Alaska Energy Metals Corporation (AEMC) has unveiled exciting findings from its 2024 inaugural exploration drilling program at the Canwell claim block which is a part of the Nikolai Project in Alaska. The Canwell area hosts three key prospects—Emerick, Odie, and Upper Canwell—located about 30 kilometers northeast of AEMC’s nickel-rich Eureka deposit.

AEMC’s Eureka Deposit: A Foundation for Growth

Exploring deeper, AEMC’s flagship Eureka deposit is a massive polymetallic resource with over 3.9 billion pounds of nickel in the Indicated category and 4.2 billion pounds in the Inferred category. This deposit also includes critical materials such as cobalt, chromium, platinum, and palladium. It also holds copper, iron, and gold which positions AEMC as a significant player in the strategic metals sector.

The advantage doesn’t end here, having such a rich resource potential aligns with U.S. government priorities for securing domestic supplies of strategic metals.

Nikolai Project – Property Location Map

Breaking Ground at Canwell: Promising Results for Nickel and Critical Metals

According to the company’s press release they used one surface diamond drill rig to drill three holes across the Emerick, Odie, and Upper Canwell prospects, covering a total of 1,047.9 meters. Each hole targeted geological, geophysical, and geochemical anomalies, providing valuable data for understanding the region’s mineralized ultramafic systems.

Alaska Energy Metals Chief Geologist Gabe Graf commented,

 “After 20 years of limited exploration on the Canwell property, the information collected from these drill holes will aid our understanding of the mineralized ultramafic systems within the Wrangellia Terrane of interior Alaska. In fact, the blebby sulfides intersected at the Upper Canwell prospect is the first subsurface indication for higher-grade sulfides on the property. Furthermore, the potential for coarser-grained nickel sulfides and additional disseminated sulfide zones on the Nikolai Project is encouraging, and we are excited to continue advancing the geologic understanding of the property. We look forward to getting back into these areas in the next exploration season.”

Source: AEMC

• READ MORE: Nickel Could Be the Key to U.S. Energy Independence: Alaska Energy Metals’ Strategic Role
• READ MORE: The Nickel Market is Changing Big Time: Is a Supply-Demand Shift Underway?

Key Findings from the Drill Sites

1. Emerick Prospect (CAN-24-001)

Drill hole CAN-24-001 started with 16 meters of overburden, followed by serpentinized peridotite containing 0.2–0.5% sulfide minerals. The drilling reached a depth of 72.5 meters before encountering challenging rock conditions. These included intense fracturing, clay alteration, and serpentinization, which made sulfide estimation difficult.

Non-mineralized mafic dikes were also present within the peridotite. Drilling became harder due to poor rock quality, and the hole was abandoned at 74.8 meters due to a large fault. Unfortunately, it did not reach the targeted magnetic anomaly or the base of the ultramafic intrusion.

Rather than retrying, the team decided to postpone further drilling on this target until 2025. The key findings were:

• 56.5 meters @ 0.40% nickel equivalent (NiEq) (0.26% Ni, 0.62% Cr, 7.00% Fe, 0.012% Co, 0.01% Cu, 0.019 ppm Pd, 0.032 ppm Pt & 0.007 ppm Au)

Source: AEMC

2. Odie Prospect (CAN-24-002)

Drill hole CAN-24-002 started with 12.2 meters of overburden, followed by serpentinized dunite containing 0.2–6.0% nickel sulfide and Ni-Fe alloy. This mineralized zone extended to a depth of 245.5 meters. Within the dunite, several non-mineralized gabbroic dikes were found.

At 245.5 meters, the drill hit an unmineralized diorite intrusion, which continued down to 527.0 meters. The targeted DIGHEM magnetic anomaly is believed to mark the contact between the mineralized dunite and the diorite intrusion. This area also showed increased pyrrhotite content, offering valuable clues for further exploration. The team discovered:

• 193.6 meters @ 0.42% NiEq (0.26% Ni, 0.69% Cr, 8.58% Fe, 0.01% Cu, 0.014% Co, 0.035 ppm Pd, 0.041 ppm Pt and 0.007 ppm Au)

Source: AEMC

3. Upper Canwell Prospect (CAN-24-003)

Drill hole CAN-24-003 began with 16.8 meters of overburden, followed by serpentinized and faulted dunitic rocks. These rocks showed 0.5–5.0% nickel sulfide and Ni-Fe alloy mineralization. Several cross-cutting gabbroic dikes with minimal sulfide mineralization were also encountered.

Due to challenging terrain, the drill site was relocated north of the original plan. This adjustment allowed the team to test multiple geophysical targets and resulted in drilling down the dip of the intrusion.

The targeted DIGHEM magnetic anomaly showed higher sulfide content and better nickel grades, confirming its exploration potential. The key findings were:

• 429.3 meters @ 0.39% NiEq (0.24% Ni, 0.64% Cr, 8.12% Fe, 0.01% Cu, 0.013% Co, 0.031 ppm Pd, 0.035 ppm Pt and 0.007 ppm Au), including 1.4 meters @ 0.93 NiEq (0.65% Ni, 0.66% Cr, 8.90% Fe, 0.06% Cu, 0.021% Co, 0.275 ppm Pd, 0.246 ppm Pt and 0.012 ppm Au)

Source: AEMC

Ensuring High Standards for Exploration

AEMC upholds stringent Quality Assurance – Quality Control for its Nikolai Project to ensure the best practices for logging, sampling, and analysis of samples.

As revealed by the company,

“For every 10 core samples, geochemical blanks, coarse reject or pulp duplicates, or Ni-Cu-PGE-Au certified reference material standards (CRMs) were inserted into the sample stream.”

Furthermore, drill cores were flown daily to the McLaren River Lodge in Alaska, where they were meticulously logged, labeled, and cut. Half of each core was archived, while the other half was sent to SGS Laboratories in Burnaby, B.C., for detailed analysis using advanced geochemical methods.

This indicates that the company integrates environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles into its operations. At the same time focusing on sustainable practices and carbon reduction. With offices in Anchorage and Vancouver, AEMC aims to supply critical materials essential for national security and clean energy.

What’s Next for AEMC?

Significantly, the recent results at Canwell strengthen the vision for district-wide exploration across the Nikolai Project. By confirming nickel mineralization and identifying promising areas for future drilling, AEMC has highlighted the potential for major discoveries in Alaska’s interior.

They plan to revisit the site in the 2025 season, targeting expanded sulfide zones and higher-grade nickel deposits. In addition to the Nikolai Project, AEMC is advancing the Angliers-Belleterre Project in Quebec, which holds potential for high-grade nickel-copper sulfides and white hydrogen.

• CHECK OUT: A Nickel Junior Ready to Power America’s Clean Energy Revolution

---

Disclosure: Owners, members, directors, and employees of carboncredits.com have/may have stock or option positions in any of the companies mentioned: AEMC.

Carboncredits.com receives compensation for this publication and has a business relationship with any company whose stock(s) is/are mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: This communication serves the sole purpose of adding value to the research process and is for information only. Please do your own due diligence. Every investment in securities mentioned in publications of carboncredits.com involves risks that could lead to a total loss of the invested capital.

Please read our Full RISKS and DISCLOSURE here.

The post Alaska Energy Metals Corporation Unlocks Vast Nickel and Critical Mineral Potential at Canwell Property, Nikolai Project, Alaska appeared first on Carbon Credits.

With 85 million electric vehicles (EVs) expected on the road by 2025, the demand for lithium is skyrocketing. However, traditional lithium extraction methods pose serious environmental risks. They deplete water supplies, contaminate ecosystems with chemicals, and rely heavily on energy-intensive mining processes that expand the carbon footprint.

ElectraLith, a Melbourne-based startup backed by Rio Tinto, is tackling these issues with its Direct Lithium Extraction (DLE) technology. This innovative process bypasses the need for water and chemicals, extracting lithium directly from brine solutions. 

The lithium tech startup is set to conclude a funding round worth A$27.5 million (almost $18 million) next week to support its global growth initiatives. CEO Charlie McGill confirmed the plans, as reported by Reuters.

ElectraLith’s Game-Changing Lithium Technology

Traditional lithium production can take months and devastate water-stressed regions like Chile’s Atacama Desert. ElectraLith’s proprietary DLE-R technology completes the process in hours, drastically cutting production time and environmental costs. 

• RELATED: Is Direct Lithium Extraction the Key to Solving the Lithium Shortage Crisis?

ElectraLith DLE-R Technology

The tech’s advanced filtration membranes convert lithium into lithium hydroxide while reinjecting unused brine into aquifers, ensuring minimal environmental disruption.

According to McGill, this breakthrough is especially critical in areas where water scarcity makes conventional mining untenable. He specifically noted that:

“You can’t get a water permit [referring to water-stressed regions like the Colorado River basin]… So we show up and we are like, ‘We don’t need water.’”

Backed by Rio Tinto, venture capital firm IP Group, and Monash University, ElectraLith is preparing to scale its operations. The company’s upcoming funding round, which has been oversubscribed—is a testament to investor confidence despite a challenging market.

The funds will support the construction of ElectraLith’s first pilot plant at Rio Tinto’s Rincon operations in Argentina, set to be operational within a year. Two additional pilot plants are planned, as the company aims to produce lithium hydroxide at half the cost of competitors.

Transforming the $10 Billion Lithium Industry

Direct Lithium Extraction is expected to drive the lithium industry’s growth to over $10 billion in annual revenue within the next decade. ElectraLith’s energy-efficient process not only accelerates production but also positions the company as a leader in sustainable EV battery material supply.

By addressing the dual challenges of water scarcity and environmental impact, ElectraLith’s technology could redefine lithium production. As McGill emphasizes:

“This isn’t just a better method—it’s a necessary one for the future of EVs and the planet.”

With its revolutionary approach, ElectraLith is paving the way for a greener, more efficient future in lithium extraction and EV battery manufacturing.

Cutting Costs and Carbon, Not Corners: Lithium at Half the Price?

Lithium prices have been a driving force in the EV battery market, with significant fluctuations impacting producers and manufacturers. 

After peaking at nearly $85,000 per metric ton in late 2022, prices have recently cooled, stabilizing around $26,000 per metric ton. While this decline offers some relief to EV makers, it has created challenges for lithium producers, especially those reliant on cost-intensive extraction methods.

High-cost concentrate operations, including Nemaska, Mt Cattlin, and North American Lithium (NAL), are at risk of losses unless spodumene prices rise above $800/ton. 

To stay competitive, Sayona Mining and Piedmont Lithium, the two owners of NAL, announced a merger to streamline costs. This partnership, unlike the large-scale acquisition of Arcadium Lithium by Rio Tinto, focuses on cutting corporate overhead and operational inefficiencies.

• RELATED: Seizing the Lithium Boom: Rio Tinto’s $6.7 Billion Deal for Arcadium Lithium

However, challenges remain. Protectionist trade policies and the potential repeal of the US EV tax credit could dampen demand for Canadian lithium exports, adding further pressure to high-cost producers.

ElectraLith’s Direct Lithium Extraction technology offers a significant cost advantage. By producing lithium hydroxide at nearly half the cost of traditional methods, the company is poised to thrive even in volatile market conditions. This cost efficiency could help buffer against future price fluctuations, ensuring a steady supply of affordable lithium for EV battery production.

The cost of lithium is a critical factor for the industry, per Charlie McGill. However, their technology allows them to maintain competitiveness, even in challenging markets.

Lithium Prices: A Story of Volatility

The lithium market remains dynamic, with prices responding sharply to changes in supply and demand. 

On November 13, the Platts-assessed lithium carbonate DDP China price surged by 6.4% to reach 83,000 yuan/ton, a three-month high. This rally followed production curtailments at key Australian mines and stronger-than-expected battery and cathode demand in China.

• Although prices eased to 79,500 yuan/ton by November 21, they still marked a 6.7% increase from the start of the month.

Spodumene concentrate prices have stayed stable, averaging $820-$830/ton through mid-November, according to S&P Global data. Meanwhile, China’s traction battery production in October demonstrated unusual resilience, declining only 1.3% month-over-month compared to a 10.1% drop a year earlier. 

Data suggests a recovery in battery and cathode output, further boosting demand for lithium.

A wave of supply curtailments, shown in the S&P Global chart below, has also tightened the market. The latest cuts include halting operations at the Bald Hill and Altura mines and reducing 2025 production by 73,000 metric tons of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE). Meanwhile, Australia’s Kathleen Valley mine has announced plans to delay and trim production.

The tightening supply coincides with lithium carbonate prices hovering just above $10,000/ton (CIF Asia basis), putting high-cost producers under pressure. Some companies, like Mt Cattlin, are already planning to transition into care and maintenance by mid-2025, while others seek strategic mergers to cut costs.

Outlook for 2025 and Beyond

Lithium supply reductions are expected to shrink the market until 2027, driving a deeper deficit by 2028. Prices for 2028 are projected at $15,344 per tonne, a 4.7% increase, per S&P Global forecast. 

Ultimately, lithium prices are expected to remain volatile as demand accelerates. Amid all this, ElectraLith’s revolutionary direct lithium extraction tech could help stabilize supply chains and drive the global energy transition forward.

The post Rio Tinto-Backed Lithium Startup’s $18M Funding: How Can It Revolutionize the Industry? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

The recently concluded COP29 in Baku marked another critical milestone in global climate action with mixed outcomes. Developed nations committed to channeling at least $300 billion annually into developing countries by 2035 for climate action. However, this fell short of the $1.3 trillion annual target demanded by developing nations. 

The climate summit also finalized Article 6 on carbon markets, operationalizing the Paris Agreement nearly a decade after its inception. Meanwhile, key decisions on the global stocktake and fossil fuel transition were postponed to COP30 in Brazil. The negotiations occurred amidst political tensions, including Donald Trump’s re-election and potential U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement.

Below we share our six key takeaways from this year’s climate talks. 

Article 6: Carbon Markets Take Center Stage

Article 6 of the Paris Agreement, which deals with carbon market mechanisms, took center stage at COP29. After years of negotiation, the summit finalized mechanisms for global carbon trading. 

Article 6.2 governs direct country-to-country carbon credit trading, while Article 6.4 establishes the Paris Agreement Crediting Mechanism (PACM), a centralized carbon market under UN supervision. It allows countries, corporations, and individuals to trade emission reduction units, referred to as A6.4ERs (Article 6.4 Emission Reductions Units).

The PACM introduces enhanced safeguards, including sustainable development tools and stricter methodologies to prevent “locking-in” high emissions. For example, it enforces baseline adjustments and “additionality” checks, ensuring projects generate genuine emission reductions. 

These features aim to avoid pitfalls of past carbon market mechanisms, like the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). Some projects under the CDM, such as afforestation, may transition into the PACM if they meet updated removal standards.

To prevent double-counting of credits, stringent rules for “corresponding adjustments” were introduced. For example, when a country sells emission credits, it must deduct the equivalent reductions from its own accounting, ensuring transparency and integrity.

Despite progress, experts remain cautious. While negotiators hailed the deal as a milestone, critics argue it oversells the mechanism’s potential to deliver large-scale mitigation. Concerns persist over transparency, particularly under Article 6.2, where “cooperative approaches” could lack stringent oversight. 

To address these concerns, COP29 decisions require enhanced reporting and transparency in Article 6.2 activities and encourage swift finalization of PACM methodologies by 2025. These measures are pivotal for building trust and ensuring that carbon markets contribute meaningfully to global climate goals.

• Additionally, a “Share of Proceeds” mechanism was adopted, channeling 5% of transaction volumes and 3% of issuance fees into the Adaptation Fund. This provides critical resources for climate resilience in vulnerable regions while fostering global emissions reductions.

A New Era for Climate Finance

One of the most anticipated outcomes of COP29 was the agreement on a new collective quantified goal (NCQG) for climate finance. This goal seeks to replace the $100 billion annual target set at COP15, which had been criticized for being insufficient and inadequately mobilized. The NCQG represents a more dynamic, needs-based approach to climate financing.

At COP29, a new global climate finance target was introduced, aiming to raise $300 billion annually for developing countries by 2035. The goal includes public funds, development bank loans, and private investments mobilized by governments.

The NCQG has been a point of contention in climate talks. Developed countries are expected to provide significant funding, but developing nations argue that trillions of dollars are needed for their transition to cleaner economies.

• RELATED: The World Needs $9T Annually by 2030 to Close Climate Finance Gap

The agreement also allows for “voluntary” contributions from nations like China, which have not traditionally provided climate finance.

Disagreements over the size and scope of the target caused delays and frustrations, with several drafts and revisions circulating before reaching a final agreement. Developed countries argue that global efforts must include a diverse range of contributors. As Jacob Levine, a senior director for climate and energy at the White House, stated:

“When you consider the magnitude…we need people to contribute, to do their fair share and to recognize the opportunity to work together.”

In contrast, developing nations, led by groups like the G77 and China, have insisted that developed countries bear the primary responsibility. Ali Mohamed, African Group Chair, remarked:

“We need equitable access for all developing countries. Cherry-picking certain groups won’t solve the global climate crisis.”

• The final agreement urges contributions from all sources, public and private, to meet a broader target of $1.3 trillion annually by 2035.

Mitigation Work Programme: Accelerating Action

The Mitigation Work Programme (MWP), established at COP26, received renewed attention at COP29. Delegates agreed to expand efforts to enhance renewable energy deployment and phase down unabated fossil fuel use.

However, progress has been limited to workshops and discussions. At COP28 in Dubai, negotiations faltered over whether the MWP should convey high-level political messages or remain strictly procedural. This stalemate carried into the Bonn negotiations in June 2024, with disagreements centering on linking the MWP to the global stocktake and its outcomes.

At COP29, these disputes persisted, particularly over including references to transitioning away from fossil fuels. Developing nations, represented by groups like the LMDCs and Arab states, opposed such language, citing concerns over top-down mandates.

Meanwhile, developed nations sought to integrate global stocktake results and emphasize stronger NDC updates. Paragraph 32 of an informal note, which mentioned the fossil fuel phaseout, proved particularly divisive, stalling discussions.

Despite efforts to revive negotiations in the summit’s second week, the final text (shown below) offered minimal progress. High-level political messaging was softened, with no explicit mention of the stocktake or fossil fuels. 

While the dialogues under the MWP, focused on urban systems, were deemed productive, the adopted text primarily reaffirmed procedural elements, leaving substantial mitigation ambitions largely unresolved.

Adaptation: Scaling Resilience

Adaptation is one of the significant COP29 outcomes. Discussions focused on the Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA) and National Adaptation Plans (NAPs), yet progress was hindered by disagreements. The UAE-Belém work program, introduced at COP28, aims to establish indicators for adaptation targets, including resilience in water, ecosystems, and cultural heritage. 

Midway through this two-year initiative, countries clashed over including “means of implementation” (MOI)—primarily financial support—and the concept of “transformational adaptation,” which developing nations feared might create obstacles to funding access.

The outcome included the “Baku Adaptation Roadmap,” softening MOI language to “enablers of implementation” to balance developed countries’ demands for governance and transparency with developing nations’ calls for financial support. While this compromise acknowledged both sides, it left many countries dissatisfied, particularly those advocating for robust financial commitments.

NAP discussions, initially slated to conclude in week one, also experienced delays due to extensive disagreements. By week two, facilitators proposed procedural conclusions, deferring substantive decisions to Bonn in June 2025. Other adaptation-related matters, such as the adaptation fund and performance reviews, were similarly postponed.

The roadmap’s adoption and continued GGA discussions underscore adaptation’s complexity and urgency as climate impacts intensify. COP30 is expected to revisit unresolved issues, including financial commitments and equitable adaptation frameworks.

Loss and Damage Fund: A Historic Step

COP29 marked a turning point with the operationalization of the Loss and Damage Fund, initially agreed upon at COP27. This fund aims to provide financial support to nations suffering from climate-induced disasters such as hurricanes, floods, and sea-level rise.

The fund’s governance structure ensures equitable distribution of resources, prioritizing least-developed countries and small island developing states (SIDS). Discussions also explored innovative funding sources, including levies on fossil fuel exports and international shipping, to sustain the fund over the long term. ​

The operationalization of this fund underscores the principle of climate justice, acknowledging the disproportionate impact of climate change on vulnerable populations. 

Still, loss and damage funding remained contentious at COP29. While the fund advanced with pledges rising to $759 million, developing nations criticized the insufficient funding.

UN chief António Guterres highlighted the lack of justice for vulnerable nations. He stated that the fund’s capitalization falls far short of addressing the need.

• According to a study, climate change damage costs the world between $1.7 trillion and $3.1 trillion each year by 2050.

Negotiators failed to include loss and damage in the new climate-finance goal (NCQG), as developed countries resisted expanding finance obligations. Discussions on the Warsaw International Mechanism (WIM) and Santiago Network stalled due to disagreements, with progress deferred to mid-2025.

The UAE’s Global Stocktake

The UAE-hosted conference underscored its role as a key stakeholder in global climate action through the first-ever global stocktake (GST). This assessment measured the world’s progress toward the Paris Agreement goals, providing a clear picture of where nations stand on mitigation, adaptation, and finance.

At COP29, climate talks became contentious as nations grappled with commitments from COP28’s GST. The UAE’s approach to discussions about fossil fuel transitions sparked debate. 

Developed nations and vulnerable countries demanded stronger commitments for transitioning away from fossil fuels, while Saudi Arabia opposed the inclusion of specific fossil fuel language, emphasizing the need for finance-focused discussions. This clash led to diluted draft texts and an impasse on key issues. 

In the end, the UAE dialogue was postponed until the 2025 talks, leaving many disappointed. However, COP30 in Brazil holds the potential for renewed momentum, especially in terms of accountability and climate action. 

Conclusion

The COP29 outcomes in Baku delivered a mix of progress and challenges, with significant advancements in climate finance, carbon markets, and adaptation efforts. The outcomes reflect a growing recognition of the need for collective action to address the climate crisis.

• READ MORE: Article 6.2 at COP29: Singapore Partners with Gold Standard and Verra to Advance Climate Action

The focus now shifts to implementing these agreements and bridging gaps in ambition, funding, and delivery. As the world gears up for COP30, the lessons from Baku will serve as a critical foundation for driving forward the Paris Agreement goals.

The post COP29 Key Outcomes: Milestones, Setbacks, and What Comes Next for Global Climate Action appeared first on Carbon Credits.

BHP has set ambitious plans for its largest copper mine i.e. its Escondida mine and other operations in Chile, with investments ranging from $10.7 billion to $14.7 billion over the next decade. The mining giant aims to address declining ore grades and prepare for the eventual closure of the Los Colorados plant. The Escondida mine plays a significant role in this strategy, with its upcoming projects projected to initiate production between 2027 and 2032.

BHP Americas president Brandon Craig told Reuters in a recent interview,

“We think the deficit is going to be around 10 million tons by 2035.”

He further estimated a $250 billion cost to develop enough mines to match demand and hailed it as quite a challenging task for mining companies.

Source: BHP

Escondida: BHP’s Copper Catalyst

Located in the Atacama Desert of Northern Chile, Escondida, the largest copper mine lies 170 km southeast of Antofagasta. Escondida in Spanish means “hidden,” which is synonymous with the copper deposit that’s buried under hundreds of meters of overburden. The mine feeds three concentrator plants and two leaching operations, producing copper essential for global industries.

BHP owns a 57.5% stake in Escondida, with Rio Tinto holding 30% and JECO Corp controlling the remaining 12.5%. Their joint efforts have made Escondida a vital player in boosting Chile’s GDP.

We also discovered from its corporate deck that BHP’s Chilean mine has delivered 38 million tons of copper since 1990 which accounted for 7% of global copper mine output.

BHP’s Chilean Copper Dominance

Source: BHP

To address declining ore grades, BHP plans to expand its processing facilities and implement advanced copper extraction technologies. For example, introduce leaching technologies to extract copper from sulfide ores.

The company will launch four new projects at Escondida, starting between 2027 and 2032, with peak investments expected during fiscal years 2030 and 2031.

• READ MORE: Copper Prices Swing as China’s Stimulus Sends Mixed Signals—What’s Next for 2025? 

Key Projects Supporting BHP’s Investment Plans

Let’s take a look at the investment breakup as outlined by MINING.COM.

• The new concentrator will have a capacity of 220,000 and 260,000 tpa from 2031 or 32, with an estimated capital budget of $4.4 billion to $5.9 billion.
• Expand production at Laguna Seca by 50,000 to 70,000 tpa starting in 2030/31, with an investment of $2 billion to $2.6 billion.
• New leaching facilities will add ~ 35,000 to 55,000 tpa from 2030/32 onwards, requiring a capital expenditure of $900 million to $1.3 billion.
• The Los Colorados facility will continue operations until fiscal year 2029, maintaining an output of 130,000 to 145,000 tpa before its scheduled closure.
• Allocate $2.8 billion to $3.9 billion for its Pampa Norte division, which includes the Spence and Cerro Colorado mines.
• Boost production at Pampa Norte by 125,000 to 155,000 tpa. Restart the Cerro Colorado mine, using supergene leaching to deliver 85,000 to 100,000 tpa.

Through these investments, the company expects to stabilize production at 1.4 Mtpa by the early 2030s and maximize output from Chile’s copper-rich regions, including Escondido.

With these strategies and rationale, BHP aims to overcome the challenges of depreciating ore grades and increasing project complexities. Significantly, the investment, ranging between $10 and $14 billion, will be at a capital intensity of $23,000 per tonne of copper equivalent (CuEq) to achieve its targeted expansion plans.

BHP’s Copper Output: Meeting the Demand Surge

Copper, a pinkish-orange metal known for its exceptional conductivity and non-corrosive properties makes it a daily life metal. It’s widely used in electrical systems and has antimicrobial properties as well. The global copper demand is projected to rise in the coming years, but BHP has warned of a possibility of a 10mmt supply deficit by 2035.

Chile, the world’s largest copper producer, contributes 28% of the global supply annually. BHP’s operations contribute solely to 27% of Chile’s copper output.  

• In 2023, BHP produced 1,716 kilotons (Kt) of copper. The company forecasted global demand to be approximately 2X in the next 30 years.

The rising demand for copper will be driven by the global energy transition and advancements in technology. Particularly by the growing adoption of electric vehicles and the rapid expansion of data centers.

Copper demand is projected to grow ~70% through to 2050.
(Copper semis end-use demand by key theme, Mt)

Source: BHP

Streamlined Operations and Strategic Advantages

Further putting the expansion plans into perspective, BHP expects to boost copper production by 430,000 to 540,000 tpa in its Chile operations. It shows the company’s adeptness in streamlining its operations and managing fewer but larger assets by efficiently using its infrastructure and workforce.

Being a pioneer in mining, it has time and again proved its deep geological knowledge to minimize technical risks while exploring low-risk brownfield opportunities.

Even though the global copper industry faces significant challenges, with a looming supply deficit nearly equal to 50% of today’s production, BHP remains committed. It’s adopting new technologies over time and fostering strong, mutually beneficial relationships with stakeholders to ensure sustainable growth amid market downturns.

As outlined earlier, by investing heavily in advanced technologies and strategic expansions, BHP ensures Escondida remains a critical pillar of the global copper supply and continues supporting the world’s current and future energy transition goals.

Data sources:

1. BHP to spend up to $14bn in Chilean copper expansion – MINING.COM
2. BHP bets billions on Chile mines to face global copper crunch – MINING.COM
3. BHP 2024 Chilean copper site tour

• FURTHER READING: Nornickel’s Big Copper Bet: Will It Disrupt China’s Smelting Power?

The post BHP’s $14B Investment Plan for its Chile Copper Mines. Will it Impact Global Copper Supply? appeared first on Carbon Credits.