%

Lithium 480 0.7% 2 1,280 1.9% 4 166.7%

Industrial minerals 1,146 1.8% 4 370 0.6% 2 -67.7%

Copper 59,235 91.3% 36 59,103 89.9% 32 -0.2%

Gold 1,037 1.6% 3 2,037 3.1% 4 96.5%

Lithium 480 0.7% 2 1,280 1.9% 4 166.7%

Others* 4,104 6.3% 6 3,328 5.1% 4 -18.9%

(*) Corresponds to the sum of iron and industrial minerals.


In contrast to previous years, gold mining shows a certain reactivation while, in the case of industrial

minerals, there is a drop explained mostly by the exclusion of the Arbiodo and Cerro Blanco projects

from the portfolio. The case of Codelco is important because, while the value of some of its

structural projects increases, most of the company’s other projects decreases without affecting their

principal objectives, indicating that the concept of productivity also applies to the state’s mining

investments. In Table 18, projects are shown by both sector and likelihood of materialization.

Table 18: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by mining sector and condition of projects

Type of mining 2017-2026 2018-2027

BASE PROBABLE POSSIBLE POTENTIAL BASE PROBABLE POSSIBLE POTENTIAL

CODELCO 14,284 - 5,491 3,749 15,088 - 3,529 3,542

Large min. - Cu 2,650 10,581 2,500 14,032 3,941 13,034 2,500 12,200

Med. min. - Cu - 692 624 725 - 692 624 725

Gold 2,891 - 1,016 - 2,212 370 646 -

Metallurgical plants - - 1,037 - - - 2,037 -

Iron - 70 2,888 - 70 - - 2,888

Lithium - 480 - - 480 - 800 -

Ind. minerals - 750 396 - 140 230 - -

Copper 19,825 11,273 9,631 18,506 21,241 14,096 7,299 16,467

Gold - - 1,037 - - - 2,037 -

Lithium - 480 - - 480 - 800 -

Others* - 1,300 3,284 - 690 230 800 2,888

(*) Corresponds to the sum of iron and industrial minerals.




Table 19 shows that, in the 2018 portfolio, investment in the north of the country5 increases by 4.3%,

led by the Atacama Region (+48%).

Table 19: Comparison of 2017 and 2018 portfolios by region

Region 2016 - 2025 2017 - 2026 Difference

in investment

Investment (MMUS$)

% of total N° projects Investment (MMUS$)

% of total

N° projects

Tarapacá 5,562 8.6% 4 5,232 8.0% 3 -5.9%

Antofagasta 30,699 47.3% 18 28,025 42.6% 15 -8.7%

Atacama 10,977 16.9% 15 16,247 24.7% 17 48.0%

Coquimbo 5,062 7.8% 4 5,062 7.7% 4 0.0%

Valparaíso 5,336 8.2% 3 5,190 7.9% 3 -2.7%

Santiago 616 0.9% 1 0 0.0% 0 -100.0%

O'Higgins 6,603 10.2% 2 5,992 9.1% 2 -9.2%

Northern Chile 52,301 80.6% 41 54,566 83.0% 39 4.3%

Central-southern Chile

12,555 19.4% 6 11,182 17.0% 5 -10.9%


5 Northern Chile comprises the Tarapacá to Coquimbo Regions and central-southern Chile comprises the Valparaíso, Santiago and

O’Higgins Regions.



4.2. Historical comparison of portfolios

The net increase in the 2018-2027 portfolio is not in itself very significant but does indicate a

strengthening of mining activity. However, despite improved world market conditions, this remains

cautious. Figure 8 shows the relationship between mining companies’ investment plans and the

nominal and real price of copper.

Figure 8: Investment portfolios surveyed by COCHILCO, 2006-2018


Since 2006, 46 projects valued at US$36,159 million have been implemented, with 92.3%

corresponding to copper projects, 0.2% to gold and silver and 7.5% to iron (Figure 9).

18,925 21,941

29,695

43,23151,063

66,890

104,300

112,556104,851

77,290

49,208 64,856

65,747

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0,000

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

Copper Gold and silver

Iron and industrial minerals Nominal Cu price (cUS/lb)

Real Cu price (cUS/lb)



Figure 9: Projects starting operation between 2006 and 2017


Two projects, representing an investment of US$700 million, are expected to start operation in 2018. 2018 differs from previous years in that there is a greater diversification of the type of projects entering the portfolio, with gold making a reappearance through the Salares Norte project and industrial minerals boosted by two lithium projects (Figure 10).

Figure 10: New projects entering the portfolio between 2007 and 2018


7 projectsMUS$ 2,859

3 projectsMUS$ 71


1 projectMUS$ 172



4 projectsMUS$ 1.667




2 projectsMUS$ 511


0,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

10,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

MU

S$

Copper Gold and silver Iron and industrial minerals


1 projectMUS$ 2,500











0,000

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

MU

S$

Copper Gold and silver Iron and industrial minerals



Given that copper mining accounts for 89.9% of the portfolio, it is interesting to note the recovery in the maximum contribution to copper output of projects included in the portfolios of the last three years. This is highest in 2018 after the drop in investment in 2014 and 2015.

Figure 11: Historical copper portfolios and their contribution to output


This growth in copper projects’ contribution to output is in marked contrast to the amounts invested

in copper. As shown in the figure below, capital intensity per copper project has been increasing

since 2016 but, when measured in terms of the fine copper contributed, has dropped from almost

US$20,000/ton to US$15,800/ton. Figure 72: Capital intensity per copper project vs. capital intensity per ton of fine Cu contributed

43,2

13

55,3

28

55,8

75

2.2

3.33.5

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

0,000

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

Mt

fin

e co

pp

er

MU

S$

Investment in copper Contribution to copper output




8161,036

1,294

1,791 1,6582,013

2,6802,891

2,5042,294

1,662 1,7851,996

8.19.0

10.2

13.0 11.0

16.6

20.519.0

16.517.7

19.6

16.6 15.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

0,000

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

kUS$

/mt

fin

e C

u

MU

S$/p

roje

ct

Capital intensity per copper project Capital intensity per ton of fine Cu produced



Chapter 5:

Conclusions



5. Conclusions

This survey of mining investments for 2018-2027 detected 44 initiatives, with a net increase of

US$892 million on the previous year’s portfolio, indicating a stabilization of the mining industry,

with a view to growing in the coming years in line with substantial improvements in world market

conditions and our country’s economic development.

It is interesting to see how, despite the swings of the market, mining investment in Chile has

remained active, with 46 projects totaling an outlay of US$36,159 million materialized since 2006,

of which 92.3% corresponded to copper. In recent years, however, a certain diversification of

investment to other segments of the industry has become apparent in what could prove a sign of a

modernization of the focus of mining investment in Chile.

The main results of analysis of the investment portfolio can be summarized as follows:

Origin of investment

The investment represented by the 2018-2027 portfolio has its origin mainly in 11 countries, led by

Chile. Here, the main players are Codelco and Antofagasta Minerals which together account for 82%

of local investment. Chile is followed by Canada, with Teck, Goldcorp and Capstone Mining as the

main investors and accounting for 84.5% of Canadian investment.

In third position, Australia is represented mainly by BHP which, with its Spence Growth Option

project, accounts for 78.6% of Australian investment.

The United States is the fourth most important source of investment, with Freeport McMoRan and

its El Abra Mill project accounting for 89.5% of US investment. In the case of Japan, in fifth place,

Sumitomo accounts for 59.4% of Japanese investment.

The “others” group includes the United Kingdom, Poland, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan and

Switzerland, which together account for 5% of the total investment in the portfolio.

State mining, represented by Codelco and ENAMI, is responsible for 37.7% of the investment in the

portfolio while the private sector, including large and medium-scale copper mining as well as gold,

silver, iron and industrial minerals, is responsible for the remaining 62.3%, with copper mining

predominating (83.8% of private-sector investment).

Purpose of investment

Out of the 44 initiatives that make up the portfolio, 52.8% are new projects and the remaining 47.2%

are replacement or expansion projects. In the case of the stage of the project, 60.2% are at the

feasibility stage and 33.4% are already being implemented.

For the construction phase, environmental permits must be obtained and 59.9% of the portfolio has

completed this stage. When comparing with projects under construction, it can be seen that there



are 12 projects that have yet to start construction. These are the projects that require more

attention and analysis on the part of the authorities. The analysis also shows that 63.7% of the

portfolio will be implemented within the next five years, leaving only seven projects for the

subsequent five years.

The survey found that 73.3% of the projects correspond to the production of copper concentrate at

the expense of production of SX-EW cathodes via leaching. This points to a change in the production

structure of copper mining in Chile (without considering the 11.6% of mixed oxide and sulfide

projects). In the case of industrial minerals, the production of nitrates and iodine has been displaced

by lithium carbonate and hydroxide projects, reflecting the boom in electromobility and the use of

lithium in batteries.

Only 38.7% of the projects in the portfolio are greenfield, indicating that most current projects are

geared to operational continuity, rather than increasing output. This is the case for gold, lithium and

industrial minerals as well as copper.

Region of Chile

The Antofagasta Region continues to lead mining investment, accounting for 42.6% of the portfolio.

Out of investment in this region, 96.2% corresponds to copper. The Antofagasta Region is followed

by the Atacama Region, with 24.7% of the portfolio. Here, copper is also important, accounting for

84.9% of investment. The O’Higgins Region takes third place, with a 9.1% share of investment, all of

which corresponds to copper.

It is important to note that 75.3% of investment corresponds to northern Chile where 92.4% would

be in copper.

Maximum contribution to output

In contribution to output, the production of concentrates predominates and, based on analysis of

the maximum production capacity of the projects included in the portfolio, it can be concluded that,

out of the estimated maximum of 3.53 million tons of fine copper they would contribute by 2028,

95.8% would correspond to concentrate. This would also imply a contribution in the form of other

minerals such as molybdenum (9,200 tons) and gold (7,650 kg).

In addition to the contribution of copper mining projects to gold output, the projects in the survey

would contribute primary production of around 23,210 kg of gold and 100 tons of silver. In addition,

iron projects could contribute some 7.24 million tons of iron by around 2028.

In the case of industrial minerals, additional production would comprise 180,400 tons of lithium

carbonate, 35,100 tons of lithium hydroxide, 2,500 tons of iodine, 320,325 tons of nitrates and

38,900 tons of potassium chloride.



Conditionality of investment

Projects with a higher probability of materialization in the expected timeframe have gained ground

as compared to those with a lower probability of materialization, with the former increasing by 5

percentage points in a sign of the robustness of the investment portfolio for the next decade.

There are 25 base and probable projects totaling US$36,257 million and representing 55.1% of the

portfolio while possible and potential projects, which are more prone to be affected by changes in

market conditions (19 projects) total US$29,490 million, equivalent to 44.9% of the portfolio.

Analysis of annual investment by sector shows that, although the private sector contributes more

in terms of amount of investment, state projects have a higher probability of materialization over

the next decade, accounting for 68.9% of base and probable projects and highlighting this sector’s

importance for investment.

Out of the investment with a higher probability of materialization, 23.2% has already been

implemented and 73.9% would be implemented in the next five years.



Appendices



APPENDIX 1: Methodology

The methodology used to prepare this report is based on the following criteria:

1. Coverage

The survey covers investments for the purpose of production (replacement or expansion of

production or new projects) envisaged by Codelco and large and medium-scale private companies

in the metallic and non-metallic mining sectors, excluding energy minerals. Only those projects

representing an investment of more than US$70 million are included. The portfolio includes projects

under implementation and those which companies are studying with a declared intention of starting

their implementation within the next five years.

For the purposes of the annual distribution of each project’s estimated investment, the sum of the

investments already materialized from the beginning of the project until the end of the year prior

to this report is included under the concept of “ Before xxxx”, where “xxxx” is the year of the report’s

publication. The estimated investment for each of the years of the next five-year period is then

indicated. In the case of projects that will start operations after the end of the five-year period,

investment through to their start-up is presented as “Investment after xxxx”, where “xxxx” is the

year subsequent to the last year of the current five-year period.

The information presented in this report is the best known approximation to the evolution of the

projects considered. In some cases, in the absence of public information, the annual distribution of

the investment is the authors’ estimate and in no way represents a commitment on the part of the

project’s owners.

Information about the projects includes an estimate of the metal production they would contribute,

when appropriate, as well as an indication of the projects’ current status.

2. Attributes of projects and condition of materialization

The reliability of the information presented depends on the quantity and quality of information

available about the projects which, in turn, depends on their attributes at the time of preparing the

report.

2.1. Condition of materialization

Each of the attributes is of a gradual nature that can be associated with greater or lesser certainty

and, together, they provide an idea of the likelihood of a project’s materialization, defined as base,

probable, possible or potential, associated with the specific attributes set out in Table 20.



Table 20: Conditions of materialization of a project

Condition Type of project Stage of advance Environmental permits

Start-up date

BASE Any Implementation RCA approved Within the period

PROBABLE

Any Implementation suspended

RCA approved or before courts

Within the period

Any Feasibility RCA approved Within the period

Replacement or expansion

Feasibility EIA or DIA submitted to SEA

Within the period

POSSIBLE


Feasibility suspended EIA or DIA submitted to SEA

Within the period


Feasibility EIA or DIA not submitted Within the period

New Feasibility EIA or DIA submitted to SEA or not submitted

Within the period

Any Feasibility RCA approved After the period


Feasibility EIA or DIA submitted to SEA or not submitted

After the period

POTENTIAL

Any Feasibility suspended Any After the period

New Feasibility EIA or DIA submitted to SEA or not submitted

After the period

Any Prefeasibility Any Any


In Table 20, “within the period” indicates that a project will be materialized in 2018-2022 and “after

the period” that it would be materialized in the subsequent five years or, in other words, 2023-2027.

A project’s attributes are related to its type, stage of advance, its situation as regards environmental

permits and its estimated start-up date, which are defined as explained below.

2.2. Type of project

This attribute provides information about the certainty or otherwise of a project’s materialization

since it is related to the company’s strategic purpose and the project’s complexity. The types of

project are:

a) Replacement project. These are brownfield projects in which the objective is to maintain the production capacity of an existing operation by developing new areas of it as a means of addressing a drop in ore grades and/or the exhaustion of sectors already being worked. These projects extend the useful life of a mine and its installations.

b) Expansion project. These brownfield projects seek to increase a mine’s operational capacity in order to raise its scale of production and reduce unit costs, particularly in the face of a drop in ore grades.

c) New projects. These greenfield projects involve the construction of a new mine, with the need to obtain environmental and sector permits, develop infrastructure and establish the



company in a new location. This category also includes brownfield projects at existing operations that imply a complete change of process (for example, from leaching to concentration) since they are virtually equivalent to the development of a new mine.

2.3. Stage of advance

As a project advances, certainty about its materialization also increases. Projects are, therefore,

classified in this report according to their stage of advance:

a) Implementation. In these projects, the investment has been approved and the necessary permits for their development have been obtained and they have reached a phase between detailed engineering, construction and ramp-up.

b) Feasibility study. This category includes those projects at a stage between having begun to prepare feasibility studies and submissions for environmental permits - an Environmental Impact Study (EIA) or an Environmental Impact Declaration (DIA) - and having completed this stage, but without a final decision on the investment having been taken.

c) Prefeasibility study. Projects included in this category are at a stage between the start of prefeasibility studies and a decision to move on to the next stage.

Most projects follow their normal course, barring the modifications that may be introduced.

However, a project may also be suspended for internal or external reasons. In some cases, a project

that has been suspended may have to return to an earlier stage to repeat studies in order to resolve

questions raised from within the company or externally.

2.4. Environmental permits (SEA)

All projects must obtain a Resolution of Environmental Approval (RCA) from the Environmental

Evaluation Service (SEA). This is awarded only after an exhaustive technical-administrative process

that involves citizen participation and during which the project’s Environmental Impact Study (EIA)

or Environmental Impact Declaration (DIA) is analyzed. Here, projects are classified in three stages

from greater to lesser certainty:

a) RCA approved b) EIA or DIA submitted c) EIA or DIA not submitted.

2.5. Start-up date

The reliability of the information about a project also increases as the date of its start of operation

approaches. The following timeframes are used, from greater to lesser certainty:

a) Within the period: Date within the period of analysis or, in other words, within the five-year period

b) Long term: Date after the period of analysis or, in other words, outside the five-year period.



3. Investment by Codelco and sources of information

The information presented for Codelco’s projects is based on the public information available on

the company’s website and/or in presentations by its authorities, complemented principally by the

information included in its Business and Development Plan and other official company information.

It should be understood only as a forecasting tool and in no way represents a commitment on the

part of the public bodies that will intervene in the evaluation of the investment projects that may

or may not be included in this forecast.

The Codelco investments included in the portfolio are those envisaged in the company’s 2018

Business and Development Plan (PND 2018), justified as development projects or in order to

increase the information needed for future developments.

Development projects are directly related to the future production capacity of Codelco’s different

divisions and must comply with the corresponding profitability norms for their approval. They

include:

a) Structural projects. These development projects are designed to allow the company to take full advantage of its mineral resources and as the foundations for the company’s long-term development. This report provides explicit information about the characteristics of each of these projects and the investment involved in their implementation stage.

b) Other development projects. Codelco’s investment portfolio includes a number of projects with shorter-term objectives whose implementation is essential for the operational continuity of its divisions, complementing the company’s plans for its structural projects. This report provides an overall investment figure for this group of projects.

c) Information projects. The purpose of these projects is to obtain new information that is relevant for the company’s development. They are, however, not identified as individual projects. This category includes studies for future development projects (prefeasibility, feasibility, environmental impact studies, etc.) and investment in basic and generative exploration and R&D. Given the diversity of objectives involved, only an overall figure for investment in these projects is provided.

d) Smelting and Refining Area (FURE) projects. These projects involve environmental and operational improvements at Codelco’s smelting-refinery complexes in order to comply with new environmental regulation in force as from 2018.

e) Tailings dams. This category comprises projects to improve the infrastructure of the tailings dams of Codelco’s different divisions.

The projects considered in this report do not include investments under the 2018 Business and

Development Plan that have other objectives such as the replacement of equipment, the repair of

installations and projects related to decontamination, workplace safety and welfare, although they

also require an Investment Project Report (API). They are excluded for the sake of comparability

with private mining companies for which information of this type is not available.



Those Codelco investments that, because of their nature, do not require an API are also excluded as

outside the scope of this report. However, Codelco’s investments in companies to build

metallurgical plants for processing byproducts as a means of obtaining end products of greater value

are included. In the portfolio, these do not appear as part of Codelco’s investments but as

“Metallurgical Plants” in copper mining.

4. Private-sector investment and sources of information

Information about the projects of private mining companies is taken principally from the

announcements they make through different media (their own websites, newspapers, articles in

specialized magazines, etc.) and their submissions to the Environmental Evaluation Service (SEA).

The portfolio includes all those projects already under construction. In the case of projects still being

studied, their stage of advance was reviewed and the investment forecast, start-up date and

estimated output were updated in the light of the most recent public information available.

This implied at least the following updates:

a) Identification of owners as a result of a change of ownership

b) Production capacity and types of product

c) Amount of investment, start-up date and timeline for implementation

d) Inclusion of new projects

e) Elimination of projects that had recently started operation

f) New requirements such as the use of seawater, either directly or through desalination.

In the case of the amount of the investment, it is assumed that this corresponds principally to the

implementation stage, without ruling out that some projects may include earlier investments during

their study phases.

Given that generally only an overall investment figure and the expected start-up date are known,

the annual distribution of the investment is estimated assuming a tentative timeline for a project’s

development, based principally on presentations to the Environmental Evaluation Service (SEA) or

empirical estimates of timelines for similar projects.

In the case of projects for which a precise start-up date was not available in public information,

COCHILCO estimated this on the basis of the context of the information available. This does not

imply any commitment on the part of the company in question.

5. Methodological criteria for estimating start-up date

Different internal and/or external circumstances can affect a project’s development. External

factors include the need to secure electricity supply at less than current prices, to improve the



project’s environmental impact study and/or obtain permits for the construction of the necessary

infrastructure.

Internal factors include the project’s alignment with the company’s overall strategy, securing

financing, the need to improve the cost indicators for the investment and/or operation as

determined by the project’s engineering studies.

In the absence of public information about a project’s start-up date, COCHILCO applied the following

methodological criteria:

a) A year’s delay is incorporated if a project is affected only by external factors,

notwithstanding the possibility that the company reviews a project’s feasibility study in

order to resolve pending issues, which could imply minor modifications to the study.

b) A delay of two years is incorporated if a reformulation of a project’s prefeasibility or

feasibility study is required since this is the time typically required for studies of this type.

If insufficient information was available to estimate a clear start-up date, the project was excluded

from the portfolio as a “project under restructuring”.



APPENDIX 2: Description of investment projects in copper mining

1. State copper mining

1.1. Codelco structural projects - www.codelco.cl

Condition Type of project Stage of advance Environ. permit Start-up

POSSIBLE New Feasibility EIA approved 2024

RT SULFIDES PHASE II

(Radomiro Tomic Div.)

Resources: 37,372 Mt @ 0.41% Cu.

Treatment capacity: 115 ktpd of sulfidemineral.

Estimated investment: MMUS$2,154.

Use of seawater: Supply through Codelco'sNorth District Desalination Plant project, dueto be completed in 2021.

Job creation: 12,100 jobs in constructionstage and 2,200 when operational.

Current status: Redesign of project as a single115-ktpd module, instead of two 100-ktpdmodules.

http://www.codelco.cl/



Condition Type of project Stage of advance Environ. permit

Start-up

BASE Replacement Implementation EIA approved 2023



NEW MINE LEVEL

(El Teniente Div.)




Use of seawater: Not applicable.

Job creation: 2,400 jobs in construction stageand 2,650 when operational.

Current status: Start of Recursos Norteproject in 2020, with production of 30 ktpdwhen in full operation. Start-up of New MineLevel project in 2023.

CHUQUICAMATA SUBTERRÁNEA

(Chuquicamata Div.)


Treatment capacity: Up to 140 ktpd of sulfide mineral, achievable in 2025.



Job creation: 3,736 jobs in construction stageand a maximum of 4,856 when operational.

Current status: Tchitack electricity substationto supply project built and awaiting start-up;as of first half of 2018, 105 km of tunnels alsobuilt.




POTENTIAL Expansion Prefeasibility Without EIA 2026



ANDINA EXPANSION

(Andina Div.)


Treatment capacity: 56 ktpd of sulfidemineral additional to current 94 ktpd.



Job creation: Information not available.

Current status: Awaiting start of feasibilitystudy in 2018. Delayed until 2026 to continuestudies of best way to take advantage ofproject's resources.

MINE-PLANT TRANSPORT

(Andina Div.)

Resources: Not applicable.

Treatment capacity: Not applicable.



Job creation: Average of 200 jobs inconstruction stage and average of 60 whenoperational.

Current status: Underground work related toexcavation of mineral distribution center inCordillera Plant began in 2017; excavation ofHaulage III tunnel and halls - crushing,regenerative and electricity room - continueson schedule.




POTENTIAL New Prefeasibility Without EIA 2021

RAJO INCA

( Salvador Div.)



Estimated investment: MMUS$817.


Job creation: Approximately 2,000 jobs inconstruction stage and 400 when operational.

Current status: Information from the completed prefeasibility study being updated, including oxide resources, with view to starting feasibility study.



2. Large-scale private copper mining sector

2.1. Antofagasta Minerals - www.antofagasta.co.uk


PROBABLE New Feasibility EIA approved 2022

CENTINELA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT -ENCUENTRO SULFIDES AND ESPERANZA SUR

(Minera Centinela)

Resources: 3,178 Mt @ 0.38% Cu; 0.011%Mo; 0.12 gpt Au (sulfides); 308 Mt @ 0.38%Cu (oxides).



Use of seawater: From exising Esperanzaplant.


Current status: Project includes operationalcontinuity of oxides line.

http://www.antofagasta.co.uk/




PROBABLE Expansion Feasibility EIA approved 2020

POSSIBLE Expansion Feasibility Without EIA 2022


PROBABLE Replacement Feasibility EIA submitted 2022

LOS PELAMBRES MARGINAL EXPANSION -PHASES I AND II

(Minera Los Pelambres)

Resources: 4,831 Mt @ 0.48% Cu; 0.015%Mo; 0.057 gpt Au.

Treatment capacity: +20 ktpd in Phase I and+15 ktpd in Phase II of sulfide mineral.

Estimated investment: MMUS$1,050 inPhase I and MMUS$500 in Phase II(estimated).

Use of seawater: 450-l/s desalination plantand pumping system.

Job creation: 2,300 jobs in construction stageand 241 when operational.

Current status: Update of investment inPhase I underway. Desalination plant withapproximate investment of MMUS$520.

ZALDÍVAR OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY

(Cía. Minera Zaldívar)

Resources: 613 Mt @ 0.48% Cu.

Treatment capacity: 260 ktpd.


Use of seawater: Does not use.

Job creation: 476 jobs in construction stageand 1,700 when operational.

Current status: EIA submitted in June 2018,with view to extending life of mine to 2031.



2.2. BHP - www.bhp.com


BASE New Implementation EIA approved 2020

SPENCE GROWTH OPTION

(Pampa Norte)

Resources: 2,440 Mt @ 0.43% Cu; 0.012%Mo.

Treatment capacity: 95-100 ktpd of sulfidemineral.

Estimated investment: MMUS$3,300(includes MMUS$800 for desalination plant).

Use of seawater: 800-l/s desalination plant,expandable to 1,600 l/s.

Job creation: 1,380 and 1,550 jobs inconstruction stage and 26 and 220 whenoperational for desalination plant and mine,respectively.

Current status: Under construction, withstart-up scheduled for mid-2020.

http://www.bhpbilliton.com/



2.3. Capstone Mining - www.capstonemining.com



SANTO DOMINGO

(Santo Domingo SCM)

Resources: 572 Mt @ 0.30% Cu; 25.6% Fe;0.039 gpt Au.

Treatment capacity: 70 ktpd

Estimated investment: MMUS$1,700 (to beupdated).

Use of seawater: 12.5-l/s desalination plant(2.5 l/s for washing concentrate andconsumption of workforce and 10 l/s forDiego de Almagro community) and 112-kmpipeline with nominal flow of 389 l/s.


Current status: Closing potential associationwith third parties for project's development,which would imply update of amount ofinvestment.

http://www.capstonemining.com/



2.4. Doña Inés de Collahuasi - www.collahuasi.cl


PROBABLE Expansion Feasibility EIA approved 2019

COMPLEMENTARY INSTALLATIONS TO 170 KTPDCOLLAHUASI

(Cía. Minera Doña Inés de Collahuasi)




Use of seawater: Not considered.

Job creation: 599 jobs in constructionstage; when operational, no change incurrent workforce.

Current status: EIA submitted inSeptember 2017 and approved atbeginning of 2018. Seeking additionalpermits with view to starting definitiveconstruction by end-2018 at latest.

http://www.collahuasi.cl/



2.5. Freeport McMoRan - www.fcx.com


POTENTIAL New Feasibility Without EIA 2026

EL ABRA CONCENTRATORFORMERLY EL ABRA MILL

(CCM El Abra)

Resources: 1,999 Mt @ 0.45% Cu; 0.020 gptAu; 0.010% Mo; 1.4 gpt Ag.



Use of seawater: Envisages a desalinationproject of approximately 800 l/s andpumping system.

Job creation: Approximately 4,000 jobs inconstruction stage and 1,200 whenoperational.

Current status: The company is currently inthe process of socialization of project andpreparation of environmental baseline;both the investment and start-up date areestimated based on previous informationfor the project.



2.6. Goldcorp / Teck - www.nuevaunion.cl



POTENTIAL New Feasibility Without EIA 2026*

(*) Corresponds to start-up of Phase II of the project; Phase III would be implemented gradually through to 2041.

NUEVAUNIÓN

PHASES I, II AND III

(NuevaUnión SpA)

Resources: 1,481.6 Mt @ 0.388% Cu; 0.171gpt Au; 0.009% Mo.

Treatment capacity: 104 ktpd (Phase I), 12ktpd (Phase II) and 92 ktpd (Phase III) ofsulfide mineral.

Estimated investment: MMUS$3,500 inPhase I; MMUS$3,700 in Phases II and III.

Use of seawater: Envisages a seawaterdesalination project of around 700 l/s andpumping system.


Current status: Starting feasibility study inmid-September 2018; currently preparing theenvironmental baseline for 3 phases forpresentation of EIA in the medium term.



2.7. KGHM - www.sgscm.cl


POSSIBLE Expansion Feasibility EIA approved 2022

SIERRA GORDA EXPANSION 230 KTPD

(Sierra Gorda SCM)

Resources: 1,607 Mt @ 0.40% Cu; 0.060 gptAu; 0.020% Mo.

Treatment capacity: +40 ktpd.


Use of seawater: Mantains current supply ofseawater and desalinated water.

Job creation: 6,000 jobs in construction stage and 2,900 when operational.

Current status: The project not only seeks toexpand the approved capacity of the originalproject (190 ktpd) and process oxidizedresources in stock (additional 55 kt fine Cu)but also to adjust the operation of the tailingsdam to ensure its environmentalsustainability as well as its stability andoperational continuity and to change thedestination of part or all of the concentrate toMejillones Bay. EIA approved at end of August2018 with official communication to thecompany pending.



2.8. Lundin Mining - www.sgscm.cl



CANDELARIA 2030

(CCM Candelaria)

Resources: 268 Mt @ 0.86% Cu; 0.203 gpt Au;2.416 gpt Ag.

Treatment capacity: +9.8 ktpd to +24.2 ktpdof sulfide mineral.


Use of seawater: New 500-l/s aqueduct,parallel to the existing one and with samecharacteristics, to provide the operation withdesalinated water.

Job creation: 970 jobs in construction stageand 2,600 when operational.

Current status: Project poised to start fulloperation.



2.9. Mantos Copper




BASE Expansion Implementation EIA approved 2020

MANTOVERDE DEVELOPMENT


Treatment capacity: 35.6 ktpd of sulfidemineral.


Use of seawater: Considers increase of 260l/s in consumption from existing desalinationplant (current capacity of 380 l/s andconsumption of 120 l/s).


Estado actual: EIA approved in mid-2018 andproject poised to start construction.

MANTOS BLANCOS CONC. DE-BOTTLE

Resources: 456.7 Mt @ 0.53% Cu.

Treatment capacity: +8 ktpd of sulfidemineral.



Job creation: 566 jobs in construction stageand 106 when operational.

Current status: EIA approved andconstruction underway to start ramp-up atend-2019.



2.10. Teck - www.teck.com



QUEBRADA BLANCA PHASE II - HYPOGENE PROJECT

(Cía. Minera Teck Quebrada Blanca)


Treatment capacity: 135 ktpd of sulfides.


Use of seawater: Envisages a seawaterdesalination plant in Punta Patache Port, witha pumping system with a 170-km pipeline andestimated flow of 1,300 l/s.

Job creation: Average of 7,000 and maximumof 9,200 jobs in construction stage andaverage of 1,787 and maximum of 2,053when operational.

Current status: The project's EIA wasapproved at end-July 2018 and the companyestimates that investment decision will betaken and construction start at end-November 2018, with start-up in mid-2022.

http://www.teck.com/



3. Medium-scale copper mining sector

3.1. Central Asia Metals PLC - www.centralasiametals.com


PROBABLE New Feasibility EIA submitted 2019

PLAYA VERDE

(Copper Bay Chile)

Resources: 53.4 Mt @ 0.24% Cu.

Treatment capacity: 13.5 ktpd.


Use of seawater: Use of seawater fromdredging of tailings and a 12.5-l/s reverseosmosis plant.

Job creation: Maximum of 317 jobs inconstruction stage and of 96 whenoperational.

Current status: The project consists indredging to remove old tailings deposited onthe Playa Grande beach in Chañaral,processing them in a metallurgical plant toextract copper and produce cathodes andconcentrate (7.08 ktpy and 1.56 ktpy,respectively) and restore the beach damagedby landslides and the deposit of tailings formore than 40 years.



3.2. COPEC - www.empresascopec.cl



DIEGO DE ALMAGRO

(Cía. Minera Sierra Norte)


Treatment capacity: 24 ktpd of sulfidemineral and 2 ktpd of oxide mineral.


Use of seawater: Desalination plant locatednear the concentrator, with a flow of 1,865m3/day, to supply desalinated water for minorprocesses; most consumption will be in theform of non-desalinated seawater.

Job creation: Maximum of 595 jobs inconstruction stage and of 178 whenoperational.

Current status: Reactivation of the project atthe beginning of 2018 suggests start-up inaround 2020.

http://www.empresascopec.cl/



3.3. Hot Chili - www.hotchili.net.au


POTENTIAL New Prefeasibility Without EIA 2021

3.4. Pucobre - www.pucobre.cl


PRODUCTORA

(Soc. Minera El Águila)

Resources: 288 Mt @ 0.26% Cu; 0.057 gpt Au;0.007% Mo.





Current status: Company is continuing withexploration campaigns to update the project'sresources.

EL ESPINO Resources: 230.3 Mt @ 0.45% Cu; 0.191 gptAu.





Current status: Engineeering studies beingupdated, ruling out the oxides line for themoment.

http://www.hotchili.net.au/

http://www.pucobre.cl/



POSSIBLE New Feasibility EIA approved 2022

4. Metallurgical plants

4.1. Ecometales - www.ecometales.cl



LEACHING OF CONCENTRATE


Treatment capacity: 200 ktpy of concentrate.




Current status: Construction of a high-pressure copper concentrate leaching plant toremove impurities, principally arsenic, andgenerate stable waste; project awaitinginvestment decision after obtaining RCA atbeginning of August 2017.



4.2. ENAMI – www.enami.cl


POSSIBLE Expansion Feasibility Without EIA 2022

NUEVA PAIPOTE -Stages 1 and 2

(Hernán Videla Lira Smelter)


Treatment capacity: 200 ktpy of concentrate.

Estimated investment: MMUS$646



Current status: The project to modernize thesmelter has been divided into 2 stages. Stage1 corresponds to a transition project tocomply with Supreme Decree 28 and isdesigned to cover the period between 2018and 2021, the estimated start-up date ofStage 2. The principal modernization project(Stage 2) consists in the implementation ofChinese BBR-BCC fusion-conversiontechnology. ENAMI is currently analyzingStage 2 without having taken the investmentdecision.



4.3. Molymet – www.molymet.cl



MOLYNOR EXPANSION

(Molynor)


Treatment capacity: +40 ktpy of molybdenumconcentrate.



Job creation: Between 150 and 300 jobs inconstruction stage and 300 when operational.

Current status: Under construction with start-up at end-2018.



APPENDIX 3: Description of investment projects in gold and silver mining

1. Rio2 Limited - www.rio2.com


POSSIBLE New Feasibility Without EIA 2021

CERRO MARICUNGA

Resources: 252 Mt @ 0.434 gpt Au.

Treatment capacity: 40-80 ktpd of oxidemineral for cyanidation.




Current status: Project owner was acquiredby Rio2, which would accelerate the project'sdevelopment.

http://www.rio2.com/



2. Gold Fields – www.goldfields.com


POSSIBLE New Feasibility EIA submitted 2021

SALARES NORTE Resources: 23.3 Mt @ 4.89 gpt Au; 66.03 gpt Ag.

Treatment capacity: 5.5 ktpd of oxide mineral for cyanidation.




Current status: EIA submitted in July 2018,indicating that project consists in open-pitmining of gold and silver mineral, itsprocessing with a crushing system, a millingsystem, extraction of the mineral using ahybrid system of conventional cynaideleaching, Merrill-Crowe and carbon in pulp torecover the gold and silver and deposit infiltered tailings. Useful life of 13 years withestimated output of 7,860 kg of gold in theform of doré.



3. Kingsgate Consolidate Ltd. - www.kingsgate.com.au



NUEVA ESPERANZA -ARQUEROS

Resources: 39.4 Mt @ 0.39 gpt Au; 66 gpt Ag.

Treatment capacity: 8 ktpd of oxide mineral for cyanidation.




Current status: EIA submitted in July 2018,which would replace DIA submitted in July2017 on which no decision issued. The EIA,entitled "Update of Arqueros", seeks tointegrate Chimberos and Teterita deposits,along with modifications to waste dump,mineral stockpiling areas, camps, location ofprimary crusher and conveyor belts,processing plant and technological change indisposal of the leaching gravel, using filteringrather than thickeners. The amount of theinvestment remains unchanged.

http://www.kingsgate.com.au/



4. Kinross - www.kinross.com


POSSIBLE Replacement Feasibility EIA approved 2022

LA COIPA PHASE 7

Resources: 17.28 Mt @ 1.85 gpt Au; 59.15 gpt Ag.

Treatment capacity: 15 ktpd of oxide mineral for cyanidation.

.Estimated investment: MMUS$200.



Current status: Pompeya and Catalina depositsunder analysis, apart from so-called Purén 2. Atpresent, working on feasibility study scheduledfor completion in mid-2019 before startingconstruction once the investment cost hasbeen updated and approved by investors. Inparallel, start of studies for reactivation of LoboMarte, once useful life of La Coipa Phase 7 endsin around 2030.

http://www.kinross.com/



APPENDIX 4: Description of investment projects in iron mining

1. Admiralty Resources



MARIPOSA Resources: 66.6 Mt @ 33.1% Fe.

Treatment capacity: 5.6 ktpd of iron mineral.




Current status: The project, which seeks tomine minerals and produce iron concentrateat a maximum rate of 771,000 tpy duringapproximately 18 years, including transport toPunta Totoralillo Port, was submitted to SEAin May 2017. Under construction with start-up in mid-2019.



2. Andes Iron - www.conocedominga.cl



DOMINGA Resources: 2,082 Mt @ 23.3% FeT; 0.07% Cu.

Treatment capacity: 95 ktpd of mineral.


Use of seawater: 450-l/s desalination plant inTotoralillo Norte sector.


Current status: This mining-port project was rejected in appeal to Committee of Ministers and is currently planning to submit a new EIA so start-up not estimated to be before 2023.



APPENDIX 5: Description of investment projects in industrial minerals

1. Albemarle



LA NEGRA PLANT EXPANSION -PHASE 3

Resources: Information not available.

Production capacity: +42.7 ktpy of lithiumcarbonate.




Current status: Obtained environmentalapproval in July 2017 and under constructionwith start-up scheduled for end-2019.



2. SQM S.A. - www.sqm.cl



ORCOMA Resources: Information not available.

Treatment/production: 11 Mtpy of caliche toproduce 2,500 tpy of iodine and 320,325 tpyof salts rich in nitrates.


Use of seawater: 200 l/s of non-desalinatedseawater through withdrawal pipe located inCaleta Buenara sector.

Job creation: 600-950 jobs in constructionstage and 450 when operational.

Current status: Has obtained environmentalapproval and is awaiting start of construction,with process of obtaining permits underway.Start-up at end-2019.

http://www.sqm.cl/







PEDRO DE VALDIVIA DISSOLUTION AND REFINING PLANT

(SQM Nitratos S.A.)


Production capacity: 420,000 tpy of refinedsolar-quality nitrates.




Current status: EIA approved andconstruction underway.

SALAR DEL CARMEN EXPANSION

(SQM Salar S.A.)


Production capacity: Lithium carbonate: +10ktpy (Phase I) and +12 ktpy (Phase II); lithiumhydroxide: +10 ktpy (Phase I) and 2 newplants of +8 ktpy (Phases II and III).




Current status: EIA approved andconstruction underway.




POSSIBLE Expansion Feasibility EIA submitted 2022

LITHIUM CARBONATE EXPANSION 180 KTPY

(SQM Salar S.A.)


Production capacity: +110 ktpy of lithiumcarbonate.




Current status: EIA submitted and awaitingapproval. Project complements the Salar delCarmen Expansion project which already hasenvironmental approval and is underconstruction.



3. SIMCO SpA



MARICUNGA SALTS PRODUCTION


Production capacity: 5,700 tons of lithiumcarbonate, 9,100 tons of lithium hydroxideand 38,900 tons of potassium chloride.




Current status: Consists in the exploitation offresh brine from the northeast sector of theMaricunga Salt Flat at an extraction rate of275 l/s; processing of brine using solarevaporation and subsequent precipitation in alithium carbonate plant, using solventextraction to produce lithium hydroxide andpotassium chloride as byproducts. Start-upscheduled for 2020.



APPENDIX 6: Units of measurement and abbreviations

Weight and measurement

g Gram

kg Kilogram

t Metric ton

kt Thousands of metric tons

Mt Millions of metric tons

oz Troy ounce

koz Thousands of troy ounces

Moz Millions of troy ounces

lb Pound

Mlb Millions of pounds

m Meter

km Kilometer

m2 Square meter

m3 Cubic meter

Chemical and mineral elements

Ag Silver

Au Gold

Cu Copper

Cu cath. Copper cathodes

Cu conc. Copper content in concentrate

CuEq Copper equivalent

Fe Iron

Fsp Feldspar

H3BO3 Boric acid

H2SO4 Sulfuric acid

KCl Potassium chloride

KNO3 Potassium nitrate

LiCl Lithium chloride

NaNO3 Sodium nitrate

Mo Molybdenum

TiO2 Titanium dioxide (rutile)

Concentrations and production rates

gpt Grams per ton

ppm Parts per million

oz/y Troy ounces per year

koz/y Thousands of troy ounces per year

Moz/y Millions of troy ounces per year

kg/y Kilograms per year

tph Metric tons per hour

tpd Metric tons per day

tpm Metric tons per month

tpy Metric tons per year

ktpy Thousands of metric tons per year

Mtpy Millions of metric tons per year

Processes and inputs

g/L Grams per liter

kg/L Kilograms per liter

l/s Liters per second

l/m Liters per month

kV Kilovolt

kVA Kilovolt-ampere

GWh Gigawatt-hour

MWh Megawatt-hour

Production processes

Flot Flotation

Lix Leaching

SX Solvent extraction

EW Electrowinning

Currencies and prices

US$ US dollar

MUS$ Thousands of US dollars

MMUS$ Millions of US dollars

US$/lb Dollars per pound

cUS$/lb Cents of the dollar per pound

US$/oz Dollars per troy ounce

Geographical abbreviations

m.a.s.l. Meters above sea level

UTM Universal Transversal Mercator

Types of company

Cía. Company

Inc. Incorporated

Int. International

Ltda. Limited

Ltd. Limited

S.A. Listed company

SCM Contractual mining society

CCM Contractual mining company

Others

Ind. Industrial

Min. Mineral

RCA Resolution of Environmental Approval

DIA Environmental Impact Declaration

EIA Environmental Impact Study

SAG Semi-autogenous

API Investment Project Report

PND Business and Development Plan


This report was prepared by the Research and Public Policy Department

Cristian Cifuentes González

Strategy and Public Policy Analyst

Jorge Cantallopts Araya

Director of Research and Public Policy

September 2018

investment in the chilean mining industry portfolio …...investment in the chilean mining industry...

Documents