So they didn't change the size of the project from the FS. We still have a large capital cost but at least the reserves are protected. I don't estimate much change in the NPV from the FS base case:
| |
FS base case |
new |
delta(%) |
Delta NPV$MM) |
| Ex. R |
0.97 |
0.83 |
14 |
1050 |
| Cu ($/lb) |
3.25 |
3 |
-8 |
-400 |
| Au ($/oz) |
1445 |
1200 |
-17 |
-350 |
| Mo ($/lb) |
14.64 |
10 |
-31 |
-250 |
| |
|
|
|
50 |
| NPV8 ($MM) |
513 |
563 |
|
|
The new numbers for exchange rate and metal prices come from the remodeling work done in 2017 described in the overview section of the Schaft Creek project. The change in NPV is estimated from the sensitivity plots in the FS. Elmer has mentioned the $ 75 million improvement in NPV for every cent decrease in exchange rate but never mentions the amount of NPV reduction for the changes in metal values. So here we are almost 6 years later with only a conceptual analysis on CAPEX and OPEX left to look forward to? There's no point in waiting for higher metal prices because Teck never uses spot prices, only long term, conservative values for the project economics. Again I say E&E need to face reality.
