Challenges of Exploring Under Deep Coverminexconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/...– During...

Challenges of Exploring UnderDeep Cover

Richard SchoddeManaging Director, MinEx ConsultingAdjunct Professor, Centre of Exploration Targeting, University of Western Australia

AMIRA International’s11th Biennial Exploration Managers Conference28th – 31st March 2017, Healesville Australia

Overview

1. Long term trends in exploration… what did we spend & what did we find?

2. Factors behind the recent decline in discoveryperformance

3. Industry behaviour over the last business cycle

4. Long term trends in the depth of cover

5. Deep discoveries made since 2000

6. Discovery methods used

7. Conclusions

2

1. LONG TERM TRENDSIN EXPLORATION

In spite of the massive boom in expenditures in 2002-12discovery rates did not increase

3

Exploration expenditures: Worldby Commodity : 1975-2016

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Other

Coal

Iron Ore

Diamonds

Uranium

Base Metals

Gold

2016 US$ billion $33Bin 2012

$3Bin 2002

11x real increasein the last decade

$10.2Bin 2016

Spend reached an all-time high in 2012

Spend reached an all-time high in 2012

69% fall in thelast 4 years

4

Sources: MinEx Consulting estimates © March 2017, based on datafrom ABS, NRCan, MLR (China), OECD andSNL Metals & Mining data, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

Number of discoveries by sizeMineral discoveries in the World : All Commodities : 1950-2016

0

50

100

150

200

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Moderate

Major

Giant

Number

808

5234

1899

2527

Note: “Moderate” >100koz Au, >10kt Ni, >100Kt Cu, 250kt Zn+Pb, >5kt U3O8 , > 10Mt Fe, >20Mt Thermal Coal“Major” >1Moz Au, >100kt Ni, >1Mt Cu, 2.5Mt Zn+Pb, >25kt U3O8 , >100Mt Fe, >200Mt Thermal Coal“Giant” >6Moz Au, >1Mt Ni, >5Mt Cu, 12Mt Zn+Pb, >125kt U3O8 . >500Mt Fe, >1000Mt Thermal Coal

Need to factorin unreporteddiscoveries for

recent years

Need to factorin unreporteddiscoveries for

recent years

Caution:Incomplete datain recent years

Source: MinEx Consulting © March 2017

Historically ~70-80deposits were

found each yearin the World

Historically ~70-80deposits were

found each yearin the World

Peaked at 149discoveries in

2007

Peaked at 149discoveries in

2007

5

Collapse in thediscovery rate?

Number of discoveries by sizeMineral discoveries in the World : All Commodities : 1950-2016

0

50

100

150

200

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Est Unreported

Moderate

Major

Giant

Number

808

5234

1899

2527

Note: “Moderate” >100koz Au, >10kt Ni, >100Kt Cu, 250kt Zn+Pb, >5kt U3O8 , > 10Mt Fe, >20Mt Thermal Coal“Major” >1Moz Au, >100kt Ni, >1Mt Cu, 2.5Mt Zn+Pb, >25kt U3O8 , >100Mt Fe, >200Mt Thermal Coal“Giant” >6Moz Au, >1Mt Ni, >5Mt Cu, 12Mt Zn+Pb, >125kt U3O8 . >500Mt Fe, >1000Mt Thermal Coal

MinEx’s adjustmentfactor for unreported

discoveries

MinEx’s adjustmentfactor for unreported

discoveries

240


6

Even after factoringthis in, the discovery

rate is still down

Even after factoringthis in, the discovery

rate is still down

Number of discoveries versus expendituresMineral discoveries in the World : All Commodities : 1950-2016

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

0

50

100

150

200

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Est Unreported

Discoveries

Expenditures

Number

Note: Discoveries based on deposits >=“Moderate” in sizei.e. >100koz Au, >10kt Ni, >100Kt Cu, 250kt Zn+Pb, >5kt U3O8 , > 10Mt Fe, >20Mt Thermal Coal

No World exploration data prior to 1975Source: MinEx Consulting © March 2017

Expenditures (2016 US$b)

7

Even after adjusting forunreported discoveries, over

the last decade, expendituresoutpaced the number of

deposits found

Even after adjusting forunreported discoveries, over

the last decade, expendituresoutpaced the number of

deposits found

$0

$100

$200

$300

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Discovery costs are risingUnit cost per for a moderate-sized gold or base metal discovery in the World

Average Cost per Discovery (2016 US$m)

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Unit discoverycosts have

tripled in thelast decade

Unit discoverycosts have

tripled in thelast decade

Note: Discoveries are for deposits >0.1 Moz Au or >0.1 Mt Cu-eqData from 2007 onwards have been adjusted for unreported deposits


$632m

~$200mWeighted Average for1990-99 = $60mWeighted Average for

1980-89 = $47m

Weighted Average for2000-09 = $80m

Estimated

Estimated




~$300m

8

$0

$100

$200

$300

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

The unit value of discovery varies over timeEstimated NPV per Gold or Base Metal discovery in the World

Average Value per Discovery (2016 US$)

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

The averagevalue/quality ofgold discoverieshas been falling

over time

The averagevalue/quality ofgold discoverieshas been falling

over time

Note: Discovery values are indicative only, and based on rolling 3-year averageData from 2007 onwards have been adjusted for unreported deposits


$632m

Weighted Average for1990-99 = $173mWeighted Average for

1980-89 = $134m

~$90m


Estimated

Estimated



Weighted Average for1980-89 = $104m ~$150m

The averagevalue/quality of

base metaldiscoveries has

remained constant

The averagevalue/quality of

base metaldiscoveries has

remained constant

9

Estimated value of discoveries versus expendituresMineral discoveries in the World : All Commodities : 1950-2016

$0

$10

$20

$30

$40

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Est Unreported Value

Value of Discoveries

Expenditures

Caution: Values are indicative / approximate-onlyNo World exploration expenditure data prior to 1975


2016 US$ billionOver the last decade theexploration industry has

moved from creating wealthto destroying wealth

Over the last decade theexploration industry has

moved from creating wealthto destroying wealth

Caution:Incomplete datain recent years

10

This situationshould improve

over time asdiscoveries are

drilled-out

This situationshould improve

over time asdiscoveries are

drilled-out

2. FACTORS CAUSING THE RECENT DECLINEIN EXPLORATION PERFORMANCE

Industry is affected by structural and cyclical factors

11

Key Drivers for exploration

• Changes in commodity prices & exchange rates

– Drives the overall size of the exploration budget

• Changes in input costs

– Land access, offices & admin, geologists, drillers and community relations

• Fixed/Variable costs of running an exploration team

– During downtimes, field work (and drilling) gets cut proportionately more

• Major new discoveries / commodity types / change in country risk

– Success brings in new players (changes in risk/reward perception)

• New geological concepts and exploration tools

– Potential to be more efficient and effective

• Increasing depth of cover

– Technical risk increases and it is more expensive to explore

Some factors arecyclical, others are

structural

Some factors arecyclical, others are

structural

structuralstructural

12

3. INDUSTRY BEHAVIOUR OVER THELAST BUSINESS CYCLE

The move from boom to bust (and back again) impacts on ourdiscovery rate and performance

13

Change in the level of exploration activitiesCanada + Australia : 2000-2016

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Number of Active Explorn Companies

Number of Active Explorn Projects

Total Expenditures

Metres Drilled

Change in ActivityNormalised to Year 2002 = 1

Source: Analysis by MinEx Consulting © March 2017based on data from ABS, NRCan and SNL

Note: Excludes exploration and discoveries for Bulk MineralsDiscovery rate is based on deposits >=“Moderate” in sizeAll costs are reported in constant 2016 US$

From 2002 to 2012 the number of exploration companies rose by 2.5xthe number of exploration projects by 2.9x and total expenditures

(in constant $) by 7.0x, but metres drilled only went up 2.6x



14

Change in the level of exploration activitiesCanada + Australia : 2000-2016

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Discoveries made

Number of Active Explorn Companies

Number of Active Explorn Projects

Total Expenditures

Metres Drilled


Source: Analysis by MinEx Consulting © March 2017based on data from ABS, NRCan andSNL Metals & Mining data, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence





.. and the number of discoveries by only 2.4x

The rate ofdiscovery was bestin the early part of

the boom

The rate ofdiscovery was bestin the early part of

the boom

15

Note: Excludes exploration and discoveries for Bulk MineralsDiscovery rate is based on deposits >=“Moderate” in sizeAll costs are reported in constant 2016 US$

Change in the level of exploration activities per projectCanada + Australia : 2000-2016

0

1

2

3

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Discovery Rate per Project

Number of Active Projects per Company

Total Expenditures per Project

Metres Drilled per Project


Source: Analysis of 2602 companies by MinEx Consulting © March 2017based on data from ABS, NRCan andSNL Metals & Mining data, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

Note: Includes Greenfield and Brownfield explorationExcludes exploration and discoveries for Bulk MineralsDiscovery rate is based on deposits >=“Moderate” in size

16

For most of the period the discovery rate per project remained fairlyconstant (if anything it was better in the early-part of the up-cycle).

In the down cycle, companies pruned back their portfolio of projectsand spend per project, but also pruned back on the level of drilling

For most of the period the discovery rate per project remained fairlyconstant (if anything it was better in the early-part of the up-cycle).

In the down cycle, companies pruned back their portfolio of projectsand spend per project, but also pruned back on the level of drilling

Success rates aredriven more by thelevel of drilling than

total spend

Success rates aredriven more by thelevel of drilling than

total spend

0.82

2.42

0.90

1.15

1.51

0.95

0.95

0.66

1.60

1.29

Change in level of explorn activities per greenfield projectCanada + Australia : 2000-2016

0

1

2

3

2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Discovery Rate per Project

Number of Active Projects per Company

Total Expenditures per Project

Metres Drilled per Project


Caution: approximate onlyNote: Excludes exploration and discoveries for Bulk Minerals

Discovery rate is based on deposits >=“Moderate” in size

17

The discovery rate per project was bestduring the early part of the up-cycle.

The discovery rate per project was bestduring the early part of the up-cycle.

Success rates forgreenfield

exploration areinfluenced by

project qualityand the amount

of drilling

Success rates forgreenfield

exploration areinfluenced by

project qualityand the amount

of drilling

1.39

1.59

0.55

1.17 1.10

1.00

0.56

0.44

Source: Analysis of 2602 companies by MinEx Consulting © March 2017based on data from ABS, NRCan andSNL Metals & Mining data, an offering of S&P Global Market Intelligence

1.00

1.321.15 0.82

1.36

1.81

Projects in 2016 have 1.10x level ofspend to that of 2002, but only 0.56xthe amount of drilling … and the unitdiscovery rate is 0.44x that of 2002.

Projects in 2016 have 1.10x level ofspend to that of 2002, but only 0.56xthe amount of drilling … and the unitdiscovery rate is 0.44x that of 2002.

0.65 0.35

1.040.59 0.76 1.00 0.92 0.98 0.86 0.77 1.04 0.98 0.72 1.03 0.39

Keys learnings

• Discovery performance is best in the first couple yearsof the up-cycle

• At the top of the cycle, companies tend to take onmarginal projects and lose control of costs

• In the down-cycle companies need to quickly restructuretheir business to get the fixed/variable costs back in-balance

• Exploration success is driven by good ideas (andeconomic targets) and a healthy drilling budget

18

4. LONG TERM TRENDS IN DEPTH OFCOVER

The challenge of exploring under deeper cover is a “slow-burn”story that will only get tougher over time.

19

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Gold and Base Metal discoveries in the World : 1900-2016


Industry isprogressivelylooking underdeeper cover

over time

Industry isprogressivelylooking underdeeper cover

over time

Depth (Metres)

20

Such depositsare harder to find

… but this is a“slow-burn” storyand doesn’texplain the rapiddecline in recentperformanceN = 2926

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveriesExcludes satellite deposits within existing camps. Analysis excludes Nickel laterites and under-sea deposits

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Base Metals

Gold

Gold - South Africa

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Gold discoveries in the World : 1900-2016


Depth (Metres)

21

N = 1743

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveries.Excludes 615 deposits with no information on depth of cover.Excludes satellite deposits within existing camps.

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Gold

Gold - South Africa

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Base Metal discoveries in the World : 1900-2016


Depth (Metres)

22

N = 1183

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveries.Excludes 383 deposits with no information on depth of cover.Excludes satellite deposits within existing camps. Analysis excludes Nickel laterites and under-sea deposits.

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Base Metals

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Base Metal discoveries in the World : Greenfield vs Brownfield 1900-2016


Depth (Metres)

23

278

905

N = 1183


GF discoveries inthe KupferschieferBelt in Poland

Industry is moreeffective at

exploring underdeep cover for

Base Metals than itis for Gold

Industry is moreeffective at

exploring underdeep cover for

Base Metals than itis for Gold

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Base Metals - Brownfield

Base Metals - Greenfield

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Gold discoveries in the World : Greenfield vs Brownfield : 1900-2016


Depth (Metres)

24

N = 1743

367

57

1319

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveries.Excludes 615 deposits with no information on depth of cover.Excludes satellite deposits within existing camps.

Greenfieldsexploration for gold is

still stuck at the“shallow-end” of the

swimming pool

Greenfieldsexploration for gold is

still stuck at the“shallow-end” of the

swimming pool

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020

Gold - Brownfield

Gold - Greenfield

South Africa

Depth of cover has been slowly increasing over timeWeighted average depth of cover for primary gold discoveries in the World

16 12 13 11 8 1118

717

28

7889

124

159

13 13 1724 28

41

60

0

50

100

150

200

1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-09 2010-16

Greenfield

Brownfield

Average

Depth of Cover (Metres)

Note: Excludes South Africa

72% 83% 77% 80% 76% 74% 71%

28% 17% 23% 20% 24% 26% 29%

0%

50%

100%Percentage Share (G/F versus B/F)


25

Depth of cover has been slowly increasing over timeWeighted average depth of cover for base metal discoveries in the World

30 36 4567

3856

99

155141

114

202

239

129

379

57 59 57

9978 78

190

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-09 2010-16

Greenfield

Brownfield

Average

Depth of Cover (Metres)

79% 78% 82% 76% 77% 70% 68%

21% 22% 18% 24% 23% 30% 32%

0%

50%

100%Percentage Share (G/F versus B/F)

# Note: Excludes 9 very deep (and uneconomic) greenfield discoveries in 1990s on extensions to the Kupferschiefer Belt in Poland.Including them increases the average Greenfield depth to 203m and average total to 211m


#

26

0

100

200

300

400

500

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Cumulative Number

0

100

200

300

400

500

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Cumulative Number

77%

91%

91%

95%

95%

18% of allgreenfielddiscoveries

outcrop


outcrop

14%

33%

38%

67%

76%

Average depthis 99 metres


Note: Based on 44 greenfield and 21 brownfield discoveries.Excludes Nickel Laterite deposits and Undersea Deposits

Depth of Cover (Metres) Depth of Cover (Metres)

5% of allbrownfielddiscoveries

outcrop


outcrop



GREENFIELD BROWNFIELD

Have a wide range of depths for Base MetalsDepth of cover for base metal deposits > 0.1 Mt-Cu equivalent found in the World: 2010-16


27

0

100

200

300

400

500

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Cumulative Number

Most gold discoveries are still being made at (or near) surfaceDepth of cover for gold deposits > 0.1 Moz found in the World: 2010-16

0

100

200

300

400

500

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Cumulative Number

96%

98%

99%

99%


outcrop


outcrop

67%

77%

85%

88%

90%



Note: Based on 115 greenfield and 48 brownfield discoveries.Excludes South Africa

Depth of Cover (Metres) Depth of Cover (Metres)


outcrop


outcrop



GREENFIELD BROWNFIELD


28

5. DEEP DISCOVERIES MADESINCE 2000

Between 2000-16, out of the 800+ gold and base metal discoveriesmade in the World, only 21 were >500 metres deep

29

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Gold - Brownfield

Gold - Greenfield

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Gold discoveries in the World : Greenfield vs Brownfield : 2000-2016


Depth (Metres)

30

N = 470

130

340

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveries.Excludes 100 deposits with no information on depth of cover. Excludes South AfricaExcludes satellite deposits within existing camps..

Since 2000, only 12 golddeposits (out of 469)

found in the World weredeeper than 500 metres

Since 2000, only 12 golddeposits (out of 469)


… and all of themwere brownfield

Pinson Deeps(530m)

Ren (840m)

Lalor Lake(782m)

SizhuangDeeps (1200m)

Cochenour(800m)

Vogue(700m)

Matang Deeps(1500m)

Jiaojia Deeps(1000m)

Haiyu(1250m)

Federation(1000m)

Liberator(1000m)

Fourmile(670m)

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

Base Metals - Brownfield

Base Metals - Greenfield

Depth of cover versus discovery year:Base Metal discoveries in the World : Greenfield vs Brownfield 2000-2016


Depth (Metres)

31

165

74

N = 239


Since 2000, only 9 basemetal deposits (out of 239)


Since 2000, only 9 basemetal deposits (out of 239)


… and 7 of thesewere brownfield

Resolution(Cu:1750m)

Gaworzyce-Radwanice(Cu: 1200m)

Kemess East (Cu: 825m)

South Miitel(Ni: 600m)

Rook (Ni: 870m)

Khamsin (Cu: 550m)

Semblana(Cu: 880m) Teena (Zn: 796m)

Weisswasser(Cu:1050m)

Depth of cover for Base Metal discoveries : 2000-16


N = 239

Outcropping

200-500m

100-200m

1-100m

>500 metres

GiantMajorModerate

Resolution(Cu:1750m)

Gaworzyce-Radwanice(Cu: 1200m)

Kemess East(Cu: 825m)

South Miitel(Ni: 600m)

Rook(Ni: 870m)

Khamsin(Cu: 550m)

Semblana(Cu: 880m)

Teena(Zn: 796m)

Weisswasser(Cu:1050m)


32

N = 470

Outcropping

200-500m

100-200m

1-100m

>500 metres

GiantMajorModerate

Pinson Deeps(530m)

Ren (840m)

Lalor Lake (782m)

Sizhuang Deeps (1200m)

Cochenour (800m)

Vogue(700m)

Matang Deeps (1500m)

Jiaojia Deeps (1000m)

Haiyu (1250m)

Federation(1000m)

Liberator(1000m)

Fourmile(670m)

Mangalisa (776m)

Robijn (2000m)

Depth of cover for Gold discoveries : 2000-16

Note: Size of the bubble refers to Moderate, Major and Giant discoveries.For completeness have included South Africa. Excludes 99 deposits with no information on depth of cover.Excludes satellite deposits within existing camps.

The very deep discoveries areall clustered in a handful of

established districts

The very deep discoveries areall clustered in a handful of

established districts


33

6. DISCOVERY METHODS USED

A wide range of exploration tools and techniques are available.Their effectiveness varies by commodity type and depth of cover

34

Trends in exploration methods

The preferred search method used varies by commodity type, depth

of cover and “scale”

Continental-Scale

Province-Scale

District-Scale

Project-Scale

Prospect-ScaleMinEx has carried out a detailedanalysis of the discovery history of 559

gold and base metal deposit found inthe World at these two scales

MinEx has carried out a detailedanalysis of the discovery history of 559

gold and base metal deposit found inthe World at these two scales

35

195

92

28

19

17

25

0 metres

1-25 metres

26-50 metres

51-100 metres

101-200 metres

>200 metres

2.15

3.24

3.16

4.35

2.36

3.21

Number Average Size(Moz Au)

Discovery MethodDISTRICT-SCALE DRILL TARGET

As methods become lesseffective switch from

Geochem to GPx then todrilling (sole method)




Discovery method changes with depthPrimary gold discoveries >0.1 Moz in World: 2000-2016

36

Discovery method changes with depthPrimary base metal discoveries >0.1 Mt Eq in World: 2000-2016

31

81

20

18

24

9

0 metres

1-25 metres

26-50 metres

51-100 metres

101-200 metres

>200 metres

1.22

3.41

1.11

1.69

5.93

3.73

Number Average Size(Mt Cu-eq)

Discovery MethodDISTRICT-SCALE DRILL TARGET






37

5. CONCLUSIONS

38

Conclusions [1/4]

• Global exploration expenditures (for bulks and non-ferrous) reached anall-time high in 2012 (of US$33 billion). In the 4 years since then it hasdropped by 69% to $10.2 billion

– Gold continues to be the main target (39%) followed by base metals (29%)and bulk minerals (14%).

• Historically, ~70-80 Moderate-sized (or larger) deposits were foundeach year in the World. This peaked at 149 discoveries in 2007 andhas fallen dramatically since then

– However, we need to remember that it does take time for discoveries to bereported and fully-drilled out

• Over the last decade, due to a massive increase in spend and only modestincrease in the number of deposits found, industry performance declined

– Average cost per discovery went up 3x. It currently costs ~$200m to find a golddeposit and $300m for a base metal deposit. Challenge is that these depositsare (on average) only worth $90m and $150m respectively.

39

Conclusions [2/4]

• The recent decline in driven by a combination of cyclical and structuralfactors. These include:

– Higher commodity prices led to a boom in exploration – but it led to a doubling inthe cost of running an office, hiring a geologist and drilling a hole.

– The subsequent bust has resulted in lower input costs, but companies had goneinto hibernation – resulting in very little fieldwork (and discoveries)

– Discovery performance is best in the first 2 years of an up-turn … as companies re-activate their (best) projects.

• The move to exploring under progressively deeper cover is a slow-burn story

– It only partially explains the recent poor performance for the industry.

– The depth of cover issue varies by commodity and brownfield/greenfield andlocation (it’s not an issue in Africa)

– For Australia and Canada the issue will only get worse over time

40

Conclusions [3/4]

• Simply focussing on the trend in the average depth of cover, can give amisleading impression of the challenge

– In 2010-16 the average depth of cover for new gold and base metal discoverieswas 60 metres. However this was made up of greenfield discoveries (at 18m) andbrownfield discoveries (at 159m)

– Over the last decade 54% of all greenfield discoveries made in the World wereoutcropping, and 96% were less than 100 metres.

– Over period 2000-16, only 12 gold discoveries (out of 570) were >500 metres. Allof these were brownfield targets in mature districts

– For base metals, over the last decade, only 9 (out of 308) were >500 metres. Onlytwo of these were greenfields. These were Teena (Zn in Queensland) andWeisswasser (Cu in Poland)

41

Conclusions [4/4]

• Discovery methods vary with the commodity type and depth of cover

– In 2010-16 the average depth of cover for new gold and base metal discoverieswas 60 metres. However this was made up of greenfield discoveries (at 18m) andbrownfield discoveries (at 159m)

– Over the last decade 54% of all greenfield discoveries made in the World wereoutcropping, and 96% were less than 100 metres.

– Over period 2000-16, only 12 gold discoveries (out of 570) were >500 metres. Allof these were brownfield targets in mature districts

– For base metals, over the last decade, only 9 (out of 308) were >500 metres. Onlytwo of these were greenfields. These were Teena (Zn in Queensland) andWeisswasser (Cu in Poland). At these very deep levels the main explorationtechnique used is “extrapolation from known mineralisation

42

To improve its performance, industry needs to developbetter tools for exploring beyond 200 metres of cover

Contact details

Richard SchoddeManaging DirectorMinEx ConsultingMelbourne, Australia

Email: [email protected]: MinExConsulting.com

Copies of this and other similarpresentations can be downloaded

from my website

Copies of this and other similarpresentations can be downloaded

from my website

43

Challenges of Exploring Under Deep Coverminexconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/...– During...

Documents

Transcript of Challenges of Exploring Under Deep Coverminexconsulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/...– During...