Last year’s survey questioned whether the long boom in mining investment was starting to fade, or just experiencing a temporary market adjustment. This year’s verdict: the boom has peaked.

By Magnus Ericsson and Viktoriya Larsson

The investment boom in the global mining sector slowed down during 2012. The annual growth rate of the project pipeline was only 9% in 2012 compared with 20% and 21% in 2011 and 2010. The number of projects in the pipeline even decreased between 2011 and 2012—only by 1%, but marking the end of a continuous increase over the past years. The slowdown, which continued throughout the year but accelerated in the last quarter, has included a number of project deferrals such as the postponement of the high-profile $8-billion Olympic Dam project by BHP Billiton. Other examples are the Prioskolskoye iron ore project and the Sukhoi Log gold project, both in Russia; Grupo Mexico’s El Arco copper project in Mexico; Vale’s Vermelho nickel project in Brazil; and others.

During 2012, 130 new mining projects with an estimated total cost of $47 billion were registered in Raw Materials Group’s (RMG) Raw Materials Data Metals (RMD Metals) ‘Mines/Projects’ database. Project investment in 2012 was considerably lower than in 2011, when the number of new projects registered was 165 with an estimated total investment cost of $110 billion. The final figures for 2012 will most likely increase somewhat as a number of projects from the end of 2012 will only be registered in the database early in 2013. This correction has been as much as 15%–20% in some years, but most probably will be less than that this year. Although it is too early to draw any detailed conclusions it is clear that the peak in investments in the present cycle has been reached and we will most likely see a slight decline in investment activities in 2013.

However, this decline will not represent the start of a long-term trend. Mining and mining investments have always been and will remain cyclical businesses, and RMG remains optimistic for the long-term outlook of the sector. Population growth, urbanization and general economic development in the emerging economies are still positive and provide a strong base for continued growth in metal demand and hence the need for increased mine production and for new investment projects.

Economic Weakness, Lower Expectations
As 2012 drew to a close, the total value of announced investment in the project pipeline of the global mining industry was $735 billion, as registered in the RMD Metals ‘Mines/Projects’ database. The deepening financial crisis in Europe and the slow recovery in North America seem to have slowed growth in 2012. Metal prices during the past year have, on the whole, not performed badly, with gold prices higher than in 2011, copper and iron ore on slightly lower levels while nickel and zinc have been trending downward for about two years.

Industry expectations for 2013 are cautious and might have depressed investments toward the end of the past year. The number of projects announced in the third and fourth quarters of 2012 is down compared with both the first half of the year and the same two quarters in 2011. However, it is important to remember: 1) there is always a delay in reporting new projects; and 2) this analysis is based only on figures captured up to late November/early December.

The upward trend of increased project costs, highlighted in the 2011 survey, continued in 2012. We previously noted that many projects have been enlarged in both announced cost and capacity when moving from the feasibility to the construction phase and this tendency continues. Of all of the gold projects in this year’s list, 10 experienced cost increases totaling more than $8 billion, from an original total of $15.4 billion. The average increase was 54%. Only one project managed to cut its cost, by a marginal 5%. Six projects are new to the list and no comparison is possible.

Project cost increases are not entirely due to increasing unit costs but also to rapid growth in metal demand. Other important cost drivers include more complex ore bodies, deeper lying deposits with lower grades and increasingly remote locations of new mines. Equipment prices and construction costs are increasing and many equipment suppliers are working at near full capacity. Problems caused by lack of experienced mining staff, which disappeared in 2009 and 2010, have re-emerged although not at the same serious level as in late 2007 and early 2008. In some regions—Western Australia, for example—recruitment of staff has become a serious problem and salary and wage levels are getting out of hand.

The number of projects at the feasibility stage has increased strongly, to 28% of total investment. This growth is to be expected given the high numbers of new projects announced in 2010 and 2011, which now have matured and evolved to the next stage in the development process. At the same time, the number of projects at the conceptual and pre-feasibility stages has decreased because of a drop in new, early-stage projects, reflecting the declining investment appetite and increasing financial problems of the junior companies that initiate most of these projects. This will likely cause some problems in the future, as there will not be enough conceptual- or prefeasibility-stage projects in the pipeline to meet the inevitable rising demand for metal.

Mining Project Investment Pipeline, 2012
( x US$ B)
Share Trend
(2011 to 2012)
Greenfield Projects

Early Stages

Conceptual & Prefeasibility 269 37
Feasibility 204 28
Construction 82 11
Brownfield Projects
All Stages 180 24
Total 735 100
Source: All table data provided by Raw Materials Data, Stockholm, Sweden, December 2012.

The share of projects at the construction stage increased marginally compared with 2011. However, the investment value of this sector grew strongly in 2012. The average cost of projects under construction in 2012 was $930 million—a large difference from the average of $645 million in 2011. The same situation is noticeable for brownfield projects, although for those the average project cost is generally much lower, at $450 million, than for a greenfield project.

It is difficult to accurately monitor the progress of brownfield projects from project studies to construction because they are often carried out internally and quickly, without public disclosure. Thus, the total investment figure for projects under construction is undoubtedly an underestimate, particularly for this project category.

All of this year’s survey statistics are based on projects with an announced investment estimate. The RMD Metals database also includes approximately 1,900 projects—mostly in the conceptual stage—for which no investment figure has been announced. The investment total for all mining projects, including projects for which no investment estimate has been published, is therefore larger than the $735 billion recorded at the end of 2011—but it is difficult to estimate how much larger. If it is assumed that the projects without published investment estimates have a similar cost structure to those projects whose costs are known, the total figure would increase considerably. It could, however, also be argued that unannounced-project costs are lower, as most mega-projects are conducted by public companies that must publicly disclose all significant expenditures. If this is indeed the case, the total figure would be smaller. Projects involving metals not covered in this survey but included in the database also represent a specific investment total but one that is estimated at a much lower level than the major metals represented in the survey

Given the continued strong metal demand from China, India and other emerging economies, RMG expects metal prices to mildly decline in 2013 before possibly rising again in 2014.

Many of the early stage projects included in this year’s total investment figure will not pass from the conceptual study phase to the construction stage for a number of reasons. However, historically RMG has observed that 60%–75% of all projects announced will materialize during a three-year period.

Iron Ore Grabs a Bigger Share
As in previous years iron ore, copper, gold and nickel, in that order, are the largest investment targets for mining companies. These four metals account for 86% of the total project pipeline, a small increase from 84% in 2011. They also dominate the mining business in terms of total value of its output, which for these metals only is $606 billion or 71% of the total value of all mine production of metals during 2011.

Iron ore project investment remains firmly in the top spot, as it has since 2010, and even increased its share in 2012 with a project pipeline of $245 billion; while copper, in second place, accounted for $200 billion. Gold and nickel are at much lower levels ($125 billion and $60 billion respectively), followed by a significant drop to the $15–$25 billion level where uranium, lead/zinc and the PGMs, in that order, are to be found. The average iron ore project demands an investment of $1.24 billion—more than four times the average investment cost of gold projects, at $304 million—while average copper and nickel project costs are $816 million and $777 million, respectively.

Mining Project Investment by Metal, 2012
Investment Total
(US$ Billion)
Share Trend
(2011 to 2012)
Iron Ore 245 34
Copper 200 27
Gold 125 17
Nickel 60 8
Uranium 25 4
Lead/Zinc 17 2
PGMs 16 2
Diamonds 9 1
Silver 8 1
Other 0 6
Total 735 100

The project growth rate for iron ore and gold both decreased considerably in 2012, dropping to 14% and 13%, respectively, from 2011’s rate of 33% and 34%. The growth rate of the gold pipeline had started to recover in 2011 after a weak year in 2010, which had a growth rate of only 11%. New gold projects in 2012 totaled $14 billion compared with $28 billion in 2011 and only $7 billion in 2010. Given gold’s on-going high price, these swings are difficult to explain.

The iron ore sector had only $13 billion of new investment enter the pipeline in 2012 compared with $53 billion in 2011, while copper’s $10 billion of new investment in 2012 fell well below 2011’s $24 billion.

Gold’s per-project investment, on average, is relatively small but the number of gold projects is high. In 2012, 64 new gold projects were announced—not at all surprising considering the record high gold prices of 2012—compared with 53 in 2011. A total of 16 new iron ore projects and 21 new copper projects also were announced in 2012, compared with 21 new iron ore and 24 new copper projects in 2011. It is obvious that copper is the metal that has done best in terms of the number of new projects in 2012.

Somewhat surprisingly the number of new nickel projects increased in 2012 after a downturn in 2011, with six new projects announced at a total investment of $3.7 billion. The rare earths continued to attract interest after a slowdown in 2011 as well: eight new projects at a total of $3.6 billion were announced. If all of them are carried through to construction an over-supply situation will quickly develop. Also unexpected was a revival of interest in silver during 2012, with six new projects at a total announced investment of $1.2 billion. Lead/zinc, uranium and PGMs continued to decline in 2012, with only one, three and two new projects announced, respectively.

Latin America Still No. 1
Latin America remained in top position in 2012 with a 29% share of the global investment pipeline, which is below its highest previous share of 32% in 2010. North America is the only region showing strong, continuous growth for the past three years, up from 15% in 2010 to 20% in 2012, with total investment value rising from $86 billion in 2010 to $146 billion in 2012. Africa’s share of total mining project investment was down slightly to 14%, but increased in value to $106 billion. Europe, including all of Russia, maintained its position but Asia’s share fell from 11% to 10%; Asia reached its peak of 14% in 2009 but has been falling since.

The investment pipeline in North America grew by $24 billion in 2012, and in Oceania by $8 billion, a considerably slower pace than the previous year. Latin America’s project pipeline shows the highest average of all because there are more super large projects in this region than in any of the others. The average project investment within the Latin America sector is $730 million, more than twice Asia’s average of $363 million. The other regions fall between these two extremes: Europe, $450 million; Africa, $541 million; North America, $681 million; and Oceania, $583 million, respectively.

Mining Project Investment by Region, 2012
Investment Total
(US$ Billion)
Share Trend
(2011 to 2012)
Africa 106 14
Asia 75 10
Europe 77 10
Latin America 210 29
North America 146 18
Oceania 121 17
Total 735 100

In Europe (excluding Russia), focus is increasingly on the Nordic countries, including Finland, Sweden and Greenland. Sweden has maintained its position among the top 20 countries. Finland is likely to move up the list, as Anglo American has announced that its Sakatti copper/nickel/PGM early-stage project is among the most promising greenfield finds made by the company globally in 20 years. In addition, Gold Fields has revitalized its Arctic platinum project in northern Finland.

The European Commission’s renewed interest in the mining sector has not resulted in any notable improvements in Europe’s investment climate, despite the Raw Materials Initiative having been in place for several years. In Africa, the African Union has decided to establish the Africa Mineral Development Center in Addis Ababa, the capital city of Ethiopia, to support the implementation of the African Mining Vision. The World Bank has announced plans to spend $1 billion on mapping and exploration for metals and minerals in Africa, which would give this underexplored region a boost. Asia’s problems are clearly highlighted by the continuing uncertainty surrounding Mongolia’s Oyu Tolgoi copper project, which has been delayed several times due to the government’s on-going insistence on renegotiating the project’s mine agreement.

Investors Wary of Resource Nationalism, Unstable Environments
The total investment pipeline share of the 10 most attractive countries was static in 2012 at 71%, identical to 2011. Australia and Canada continue to dominate both in terms of capex volumes and number of projects. Together, they account for more than $200 billion, divided among 326 projects.

Although the promise of “spreading mining investments more evenly across the globe” has been mentioned in the previous three project surveys, it has become clear that only a small number of countries continue to attract the largest share of the investments. The growing trend of resource nationalism is most certainly a key reason for this trend. Countries that are perceived as offering a stable political and economic environment receive growing attention. The United States has improved its share at a faster rate than any other country between 2010 and 2011, garnering a 38% share in 2011 and 34% in 2012. Chile is another example, with growth during 2011 and 2012 at 20% and 27%, respectively. Australia, Canada and the U.S accounted for 34% of the total project pipeline at the end of 2011. In December 2012, their combined share remained at the same level despite a slight decline by Australia, which was compensated by strong U.S. growth.

Australia has kept its standing as one of the most attractive countries for mining investments despite concerns anticipated by the introduction of its “super profit” tax, the final promulgated version of which was a much weaker version of the original proposal. Iron ore projects continue to dominate, and of the top 20 projects in Australia 15 are in iron ore and all of them demand investments of over $1 billion each. Second-ranked Canada has a much broader mix of projects including several gold and base metal projects among the top 20 with seven iron ore projects as well as six gold projects, two copper projects, two nickel projects, one diamond project and one niobium project on the list. The pipeline value of projects in both countries is more than $100 billion.

There was little change in ranking of the Top 10 countries in 2012; in fact, the only change was Guinea moving up from ninth position from tenth, replacing the Philippines. Brazil’s mining investment total, which fell in 2011, rebounded in 2012 to its 2010 ranking with more than $50 billion in project funding. Russia, at 5% grew its investment share at a slower pace than most of the Top 10 countries, and the volume of investments in the South African pipeline declined by 7% or $23 billion, underscoring the problems the country has experienced during past years; calls from the ruling ANC party’s Youth League for nationalization of the mining sector have had an impact on international investors’ perception of the country. Meanwhile, Guinea continued its upward progress despite a slight drop in the $16 billion investment total for its three giant iron ore projects.

Mining Project Investment by Country, 2012
Investment Total
(US$ Billion)
Rank in
Australia 105 14 1
Canada 104 14 2
Chile 96 9 3
Brazil 52 7 4
Russia 48 7 5
Peru 44 6 6
United States 43 5 8
South Africa 23 3 8
Guinea 16 2 10
Philippines 15 2 9
Total 519 71

Below the Top 10 cutoff are Mexico, Papua New Guinea, Sierra Leone, Argentina, Indonesia, China, Sweden, Republic of the Congo, Cameroon and Kazakhstan in that order, each with a portfolio of projects between $8–$15 billion. (Please note that an error in the 2012 project survey text made incorrect reference in this context to the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DR Congo) instead of Republic of the Congo). The giant Zanaga iron ore project has propelled this Central African country to such a high ranking, an example of how just the start or completion of one large project can significantly alter the ranking of smaller countries relative to others in the survey.

In Sierra Leone, for example, one new project during 2012 added more than $6 billion to its country total, illustrating that not a lot of importance should be associated with a country’s rank outside the top 10. The investment figure for China, it should be noted, is most certainly an underestimate since many of the projects run by state-owned companies are never reported in such a way that they reach the international mining press. Chinese projects are generally lower in project value at an average cost of $181 million; while in Canada, for example, the average project cost is $775 million.

Chinese mining investment activity outside China remains mostly marginal. China’s scramble for resources in Australia, Africa and elsewhere involves minimal investment values despite rapid growth in recent years—but it is growth from an almost ‘zero’ starting position. It will take years before Chinese companies become powerful global players in the mining industry, but it will eventually happen.

Magnus Ericsson is CEO and a director of Raw Materials Group and a profesor at Sweden’s Luleå University of Technology. Viktoriya Larsson is a research analyst at RMG.

About This Survey
E&MJ’s annual review of metal mining projects is compiled from Raw Materials Group’s Raw Materials Projects database (see demo at The full database is available from RMG on an annual subscription basis and includes more than 4,400 projects as of December 2012, ranging from those in the prefeasibility stage to those currently under construction. Of the total number of projects listed in the database, more than 1,300 include detailed descriptions of resources/reserves, grades, planned investment cost, and completion date.

This survey includes all countries with known projects. In the process chain from ore to metal, its main focus is on the mining stage. Pure smelter projects are not listed. In some cases, however, where the process is fully integrated from mining to refining, such as acid pressure leach hydrometallurgical nickel projects, all stages are included.

Eligibility for a full listing requires each project to have an announced investment cost estimate, reserve/resource data and an estimated annual production figure. Comparability of information from different companies, countries and regions varies, as specific project information or definition may be unclear for various reasons, or the project may also involve large unreported infrastructure costs. Raw Materials Group attempts to resolve these factors, but cannot rectify all discrepancies arising from definitions and comparability.

Information contained in the survey is global in scope. However, it should be noted that completely accurate coverage of some regions is difficult to attain due to lack of information or corporate reporting standards and requirements. In total, mine projects are included from more than 70 countries and the survey’s aggregate figures are considered to reflect overall investment trends in the mining industry reasonably accurately. For more information, visit or call +46-8-7440065.

Major Mining Investment Projects Worldwide, Year End 2012
Project Name Location Status Type Products Controlled by Project Cost (US$ M)
Pascua-Lama Chile Construction OP Au, Ag Barrick 8,000
Cerro Casale Chile Prefeasibility OP Au, Ag Barrick, Kinross Gold 6,000
Donlin Creek USA Feasibility OP Au Barrick, NovaGold 5,845
KSM Canada Feasibility OP Au, Cu Seabridge 5,312
Galore Creek Canada Prefeasibility OP Au, Ag NovaGold, Teck 5,208
Dome Mountain Canada (Susp.) restart/feasibility UG Au Metal Mountain 4,187
Caspiche Chile Prefeasibility OP Au, Ag Exeter Resource 2,800
Metates Mexico Prefeasibility UG Au, Ag Chesapeake 2,701
Tasiast Mauritania Operating, exp/constr OP Au Kinross Gold 2,700
Olimpiada Russia Operating, expansion/plans OP Au PolyusGold Inter 2,500
Davidson-Blackwater Canada Conceptual OP Au, Ag New Gold Inc 1,800
Livengood USA Conceptual OP Au, Ag Intl Tower Hill 1,614
Courageous Lake Canada Prefeasibility OP Au Seabridge 1,520
Eleonore Canada Construction UG Au Goldcorp 1,414
Rosia Montana Romania Feasibility OP Au, Ag Gabriel Resources 1,400
Konevinskoye Russia Operating, expansion/plans OP Au Vertex, Rusfinansgrup 1,400
Natalka Russia (Susp.) restart/construction OP Au PolyusGold Inter 1,200
Detour Lake Canada Construction OP Au Detour Gold 1,157
South Deep South Africa Operating, expansion/plans OP, UG Au Gold Fields 1,156
Bakyrchik Kazakhstan (Susp.) restart/feasibility OP, UG Au Rio Tinto 1,124
Bystrinskoye Russia Feasibility OP Au, Cu Norilsk Nickel 1,100
Bloemhoek South Africa Feasibility UG Au Wits Gold 1,000
Hycroft Crofoot/Lewis USA Operating, expansion/feasibility OP Au, Ag Allied Nevada 985
Golden Meadows USA Closed, reopen/plans OP Au Vista Gold 879
Prosperity Fish Lake Canada Feasibility OP Au, Cu Taseko 807
Meliadine Canada Prefeasibility OP, UG Au Agnico-Eagle 793
Spanish Mountain Canada Prefeasibility OP Au, Ag Spanish Mountain 756
Cerro Negro Argentina Feasibility UG Au Goldcorp 750
Panimba Russia Conceptual OP Au PolyusGold Inter 739
Brisas Venezuela Feasibility OP Au, Cu Gold Reserve 731
Jiama China Operating, exp/feasib OP, UG Au, Cu CNGC 705
Tropicana Australia Construction OP Au Anglogold, Independence 702
Fruta del Norte Ecuador Prefeasibility OP Au, Ag Kinross Gold 700
Lobo/Marte Chile Prefeasibility OP Au Kinross Gold 700
Akyem Ghana Feasibility OP Au Newmont Mining 700
Lihir Papua New Guinea Operating, expansion/plans OP Au Newcrest 696
Rainy River Canada Conceptual OP, UG Au, Ag Rainy River Resources 680
Morelos Mexico Feasibility OP Au Torex Gold 675
Angostura Colombia Prefeasibility OP, UG Au, Ag Eco Oro 649
Kiaka Burkina Faso Prefeasibility OP Au Volta 610
Andina Chile Operating, exp/constr OP, UG Cu, Mo Codelco 6,400
Cobre Panamá Panama Feasibility OP Cu, Au Inmet 6,181
Quebrada Blanca Chile Operating, exp/constr OP Cu Teck 5,600
Tampakan Philippines Feasibility OP Cu, Au Xstrata, Indophil Resources 5,200
Udokan Russia Prefeasibility OP Cu, Ag Metalloinvest 5,000
Golpu Papua New Guinea Prefeasibility OP Cu, Au Harmony, Newcrest 4,845
Oyu Tolgoi Mongolia Construction OP Cu, Au Rio Tinto, State of Mongolia 4,600
Pebble USA Feasibility OP, UG Cu, Au Anglo American, North Dynasty 4,500
Las Bambas Peru Feasibility OP Cu Xstrata 4,200
Cerro Verde Peru Operating, expansion/plans OP Cu FCX, SMM, Buenaventura 4,000
El Morro Chile Feasibility OP Cu, Au Goldcorp, New Gold 3,900
Chuquicamata Chile Operating, expansion/feasibility OP Cu, Mo Codelco 3,828
Escondida Chile Operating, exp/constr OP Cu, Au BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto, Mitsubishi, JX Nippon, Mitsub Materials 3,800
Ministro Hales Chile Construction OP Cu Codelco 3,500
Grasberg/Ertsberg Indonesia Operating, expansion/plans OP, UG Cu, Au FCX 3,175
El Teniente Chile Operating, exp/constr UG Cu, Mo Codelco 3,039
Resolution USA Prefeasibility UG Cu, Mo Rio Tinto, BHP Billiton Gr 3,000
Reko Diq Pakistan Feasibility OP Cu, Au Antofagasta, Barrick, Gov’t. of Balochistan 3,000
Caserones Chile Construction OP Cu JX Nippon Mining, Mitsui Mining 3,000
Schaft Creek Canada Prefeasibility OP Cu, Au Copper Fox, Teck 2,892
Aynak Afghanistan Closed, reopen/feasibility OP Cu MCC, Jiangxi Copper 2,890
Sierra Gorda Chile Feasibility OP Cu, Mo KGHM, SMM 2,877
Los Azules Argentina Prefeasibility OP Cu, Au McEwen 2,851
Haquira Peru Conceptual OP, UG Cu First Quantum 2,824
Cumo USA Prefeasibility OP Cu, Mo Mosquito Cons 2,800
Frieda River Papua New Guinea Feasibility OP Cu, Au Xstrata 2,570
La Granja Peru Prefeasibility OP Cu Rio Tinto 2,500
Galeno Peru Prefeasibility OP Cu, Au Minmetals, Jiangxi Copper 2,500
Collahuasi Chile Operating, exp/feasib OP Cu, Mo Anglo American, Xstrata, Mitsui, JX Nippon Mining 2,400
Salobo Brazil Construction OP Cu, Au Vale 2,337
Quellaveco Peru Feasibility OP Cu, Mo Anglo American 2,200
Toromocho Peru Feasibility OP Cu, Mo Chinalco 2,150
Casino Canada Prefeasibility OP Cu, Au Western Copper 2,150
Agua Rica Argentina Feasibility OP Cu, Au Yamana 2,055
Aktogay Kazakhstan Feasibility OP Cu, Au Kazakhmys plc 2,000
Kamoa Congo (Dem Rep) Conceptual OP Cu Ivanhoe Capital 2,000
El Pachon Argentina Feasibility OP Cu, Mo Xstrata 1,900
Iron Ore
Lac Otelnuk Canada Prefeasibility OP Fe Wugang, Adriana 13,032
Timir Russia Conceptual OP Fe Alrosa 10,000
Simandou Guinea Prefeasibility OP Fe Rio Tinto, Chinalco 10,000
Serra Sul Brazil Construction OP Fe Vale 8,039
Minas Rio [MMX] Brazil Construction OP Fe Anglo American 8,000
Zanaga Congo (Brazzav) Prefeasibility OP Fe Xstrata, ZIOC 7,545
Sino/Balmoral Central Australia Construction OP Fe Citic Pacific 6,207
Tonkolili Sierra Leone Operating, expansion/plans OP Fe African Minerals, Shandong I&S 5,000
Mbalam Cameroon Feasibility OP Fe Sundance Resources 4,686
Kalia Guinea Feasibility OP Fe Bellzone 4,300
Balmoral South Australia Feasibility OP Fe Clive Palmer 3,968
Jack Hills Australia Operating, exp/constr OP Fe Mitsubishi 3,809
KeMag Canada Feasibility OP Fe Tata Steel 3,800
Cape Lambert Australia Feasibility OP Fe MCC 3,765
Vetria Brazil Operating, expansion/plans OP Fe ALL, Vetorial, Triunfo 3,700
Cerro Ccopane Peru Conceptual OP Fe Cuervo Resources 3,500
Jimblebar Australia Operating, exp/constr OP Fe BHP Billiton 3,400
Pampa de Pongo Peru Conceptual UG Fe Nanjinzhao 3,280
Solomon Australia Construction OP Fe FMG 3,200
Extension Hill Australia Feasibility OP Fe Shougang 3,053
Nkout Cameroon Conceptual OP Fe Afferro Mining 3,000
Tonkolili Sierra Leone Operating, expansion/plans OP Fe African Minerals, Shandong I&S 3,000
Northern System [Carajas] Brazil Operating, exp/constr OP Fe Vale 2,968
Southdown Australia Feasibility OP Fe Grange, Sojitz Corp 2,936
Hawson Australia Prefeasibility OP Fe Carpentaria, BMG 2,887
Hopes Advance Canada Conceptual OP Fe Oceanic 2,850
West Pilbara – Mt. Stuart Australia Feasibility OP Fe AMCI, Aquila, Cullen 2,813
LabMag Canada Feasibility OP Fe Tata Steel 2,750
Weda Bay Indonesia Feasibility OP Ni, Co State of France, Mitsubishi 4,000
Koniambo New Caledonia Construction OP Ni Sud Pacifique, Xstrata 3,800
Voisey’s Bay Canada Operating, exp/constr OP Ni, Cu Vale 3,600
Kalgoorlie [Heron] Australia Feasibility OP Ni, Co Heron Resources 3,574
Marlborough [Gladstone] Australia Feasibility OP Ni, Co QLD Nickel 3,400
Mindoro Philippines Feasibility OP Ni, Co Intex 2,455
Wingellina Australia Feasibility OP Ni, Co Metals X 2,269
Mount Margaret Australia Feasibility OP Ni, Co Glencore 2,035
Honeymoon Well Australia Feasibility OP Ni, Co Norilsk Nickel 1,506
Goongarrie Australia Prefeasibility OP Ni, Co Heron Resources 1,443
Araguaia [Lara] Brazil Conceptual OP Ni Teck 1,383
Ramu Papua New Guinea Construction OP Ni, Co MCC 1,370
Turnagain Canada Conceptual OP Ni, Co Hard Creek Ni 1,319
Rönnbäcken Sweden Prefeasibility OP Ni, Co IGE 1,260
Yerilla Australia Prefeasibility OP Ni, Co Heron Resources 1,200
Gag Island Indonesia Feasibility OP Ni, Co Antam 1,160
Dumont Canada Prefeasibility OP Ni, Co Royal Nickel 1,099
Talnakhskoye Russia Operating, expansion/plans OP, UG Ni, Cu Norilsk Nickel 1,000
Fenix Guatemala Feasibility OP Ni Solway 984
Mindoro Philippines Feasibility OP Ni, Co Intex 960
Nonoc Philippines (Susp.) restart/feasibility OP Ni, Co Philnico 950
Nunavik Canada Conceptual OP Ni, Cu Jilin Haorong, Nearctic Nickel 950
Mayaniquel Guatemala Prefeasibility OP Ni, Co Anfield 946
Agata North Philippines Conceptual OP Ni, Co Mindoro Res 906
Canegrass Australia Prefeasibility OP Ni Nickelore 880
Bafokeng Styldrift South Africa Construction UG Pt, Pd Royal Bafokeng Nation, Anglo American 1,623
Ferguson Lake Canada Prefeasibility OP, UG Pd, Cu Starfield 1,500
Twickenham South Africa Operating, expansion/plans UG Pt, Pd Anglo American 1,248
Bakubung South Africa Construction UG Pt, Pd JNMC, Anglo American 1,087
Sheba’s Ridge South Africa Feasibility OP Pt, Pd Aquarius, Anglo American, State of South Africa 972
Afplats South Africa Feasibility UG Pt, Pd Implats 741
Sedibelo West South Africa Feasibility OP Pt, Pd Pallinghurst Res 700
Garatau South Africa Feasibility UG Pt, Pd Nkwe 659
Akanani South Africa Conceptual UG Pt, Pd Lonmin, Shanduka 650
Fedorova Tundra Russia Feasibility UG Pd, Pt Barrick 640
Impala South Africa Operating, exp/constr UG Pt, Pd Implats 625
Impala South Africa Operating, exp/constr UG Pt, Pd Implats 518
Booysendal South Africa Construction UG Pt, Pd Northam 482
Western Bushveld Project 1 South Africa Feasibility UG Pt, Pd PGM Ltd, JNMC, Anglo American 443
Arctic Finland Prefeasibility OP Pd, Pt Gold Fields 429
Konimansuri Kalon Tadjikistan Prefeasibility UG Ag, Pb State of Tadjikistan 2,000
Navidad Argentina Prefeasibility OP Ag, Pb Pan Am Silver 760
Pitarrilla Mexico Feasibility OP, UG Ag Silver Standard 741
Cordero Mexico Conceptual OP Ag, Pb Levon Resources 647
Corani Peru Feasibility OP Ag, Pb Bear Creek Mg 574
Brucejack Canada Prefeasibility OP Ag, Au Silver Standard 436
Venetia South Africa Operating, exp/feasib OP Dia Anglo American, Ponahalo 2,100
Argyle Australia Operating, exp/constr OP Dia Rio Tinto 2,100
Star Canada Feasibility OP Dia Shore Gold 1,939
Verkhotina/Grib Russia Feasibility OP Dia Lukoil-Northwest 850
Renard Canada Feasibility OP, UG Dia Stornoway Diam 810
Cullinan South Africa Operating, expansion/plans UG Dia Petra Diamonds 632
Gahcho Kue Canada Feasibility OP Dia Anglo American, Mountain Prov 556
Jwaneng Botswana Operating, exp/feasib OP Dia Anglo American, State of Botswana 500
Ekati Canada Operating, expansion/plans OP, UG Dia BHP Billiton 323
Letseng Lesotho Operating, exp/feasib OP Dia Gem Diamonds, State of Lesotho 280
Liqhobong [Main] Lesotho Feasibility OP Dia Firestone Diamon, State of Lesotho 167
Viken Sweden Prefeasibility OP U, V Cont Precious 3,734
Elkonskoye Russia Conceptual ISL U Atomenergoprom OJSC 3,600
Imouraren Niger Construction ISL U Areva, State of Niger, KEPCO 1,553
Kvanefjeld Greenland Feasibility OP U, REO GGG 1,534
Rossing South [Husab] Namibia Prefeasibility OP U CGNPC, CADFund 1,480
Khiagdinskoye Russia Operating, expansion/plans ISL U Atomenergoprom OJSC 1,119
Cigar Lake Canada Construction UG U Cameco, Areva, Idemitsu, Tepco 1,111
Michelin Canada Prefeasibility OP, UG U Paladin 994
Etango Namibia Feasibility OP U Bannerman Resources 870
Roughrider Canada Conceptual OP U Rio Tinto 567
Eco Ridge Canada Closed, reopen/plans UG U, REO Pele Mtn Resources 563
Mehdiabad Iran Feasibility OP Zn, Pb State of Iran, UCL Resources 1,300
Dugald River Australia Feasibility UG Zn, Pb Minmetals 1,250
Ozernoye Russia Construction OP Zn, Pb IFC Metropol 948
Admiral Bay Australia Prefeasibility UG Zn, Pb Kagara Ltd 837
Selwyn Canada Conceptual OP Zn, Pb Selwyn Resources, Yunnan Chihong 672
Bahuerachi Mexico Conceptual OP Zn, Ag JNMC 619
Garpenberg Sweden Operating, expansion/plans UG Zn, Ag Boliden AB 600
Izok Lake Canada Feasibility OP Zn, Pb Minmetals 539
Citronen Greenland Feasibility UG Zn, Pb Nyrstar 502
Terrazas Mexico Prefeasibility OP Zn, Cu Andromeda 500
Hilarion Peru Prefeasibility UG Zn, Pb Votorantim 500
Asmara Gold Project Eritrea Prefeasibility OP Zn, Cu Sunridge Gold 489
Oued Amizour Algeria Feasibility UG Zn, Pb Terramin Aust, State of Algeria 413
Hackett River Canada Prefeasibility OP, UG Zn, Ag Xstrata 409
McArthur River Australia Operating, exp/constr OP Zn, Pb Xstrata 366
Accha Peru Conceptual OP Zn, Pb Zincore 351
Tulsequah Chief Canada Prefeasibility UG Zn, Ag Chieftain Metals 313
George Fisher North Australia Operating, exp/feasib UG Zn, Pb Xstrata 252
Zhairem Dalnezapadny Kazakhstan (Susp.) restart/plans UG Zn, Pb ENRC plc 250
Lombador Portugal Feasibility UG Zn Lundin Mining 228
Yukon Canada Prefeasibility OP, UG Zn Overland Resources 227
Dairi Indonesia Construction UG Zn, Pb Bumi plc, Antam 227