business opportunities in greenland - acrmacrm.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/business...business...

BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN GREENLANDPROJECT OVERVIEW 2016 / 2017

BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIES IN GREENLAND – PROJECT OVERVIEW 2016 / 2017 2

GREENLAND BUSINESS AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT OVERVIEW 2016

Published by the Arctic Cluster of Raw Materials (ACRM) in collaboration with the Confederation of Danish Industry (DI), November 2016

di.dk/english

acrm.dk

Prepared by

Up Front Communication ApS, Managing Director Hans Bak

COMMUNICATION APSFrontUP

Up-North ApS, Managing Director Martin Schjøtz-Christensen

Edited by Niels Tanderup Kristensen Foto: Hans Bak, Ivar Silis, Royal Arctic m.fl. Print: Kailow Graphic A/SISBN 978-87-7144-099-7200.11.2016


Today, the Arctic region is experiencing an unprecedented level of interdependence with a number of growing interrelated challenges to the local, regional and global order. At the local level the lives of ingenious people, who have inhabited the Arctic of thousands of years are experiencing increasing opportunities for unlocking the vast economic po-tential through natural resources, shipping and tourism but at the same time face major challenges to their traditional livelihoods and cultures. At the regional level, the Arctic states and other international actors are increasingly engaging in the region making it both a venue for cooperation and competition over economic and security interests.

The dynamics at both of these levels are unfolding at the backdrop of major global devel-opments, where climate change is having a particularly strong impact on the vulnerable region. While the global temperature increase is allowing the Arctic new economic op-portunities through new Sea ways, tourism and access to resources, climate changes are both impacting the melting of permafrost and ice caps as well as being increased through feedback loops in the Arctic.

This report takes its departure in the arctic mineral extraction industry and highlights the current prospects and developments in one arctic state: Greenland. It showcases some key facts about Greenland’s administration and legislation as well as operational insights. But most importantly, it gives you an extract of the main investment opportuni-ties in 2016/2017 that are found in Greenland’s mineral-rich underground.

The report is developed by the Arctic Cluster of Raw Materials (ACRM). ACRM is an EU accredited cluster of excellence comprising of Danish and Greenlandic enterprises. ACRM provides company profiles and industry information on Greenland in all phases of the mining life cycle.

To learn more about ACRM, please check our webpage at www.acrm.dk

We hope you will enjoy the report.

Niels Tanderup Kristensen Director, ACRM

FOREWORD


CONTENTS 6 A Nationless area in the Arctic 9 New Arctic shipping routes10 The Arctic Circle and Greenland

13 OPERATING IN GREENLAND15 Greenland at a glance

16 MINERALS (AND HYDROCARBONS) 17 The public administration 20 Mining projects 20 Existing and potential mining projects in Greenland 22 ¶ LNS / LNS Greenland A/S and LNS Greenland Gems A/S 24 ¶ Hudson Resources Inc. 26 ¶ Ironbark Zinc Ltd. 28 ¶ Rimbal Pty Ltd. / TANBREEZ Mining Greenland A/S 30 ¶ Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd. / Greenland Minerals and Energy A/S 32 ¶ General Nice Development Ltd. 34 ¶ North American Nickel 35 ¶ ARC (Arctic Resources)

37 INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS 38 Collaboration and investments 39 Selected infrastructure projects in key figures 39 Mining projects 39 Existing and potential mining projects in Greenland 40 ¶ Sikuki – Nuuk Harbour 41 ¶ Nuuk Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S) 42 ¶ Ilulissat Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S) 43 ¶ Qaqortoq Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S) 44 ¶ Tasiilaq Airport 45 ¶ Ittoqqortoormiit Airport 46 ¶ Kangerlussuaq – runway upkeep, new port and road to Sisimiut 47 ¶ Development strategy for Nuuk – Arctic Capital

49 HYDROPOWER AND CLEAN ENERGY 50 Hydro plants in Greenland

51 KEY ORGANISATIONS

53 OUTLOOK

54 SOURCES

55 ACRM MEMBER COMPANIES


The Arctic covers an area of about 14.5 million km2 of which some parts are currently outside existing terri-torial boundaries. The Arctic states (Canada, Russia, Norway, the United States and the Danish Realm) are all working to extend their territorial rights in the North.

The efforts are rooted in a wish to establish rules for shipping in the area and to benefit from the raw ma-terial deposits that may be found there. The latter is, however, currently of less significance, partly because the raw materials located outside current territorial boundaries are difficult to access, and partly because it is assessed that 80 per cent of the Arctic raw ma-terial deposits are found within boundaries that have already been established.

Exclusive economic zoneAll states are currently allowed to establish an exclu-sive economic zone 200 nautical miles off their coast-line. Within this zone, they have the exclusive right to explore and exploit the natural resources in the sea, on the seabed and subsoil, and to any economic opportunities that may arise. The states are also per-mitted to enforce environmental jurisdiction in their zone.

A NATIONLESS AREA IN THE ARCTIC

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), however, entitles states to extend their territorial demands if they can prove that their continental shelf reaches beyond 200 nautical miles. This will grant them an exclusive right to exploit natural resources on and below the seabed. Exclusive fishing rights are not part of UNCLOS.

Danish submissions to UNCLOSThe Kingdom of Denmark has submitted three par-tial submissions relating to Greenland to the Com-mission in 2012, 2013 and 2014. On 15 December, 2014, the third partial submission – regarding the area north of Greenland – was submitted cover-ing an area of 895,541 km2. The two previous par-tial submissions for Greenland concerned the area (about 114,929 km2) south of Greenland from June 2012 and the area (about 61,913 km2) north-east of Greenland from November 2013.


Iceland

Greenland

Russia

Canada

SwedenFaroeIslands

AlaskaU.S.

Norway

North Pole

Finland

Nationless area in the Arctic

Existing boundaries Nationless area Lomonosov Ridge

Source Nordregio


North Pole

New Arctic shipping routes

North West Passage North East Passage Central Arctic shipping route


New shipping routes are gradually opening up as the sea ice in the Arctic region retreats. This will signify-cantly reduce sailing times between Asia and Europe/America. Since 90 per cent of international trade is shipped by sea, new and shorter shipping routes will have an enormous impact on global trade. With the Arctic shipping routes, the shipping industry will be able to reduce its exposure to many of the challeng-es it is faced with today. These include bottlenecks in congested waters around the Suez Canal, the Pan-ama Canal and the Strait of Malacca, and the safety problems related to piracy. On the other hand, new challenges appear in relation to crews and equipment that must be able to deal with harsh weather condi-tions and drifting icebergs – even in the summer.

Three shipping routesThe Arctic region basically offers three shipping routes:

° The North East Passage north of Russia between Europe and Asia/West America

° The North West Passage north of Canada between East America and Asia/West America

° The Central Arctic shipping route across the North Pole that gives access to Europe and East America from Asia/West America.

The North East Passage is particularly interesting from a European perspective. A trip from Rotterdam to Yokohama north of Russia is only at 8,500 km, or 12,000 km shorter than through the Suez Canal. The trip from Rotterdam to Vancouver north of Rus-sia is 12,500 km, or 3,500 km shorter than through the Panama Canal. The North West Passage is open for shipping roughly every seven summers, but is ex-pected to be navigable every second summer from 2050. The route across the Arctic Ocean is not yet open for shipping, but navigability is expected to in-crease gradually so that by 2050 the area will be open during four months of the summer. This could poten-tially make Iceland a hub for transport between West America/Asia and Europe/East America.

Extreme conditionsShipping in the northern regions, however, is not without challenges, particularly in relation to unpre-dictable weather conditions. Storms, icebergs and extreme temperatures are just some of the circum-stances that both equipment and crews must be able to handle. This means that shipping in the area is highly demanding in terms of safety. One considera-tion is the vulnerable Arctic environment and another is the fact that an accident in Arctic regions may have fatal consequences for the crew since it may take sev-eral days for help to reach the position.

NEW ARCTIC SHIPPING ROUTES


InfrastructureGreenland is an example of a frontier Arctic region with limited mining infrastructure and challenging physical circumstances, yet it has a quite well devel-oped infrastructure compared to many other Arctic states and regions and is experiencing a significant increase in mining activity.

LicensesFor instance, the number of licenses issued increased from 17 in 2002 to 121 in 2016. In short, Greenland’s extractive industry is a fine mining jurisdiction with favorable geology, a pro-mining population and gov-ernment that recognize the mineral resource industry to provide important future income and jobs, no mi-nority land rights issues and a government take that is internationally competitive

Main projectsIn the following, we go a step deeper and analyse the most promising mineral projects in Greenland as well as the main infrastructure development. Each project is described in the same way so it is easy to capture the key figures.

The Arctic is currently going through major changes and is increasingly attracting international attention. Climate changes combined with technological pro-gress present new challenges and opportunities for the Arctic and its population. The recent ten year pe-riod has been the warmest ever recorded in the Arc-tic, and the region is expected to have ice-free sum-mers within the next 30-40 years. Beyond existing and prospective petroleum resources, deposits in the Arctic of other mineral resources are substantial by any standards. Yet, many known reserves of minerals are not exploited because they are found in areas to which access is poor or very difficult.

White oceanLooking at the primary mining areas in Greenland, it is a “White Ocean” of potential. It is not that Greenland has not been mined before. The extractive industry in Greenland has been a part of the island’s economy since the 1850s, with mining of cryolite, lead, olivine and gold.

Greenland has major potential in the known geologic occurrences along the coastline. What is under the Greenland ice sheet is however largely unknown.

THE ARCTIC CIRCLE AND GREENLAND


Iceland

Greenland

Russia

Canada

Sweden Faroe Islands

AlaskaU.S.

Norway

Finland

Western Greenland Barents Sea

Narsaq

Oil fields in Pechora & Yamal Megaproject

Alaska North Slope, Chukchi Sea & Arctic National Wildlife Refuge

Beaufort Sea,Mackenzie Delta

and Valley

1a

3

2

Yamalo-Nenets

Nenets

Shtockman

Valdez

Urengoi

SnøhvitLabrador

Nunavik(Quebec)

Nunavut

North West Territories

Yukon

Sakha

Krasnoyarsk

Taimyr

Chukotka

Komi

Mining and oil activities in the Arctic

Primary mining areas

Largest mining areas

Oil and gas production

Potential oil and gas reserves

Source Nordregio


On a global comparison, Greenland presents a stable political and legislative system with a general low risk business environment on par with other developed Western and Nordic countries. The challenges of a lightly populated vast country in an Arctic and Sub-arctic environment are naturally present, not unlike conditions found in regions of e.g. Canada, Alaska, Russia or Norway. As indicated in the GREENLAND BENCHMARKING REPORT 2016, Greenland gener-ally scores well on several principal macroeconomic and business environment performance indicators.

Strong economyGreenland has seen a negative growth in gross do-mestic product (GPD) in recent years (-1.1, 2012-14) and the economy foundation is still highly dependent on the incomes from a single industry (fishing) and a yearly grant from Denmark. There are, however posi-tive benchmarking factors that should be noted. The general government gross debt is very low in Green-land, currently near 5 per cent of GDP. At a GDP around 11,200 million DKK, Greenland represents a small economy, but also one that is well positioned to engage the global lending market. Benchmarked against comparable nations, Greenland is less indebt-ed by far. In terms of inflation, Greenland generally scores well with an annual inflation of 1.4 per cent (July 2015), which is within the range of optimal pre-ferred national inflation rates.

On the movePerhaps Greenland has unfairly received somewhat negative presumptions in terms of business and in-vestment climate, but serious companies looking for new ventures and investment opportunities will do well to look past any bias when seeking growth and

OPERATING IN GREENLAND

development opportunities in Greenland. Clearly, some structural and infrastructural challenges are present, but so is the country’s drive towards solv-ing them – an endeavour based on industrial devel-opment within minerals, infrastructure and housing development, hydropower and green technology, as well as growth in established industries (fishing and tourism) and more. And an endeavour that will re-quire local and inbound investments alike and create opportunities for a wide range of companies.

Recognisable legislationLegislatively, Greenland is comparable to the Nordic countries, especially Denmark. Though not a member of the EU since 1985, much of the legislative frame-work that applies to trade has been updated recently (2014-2016) to closer match the legislative frame-work of Denmark and the EU. The basis is a two-court system with options for appeal on a shared responsi-bility with the Supreme Court in Denmark.

Communications The 4,600 km fibre optic cable running from New-foundland to Iceland has since 2009 connected to the capital of Nuuk and the southern city of Qaqor-toq. Combined with almost 50 radio transmitting sta-tions on the west coast and satellite connections for the eastern and the most northern regions, this links Greenland internally and to the rest of the world in terms of tele infrastructure. Unpopulated areas gen-erally require iridium phones. Currently, there is only one supplier of telecommunication/internet. Cell phones, internet and social media are widely used and common.


inant in the business landscape. There are several options to start or conduct business in Greenland – and even more are expected with amendments to the Companies Act due to be instated January 2017. In general, inbound companies can choose between setting up a subsidiary, a registered branch office, a representative office or a taxable entity.

Personal income tax in Greenland is not incremental related to earnings, but is at a flat-rate of either 42 or 44 per cent depending on which of the four mu-nicipalities the taxpayer is eligible in. Corporate tax is generally 30 per cent plus a surcharge of 6 per cent, except for license holders within the extractive indus-tries, where incentives policies offer an effective tax of 31.8 per cent. Greenland has a limited number of import duties, but no VAT system.

Open for businessGreenlandic-based companies typically hold decisive local know-how and the experience to solve a wide range of tasks – be it auditing or legal consulting needs, services and supply, catering, transportation or construction. Many international companies have local branch offices and numerous local companies have strategic ties and/or affiliations to international partners, helping even smaller locally centred offices to punch well above their weight.

Air and sea based transportationTransportation to/from and within Greenland is ei-ther by air or sea. The population is spread around the 44,087 km coastline, primarily living on the west coast. Larger cities have paved roads, but no cities are yet connected by such. Denmark, mainly Copen-hagen, and Iceland (Reykjavik) to some degree, serve as hubs for international air traffic. Larger cities are reachable by plane; smaller settlements and remote locations by helicopter. International flights mainly connect to Kangerlussuaq (west) and to Narsarsuaq (south). North Atlantic flights via Reykjavik also con-nect to Kulusuk and Constable point (east), Nuuk and Ilulissat (west) and to Narsarsuaq. Goods are primari-ly shipped via Denmark (currently Aalborg) with a few options via Canada and Iceland. Shipping patterns are however changing with a future, more globally fo-cused strategy from the national shipping company. Harbour berth, depth and sea bunkering options vary, but generally services adhering to MARPOL stand-ards are available. In total, there are 16 city ports and 60 smaller settlement harbours in conjunction with 14 airports, seven heliports and 37 helistops.

Friendly business environmentThe majority of large companies in Greenland are either completely or partially state-owned. Privately held small and medium sized companies are predom-


Official name Kalaallit Nunaat (Greenland)

Capital Nuuk

Institutional system Parliamentary democracy (self-governing country within the Kingdom of Denmark)

Area 2,166,086 km2

Currency Danish Krone (DKK)

Official languages Kalaallisut (Greenlandic), Danish

Religion Evangelical Lutheran

Ethnic groups Born in Greenland – 89.3%, born outside – 10.7% (2016)

Population 56,186 (Aug. 2016)

Urban population 48,216 (Jan. 2015)

Source: Statistics Greenland

Greenland at a glance


was mined from the mid to late 19th century. Mining in the 20th century produced greater quantities and included coal, marble, lead, zinc, silver and cryolite (plus uranium related to research at the Risø Insti-tute). In recent years olivin and gold have been quar-ried. Notable mining endeavours include: Ivittuut/cryolite (1854-1987) 3,700,000 (t) ore; Qullisat/coal (1924-1972) 570,000 (t); Mestersvig/lead and zinc (1956-1963) 545,000 (t); Maarmorilik (Black An-gle)/lead, zinc and silver (1973-1990) 11,300,300 (t); Seqi/olivin (2005-2009) 1,200,000 (t); Nalunaq/gold (2003-2013) 680,000 (t) - 11 (t) gold.

Mineral licensesAs of 1 November 2016, six (exclusive) licenses are granted for mineral exploitation. Two of these rep-resent active operations, whereas the other four are either subject to further exploration/analysis by new stakeholders or put on standby due to feasibility forecasts and market conditions. Almost 60 (exclu-sive) licenses for mineral exploration are granted, to which could be added numerous non-exclusive and small-scale license categories. While some are more or less dormant, others see serious investments into exploration as operations move close towards an ap-plication for an exploitation license. Typically, license holder information is updated twice a month. A yearly activity report is published by the Ministry of Mineral Resources, but it is advisable to attend related con-ferences/seminars and join relevant networks/mem-bership organisations to gain information on current and projected activities.

Hydrocarbon focused operations are currently at somewhat of an adjournment. A combination of de-clining crude oil prices and a challenging Arctic envi-ronment seems to have stifled the offshore interest. In 2011, the most recent appraisal drilling was carried out by Capricorn (Cairn Energy) off the west coast, but the company did not strike commercial quantities. Though some stakeholders have farmed out or relin-quished their offshore licenses, several major oil and gas companies still retain exploration fields in Green-land. Proactive license policies have been instated by the government and seismic surveys are still pursued off the coast of northeast Greenland. Call for tenders on licenses blocks and “open door” procedures for certain areas are presented at two to three years’ intervals going towards 2018. Land-based searches have seen additional attention with onshore licenses granted in Jameson Land and a recently prepared Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment regard-ing Disko Island and the Nuussuaq Peninsula. As of 1 November 2016, 16 (exclusive) exploration and exploitation licenses are granted for hydrocarbons; two of these cover onshore areas. A similar number is seen for (non-exclusive) hydrocarbon licenses – how-ever most of these non-exclusives are, if not renewed, due to expire in the 2016-18 period.

Mining is not new in GreenlandAlthough Greenland is not an established mining na-tion per se, the country is not unfamiliar with an active mining industry: Coal mining in Greenland dates back as far as the late 18th century, while smaller quan-tities of graphite, copper, gold, silver and zirconium

MINERALS (AND HYDROCARBONS)


Detailed information is availableOnline means are available to stakeholders seeking detailed geophysical information and data on Green-land’s mineral or hydrocarbon resources: Greenland Mineral Resources Portal and Greenland National Petroleum Data Repository, respectively. Although the scope of the enterprise between the Government of Greenland and the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) is at a shift with the expected establishment of the Greenlandic institution of Geo-survey Kalaallit Nunaanni by January 2017, there is still a common partnership in promoting Greenland’s natural resources. GEUS represents further volumes of information for interested parties.

RegulationActivities in relation to Greenland’s natural resourc-es, both minerals and hydrocarbons, are highly regu-lated. All significant activates must be reviewed and approved before any prospecting, exploration or ex-ploitation can be initiated. List of fees and in-depth information is accessible at the website Govmin.gl, but the typical steps towards an operating business include obtaining an exploration license, reporting on field activities, reporting on geological findings and financial statements. Extensive and potentially intrusive exploratory activities may even require an Environmental Impact Assessment report (EIA) fol-lowed by a public hearing. Some distinctions apply to the processes related to hydrocarbons and minerals. The focus will be on mineral related activities in the following paragraph.

The public administration Previously and formally known as the Bureau of Min-erals and Petroleum (BMP), the Greenlandic author-ity on natural resources (oil, gas and minerals) com-prises different entities under the Ministry of Mineral Resources (MMR) and shares related responsibilities with the Ministry of Industry, Labour and Trade (MILT) and the Ministry of Nature, Environment and Energy (PANN). One might encounter references to the BMP in documents or rapports predating 2013, referring to the former administrative organisation.

Representing a small administrative size, bottle-necks may ensue within periods of peak activity, but the stages towards obtaining an exploratory permit or settling on an exploiting agreement reflect well regulated public sector principles known in western nations

Strategy 2014 – 2018Currently, the Mineral License and Safety Authori-ty (MLSA) and the Environment Agency for Mineral Resources Activities (EAMRA) both support the core obligations related to the responsibilities of the MMR. Typically, the specific legislative framework under-pinning the sector, including strategic and resource marketing related efforts, is formed and revised through the MMR. Greenland’s oil and mineral strat-egy 2014 – 2018 is in effect at the moment. There is a vested focus on promoting the country’s natural re-sources to the extractive industry, which includes se-curing both a reasonable ROI for private parties and a fair government take - simultaneously making sure that regulations on environmental and social impacts follow international best practices.


ority items within the IBA negotiations include: local content (recruitment of Greenlandic labour and en-gaging Greenlandic business); long-term capacity building and knowledge transfer; on-site/in-country processing, energy decisions and infrastructure; so-cio-cultural values and traditions; as well as intern-ships, training and education and decommissioning.

A signed IBA predates the final political approval of plans for exploitation, development and closure/de-commissioning. No construction work (related to ex-ploitation) can be initiated before the final approval.

Small scale mining licenses are only granted to Greenlanders (five years’ permanent/taxable resi-dents) and are usually limited in terms of scope and investment needs.

Governing legislation, procedures/standard terms, rules for fieldwork/reporting, guidelines for EIA (adm. 2015) and SIA (adm. 2016) and more is available at the Govmin.gl website.

Signed IBAs are found under publications at the Naalakkersuisut.gl website.

Social and Environmental Impact AssessmentsThe process from exploration to exploitation will in-volve both a Scoping Study, a pre-consultation, pub-lic meetings, an EIA and a Social Impact Assessment report (SIA). The reports need to provide a compre-hensive outline of the project, opportunities, impacts and mitigating activities. Whilst license holders tend to hire independent third-party consultancy to pre-pare the reports, the EIA and SIA are considered to be the licensee’s report. Draft reports will be studied and reviewed by the appropriate government au-thorities followed by a public hearing of at least eight weeks. Following this, the final reports and a White Paper, addressing questions brought up through the process, must be prepared and made available to the public. General language requirements entail report-ing in Greenlandic, English and Danish.

Impact Benefit AgreementsParallel to White Paper preparations, the Impact Ben-efit Agreement (IBA) negotiations will commence. The negotiations are conducted as three-party nego-tiation between the license holder/private company, the Government of Greenland/MILT and the appro-priate ministries and the municipality(ies). High pri-


The formal SIA process The Social Impact Assessment process-path towards final approval

Involvement of stakeholders throughout the process

1078

321

4

9

5 6

START

END

Scoping Study, collection of base line

data and draft Terms of Reference

(project description)

Pre-consultation(35 days)

Submission of draft SIA and application for

exploitation license

Terms of

Reference

Public consultation

(minimum eight weeks)

Preparation of

White Paper

Impact Benefit

Agreement (IBA)

Final SIA, White Paper and IBA negotiation

§ 16 exploitation license

§ 19, 43 and 86 approvals

Decision on political

approval


MINING PROJECTSExisting and potential mining projects in Greenland

Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd.

KvanefjeldRare Earth Elements (REE), uranium and zincExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 2,000Operation: Approx. 800

Exploration expenditure: Approx. 75 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 832 million USDStatus: Formal application for exploi-tation license expected late 2016

LNS Greenland A/S & LNS Greenland Gems A/SExploitation license previously held by True North Gems Greenland (TNGG)

AappaluttoqRuby and pink sapphire Expected employment: Approx. 80 (Based on TNGG data 2010)Exploration expenditure: Approx. 17.4 million USD (ibid)Capital cost: Approx. 25 million USD (ibid)Total operating cost: Approx. 108 million USD (ibid)Status: Operation expected to commence winter 2016/17

ARC and FBC MiningExploitation license previously held by Black Angle Mining

MaarmorilikZinc and lead mine, operated by Greenex (1973 – 90)Former employment: Approx. 350Status: Further exploration at formerly operating mine siteProjected production of zinc in 2018

North American Nickel

ManiitsoqNickel, copper, cobalt and PGEExploration related employment: Approx. 40Status: Highly active yearly exploration campaigns since 2011


Ironbark Zinc Ltd.

Citronen FjordZinc and leadExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 300Operation: Approx. 470

Exploration expenditure: Approx. 50 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 429.3 million USDTotal operating cost: Approx. 3.43 billion USDStatus: Construction expected 2017

TANBREEZ Mining Greenland A/S

KringlerneTantalum, Niobium, Rare Earth Ele-ments (REE) and ZirconiumExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 140Operation: Approx. 80-350

Exploration expenditure: Approx. 45 million USDStatus: Applied for exploitation licence March 2012. Negotiations are still ongoing

Hudson Resources Inc.

NaajatAnorthosite Expected employment:


Exploration expenditure: Approx. 30 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 25 million USDStatus: Construction commenced 2016

ARC and FBC MiningExploitation license previously held by Angle Mining

Nalunaq Goldmine, operated by Crew Gold Corporation (2004-08) and by Arctic Mining 2010-13Former employment: Approx. 60Status: Further exploration at formerly operating mine siteInitial small scale mining may be achievable in 2017

General Nice Development Ltd.Exploitation license previously held by London Mining Greenland (LMG)

ISUAIronExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 3.300 (Based on LMG data 2010 – 12)Operation: Approx. 850 (Ibid)

Capital cost: Approx. 2.35 billion USD (Ibid)Operating cost 46 USD/(t) at 15 Mtpa (Ibid)Status: Project on standby


Aappaluttoq is Greenland’s first gem corundum mine. The area was geologically defined by Canadian junior True North Gem (TNG) in 2005-2012. TNG’s operating company TNGG filed for bankruptcy 7 Sep-tember 2016. The mine is built by LNSG who previ-ously partnered with TNGG. TNGG’s assets, exploita-tion license and other licenses have been transferred to LNSGG.Together with Greenland Venture A/S and The Bank of Greenland, LNS secured the necessary financing in order to finalize the infrastructure at the mine and subsequently enable ruby and sapphire pro-duction.

Gemstones as a commodity are set apart, even from the precious metals entering the jewellery indus-try. The business model and marketability depend on stone qualities, characters, carats and cutting/polishing, more than pure yield. Tracking and docu-mentation of Greenlandic origin is planned in order to brand for market penetration and attest gems as ethically mined. Ruby and gemstone prices and sales are trending upwards, with India and China emerging as markets equivalent to U.S. market.

LNS / LNS Greenland A/S & LNS Greenland Gems A/S

¶ Services required/business opportunities: ° Transport of goods and staff ° Services to the camp ° Provision of fuel ° Provision of goods and food ° Provision of technical services etc.

¶ Staff/jobs: ° Approx. 80 when fully operational after

three years (14 – 20 of positions in Nuuk) ° Mining season expected to be 8 months/year

– year-round.

AappaluttoqRuby and pink sapphire Expected employment: Approx. 80 (Based on TNGG data 2010)Exploration expenditure: Approx. 17.4 million USD (ibid)Capital cost: Approx. 25 million USD (ibid)Total operating cost: Approx. 108 million USD (ibid)Status: Operation expected to commence winter 2016/17


Company: LNS Greenland A/S (LSNG) is a Greenlandic construction company. LNS Greenland Gems A/S (LNSGG) is a newly founded gemstone mining company. The sister companies LNSG and LNSGG are group companies under Norwegian LNS AS (Leonhard Nilsen & Sønner) specialised in tunneling and rock cavern as well as road construction and mining contracting in Arctic areas with limited infrastructure. LNS owns and operates among others the well-known Rana Iron Ore mine in central Norway plus several other mines. Shares are not publicly traded.

Website: www.lns.no

Board Chairman: Malvin Nilsen

CEO: Frode Michal Nilsen

LNS office: Strandland, Risøyhamn, Norway

Board Chairman LNSG & LNSGG: Gunnar Moe

Managing Directors LNSG & LNSGG Greenland: Finn K. Mortensen/Peter C. Madsen

LNSG & LNSGG office: Nuuk, Greenland

Exploitation licence: ‘2014/21’ – 2044. Granted 10 March 2014 / Approval 23 September 2014. Transferred from True North Gems Greenland (TNGG) to LNGG 3 October 2016.

Site: 17 km2 - Aappaluttoq – SW Greenland – Municipality: Sermersooq

Deposit & mine: Corundum (ruby - pink sapphire) – Small open pit (approx. 150mx200m)

Resource: 166,983 (t) with 339 (g/t) corundum (TNGG 2015)

Current estimated operation: 2015 – 2024 (incl. construction – expansion possible)

Status: Construction close to completion at mining site and facilities in Nuuk. Production to commence winter 2016/17.

Estimated exploration expenditure: 17.4 million USD Estimated total capital cost: 25 million USD Estimated total operating cost: 108 million USD Total estimated sales revenue: 573 million USD (resource and fiscal information: based on TNGG data 2010)

Other properties: 2014/45 (409km2)


Hudson Resources has maintained interests in Greenland since 2002, exploring for diamonds, rare earths and, more recently, industrial minerals in the form of anorthosite (calcium feldspar). The site offers the potential for developing a simple mining operation similar to a rock quarry, with primary pro-cessing/grinding on-site to produce feed product for use in making structural fiberglass. Finer milling off site has the potential to create higher value products for the industrial minerals sector. A ten-year supply agreement is signed with market-leading fiberglass producer Owens Corning. Hudson is working with the European Investment Bank to provide debt financing.

Three main industrial applications for the Naajat anorthosite have been identified by Hudson: Feed-stock to the high end fiberglass (E-glass) industry; new source of alumina to supply aluminium smelters and; new source of filler material (component in the plastics and paints industries). The anorthosite at Naajat is rated very high for industrial use, contain-ing high content of aluminium (33 per cent max) and calcium (16 per cent max). The deposit may support

Hudson Resources Inc.

mine life in excess of 100 years and the business model rests upon three potential revenue streams from one operation. Demand is upward trending with Asia (China), the US and the EU representing primary markets. Global production (2012) estimated at 10.8 billion USD.

¶ Services required/business opportunities: ° Transport of goods and staff ° Services and construction to the camp and facilities

° Provision of fuel ° Provision of goods and food ° Provision of technical services etc.

¶ Staff/jobs: ° Approx. 20 for construction and 60 once operational.

° Mining season expected to be nine months/year, processing plant ten months/year.

NaajatAnorthosite Expected employment:


Exploration expenditure: Approx. 30 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 25 million USDStatus: Construction commenced 2016


Company: Hudson Resources Inc. is a junior exploration and mining company focused on anorthosite (calcium feldspar) and Rare Earth Elements (REE). Shares trade on the TSX Venture Exchange [HUD].

Website: www.hudsonresources.ca

Board Chairman: John Hick.

President, Director: James Tuer.

Hudson Resources office: Vancouver, BC, Canada

Exploitation licence: ‘2015/39’ – 2045. Granted Sep. 11th 2015 / Approval 24 Sep-tember 2015

Site: 92 km2 - Naajat (White Mountain) – W Greenland – Municipality: Qeqqata

Deposit & mine: Anorthosite (calcium feldspar) – Small open pit (approx. 300mx400m)

Resource: 60 million (t) Current estimated operation: 2015 – 2035 (incl. construction – expansion possible)

Status: Construction commenced (September 2016). Operation and shipment planed for 2017

Estimated exploration expenditure: 30 million USD Estimated total capital cost: 25 million USD Estimated total operating cost: Confidential Total estimated sales revenue: Confidential

Other properties: 2010/40 (92km2) (Sarfartoq/REE); 2013/01 (146km2); 2012/38 (N/A)


Ironbark Zinc Ltd.

The remotely situated Citronen area presents one of the world’s largest undeveloped zinc-lead deposits. Ironbark is proposing to develop three mining depos-its within the area, with an on-site facility for crushing, grinding and flotation processing to produce mineral concentrates of zinc and lead. Concentrates will be shipped off-site to Iceland or another northern Euro-pean port and subsequently to a third party smelter for refining. Glencore and Nyrstar are project share-holders and committed to 70 per cent offtake agree-ments. MOU has been signed with China Nonferrous regarding lump sum construction and commission-ing, with 70 per cent associated debt funding and 20 per cent direct project investment.

Zinc stock levels are declining with major producers closing mines, why demand is forecasted to rise to-wards 2025, and price is projected an upward trend scenario, with both global markets and demand from China. Lead and zinc concentrates are traded on global market permitting annual negotiations bench-marking pricing amongst smelter, miners and metal markets. Zinc is the 4th most used metal globally.

¶ Services required/business opportunities: ° Transport of goods and staff ° Services and construction to the camp

and facilities ° Provision of fuel ° Provision of goods and food ° Provision of technical services etc.

¶ Staff/jobs: ° Approx. 300 for construction and up to

470 once operational.

¶ Mining season: ° All year round ° Shipping window to area approx. mid July

to mid September.

Citronen FjordZinc and leadExpected employment:


Exploration expenditure: Approx. 50 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 429.3 million USDTotal operating cost: Approx. 3.43 billion USDStatus: Construction expected 2017


Company: Ironbark Zinc Ltd. is a junior resource company focused on development of major base metal mining projects (lead and zinc) in Greenland and Australia. Shares trade on the ASX Exchange [IBG].

Website: www.ironbark.gl

Board Chairman: Peter Bennetto

Managing Director: Jonathan C. Downes.

Ironbark Zinc office: Subiaco (Perth), WA, Australia

Exploration licence: ‘2007/02’ – 2016 via Bedford (No 3) Ltd. (Owned 100 per cent by Ironbark)

Site: 120 km2 - Tarsarneq (Citronen) – N Greenland – Municipality: N/A

Deposit & mine: Zinc; lead – Underground & Open pit

Resource: 70.8 million (t) at 5.7 per cent Zn+Pb

Current estimated operation: 2017 – 2033 (incl. construction – expansion possible)

Status: SIA and EIA hearings completed early 2016. IBA signed 23 September 2016 – final approval expected late 2016. Construction expected 2017

Estimated exploration expenditure: 50 million USD Estimated total capital cost: 429.3 million USD Estimated total operating cost: 3.42 billion USD Total estimated sales revenue: 5.56 billion USD

Other properties: 2007/31 (130km2); 2007/32 (122km2); 2007/33 (69 km2); 2010/47 (94 km2); 2011/28 (5 km2); ‘2011/33 (155 km2)’; 2016/22 (114 km2)


tantalum, rare earths, yttrium and even niobium. De-mand for REE is expected to surpass current supply. Prices have settled since the 2010/11 bubble and are trending up.

¶ Services required/ business opportunities ° Transport of goods and staff ° Services ° Construction and operating camp and

facilities ° Provision of fuel/food and other goods ° Technical ° Recruitment ° Educational services

¶ Staff/jobs for stage 1: ° Approx. 140 in construction and 80 when

operational, rising to 250 in stage 3 the 3.0 m t/year option

° A further 50-100 may be needed for downstream processing of other products and administration of offshore processing facilities, marketing etc.

The project represents a significant multi-element deposit including perhaps the largest REE and tan-talum deposit in the world. Tanbreez is proposing to separate the ore into three saleable components prior to shipping. These are eudialyte (the source of the Ta, Nb, REE and Zr), arfvedsonite and feldspar. The com-pany is hoping to be able to sell 97 per cent of all that is mined, potentially making this mine unique. Due to high costs in Greenland, further downstream process-ing of the eudialyte will not be possible. At present, the company is awaiting a pending agreement on the exploitation license before it can finalise offtakes, fi-nancing arrangements and service contracts.

Tantalum is very stable and used in alloys due to its resistance to corrosion as well as in capacitors in electronic equipment. Niobium shares many proper-ties and application purposes with Tantalum. Zirconi-um is a light metal resistant to corrosion and is also used in alloys, advanced ceramics and in the space industry. Tanbreez has spent considerable funds on research into downstream processing aimed at over-coming perceived monopolies in commodities like

Rimbal Pty Ltd. / TANBREEZ Mining Greenland A/S

KringlerneTantalum, Niobium, Rare Earth Ele-ments (REE) and ZirconiumExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 140Operation: Approx. 80-350

Exploration expenditure: Approx. 45 million USDStatus: Applied for exploitation licence March 2012. Negotiations are still ongoing


Company: Tanbreez Mining Greenland A/S is a junior resource company wholly owned by Rimbal Pty Ltd, which is an Australian company owned by the Barnes Family Trust. The company is focused on a multi element deposit of Tantalum, Niobium, Rare Earth Elements (REE) and Zirconium in Greenland. Shares are not publicly traded.

Website: www.tanbreez.com.

Owner, Chief Geologist: Greg Barnes

Tanbreez Mining Greenland office: S Perth, WA, Australia & Nuuk, Greenland

Exploration licence: 2006/04

Site: 18 km2 – Killavaat Alannguat (Kringlerne) – S Greenland – Municipality: Kujalleq

Deposit & mine: Tantalum, Niobium, REE & Zirconium – Open pit

Resource: 4.8 billion (t)

Current estimated operation: Ten years (expansion possible)

Status: Applied for exploitation licence March 2012. SIA and EIA hearings completed late 2013. Negotiations on the application for a 0.5 million t/year operation are cur-rently ongoing (Oct. 2016). Long term plans of extension to 1.5 million t/year and 3.0 million t/year have as yet not been applied for.

Estimated exploration expenditure: 45 million USD Estimated total capital cost: Not disclosed Estimated total operating cost: Not disclosed Total estimated sales revenue: Not disclosed

Other properties: 2010/24 (44km2); 2007/45 (50km2) (Ivittuut) – both via Rimbal Pty Ltd


The matter is subject to further political discussion following any application for uranium exploitation, such as GME’s. Looking ahead, the uranium market is expected to grow significantly. China has a heavy dominance on the current production and stock piling of REE, why the US, the EU and others may look for alternative suppliers for a strategic pipeline stream. REE are finding increased uses within green-techs and consumer products. Demand for REE is expected to surpass current supply. Prices have settled since the 2010/11 bubble and are trending up.



¶ Staff/jobs: ° Up to 2,000 jobs during construction

and up to 800 once operational

The project represents a significant multielement deposit including perhaps the second largest REE deposit in the world, as well as significant uranium and zinc deposits. Build-Own-Operate discussions for third party infrastructure financing are current-ly ongoing with the Government of Greenland and a major European multinational conglomerate that specialises in power provision. As of 23 September 2016 Chinese Shenghe Resources Holding Ltd., has agreed, through 99.99 per cent owned subsidiary Le Shan Shenghe Rare Earth Co Ltd., to subscribe for 125 million ordinary shares in GME to take a 12.5 per cent holding, pending approval prior to 30 November 2016.

The issue of uranium mining, Greenland’s previous zero-tolerance policy and the geopolitical aspects of the resource involving the Danish government have been and are significant aspects when addressing this resource. Legislative agreements between Greenland and Denmark have been passed allowing Greenland to export uranium under international safeguard pro-tocols. Greenland has signed a parliament bill on the safeguard of nuclear materials and export of uranium.

Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd. / Greenland Minerals and Energy A/S

KvanefjeldRare Earth Elements (REE), uranium and zincExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 2,000Operation: Approx. 800

Exploration expenditure: Approx. 75 million USDCapital cost: Approx. 832 million USDStatus: Formal application for exploi-tation license expected late 2016


Company: Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd. [GGG] is a junior resource company, focused on Rare Earth Elements (REE), uranium and zinc in Greenland. Shares trade on the ASX Exchange [GGG]. Greenland Minerals and Energy A/S (GME) is the Greenlan-dic subsidiary of GGG.

Website: www.ggg.gl and www.gme.gl

Director, Board Chairman: Anthony Ho

Managing Director: John Mair

Greenland Minerals and Energy Ltd. office: Subiaco (Perth), WA, Australia

Greenland Minerals and Energy A/S office: Narsaq, Greenland

Exploration licence: 2010/02

Site: 80 km2 - Ilímaussaq (Kvanefjeld) – S Greenland – Municipality: Kujalleq.

Deposit & mine: REE, uranium, zinc – Open pit

Resource: 1 billion (t)

Current estimated operation: 2017 – 2056 (incl. construction etc. – expansion possible)

Status: SIA and EIA prehearings completed end 2015. Formal application for exploi tation license expected late 2016.

Estimated exploration expenditure: 75 million USD (2012) Estimated total capital cost: 832 million USD Estimated total operating cost: Not disclosed Total estimated sales revenue: Not disclosed

Other properties: N/A




¶ Staff/jobs: ° Up to 3.300 jobs during construction

and up to 850 once operational

The project representing a major, large-scale, iron ore endeavour is currently on standby. Mining, process-ing to slurry and pipeline to port facility was planned in 2012, when London Mining Greenland applied for exploitation rights. Since the dismantlement of its mother company (London Mining) and overtake from General Nice Development, the feasibility prospect has not supported commercial value of production under current iron ore market prices.

With current iron pricing, the project should be viewed as a long-term strategic investment from the General Nice Group. Iron ore has been in a case of oversupply and cost production lowering, but a rise in demand may also be in the horizon. Representing a serious investment, General Nice Group and investors will be on the lookout for solid upwards movements to solidify in iron ore prices before initiating operation expenditure at Isukasia. China still represents a ma-jor market for iron import and will likely look to secure sourcing for needed commodities including those for steel making.

General Nice Development Ltd.

ISUAIronExpected employment:

Construction: Approx. 3.300 (Based on LMG data 2010 – 12)Operation: Approx. 850 (Ibid)

Capital cost: Approx. 2.35 billion USD (Ibid)Operating cost 46 USD/(t) at 15 Mtpa (Ibid)Status: Project on standby


Company: General Nice Development is part of the General Nice Group which engages in three main businesses: mineral resource investment, minerals trading and real estate investment. Shares of group subsidiaries trade on related exchange venue. Website: www.generalnice.com

Founder, Chairman: Cai Sui Xin. CEO, Executive Director: Yu Lau

General Nice Development Ltd. office: Sheung Wan, Hong Kong, China

Exploitation licence: 2013/31 - 2042 Granted 24 October 2013 (London Mining Greenland)

Site: 290 km2 – Isukasia – W Greenland – Municipality: Sermersooq

Deposit & mine: Iron – Open pit

Resource: 1,1 billion (t)

Current estimated operation: 15 – 20 years (incl. construction – expansion possible)

Status: Project on standby. Exploitation licenses granted to previous licensee; London Mining Greenland A/S, now owned by General Nice Development. Indirect transfer of license approved by the Government of Greenland, late 2014. IBA and final approval to be concluded.

Estimated total capital cost: 2.35 billion USD Estimated total operating cost: 46 USD/(t) at 15 Mtpa (resource and fiscal informa-tion: based on LMG data 2010 – 12)

Other properties: N/A


Chairman: John Sabine.

CEO, Director: Keith Morrisson

North American Nickel office: North Vancouver, BC, Canada

Exploration licence: 2011/54 (2,689 km2), 2012/28 (296km2) and 2015/30 (N/A)

Site: Maniitsoq (2011/54 + 2012/28) – West Green-land – Municipality: Qeqqata

Deposit: Nickel and copper

Status: NAN has completed its sixth consecutive year of exploration on the property and is focused on providing size potentials and building tonnage at several zoned deposits.

Estimate exploration expenditure to date: 35 million USD

North American Nickel have been highly active in their Greenlandic exploration campaign since 2011, completing extensive airborne, ground and borehole geophysical surveys as well as a large satellite-borne remote sensing survey and almost 30,000 meters of diamond drilling. Successful equity financing through committed investment partners has provided a well-funded platform to support robust exploration programs in Greenland. Nickel is closely tied to steel demand with price fluctuating relative to global in-dustrial trends. Global demand has a strong correla-tion with China’s manufacturing industry.

Company: North American Nickel [NAN] is a junior resource exploration and development company, focused on nickel, copper, cobalt and PGE in Green-land and Canada. Shares trade on the TSX Venture Exchange [NAN]. The Sentient Group owns approxi-mately 60.5 per cent of NAN.

Website: www.northamericannickel.com

North American Nickel

ManiitsoqNickel, copper, cobalt and PGEExploration related employment: Approx. 40Status: Highly active yearly exploration campaigns since 2011


Nalunaq gold mine has produced around 340,000 oz of gold and deposit shows very high grade gold mineralisation. Extensive existing underground de-velopment has been carried out and an existing underground processing plant is in place. Other in-frastructure includes a nine km long road and port facility. The Maarmorilik Zinc District has produced a total of 11.2 Mt grading 12.6 per cent zinc and 4.1 per cent lead. With upcoming zinc mine closures globally, zinc price is expected to trend upwards. Current infra-structure allows fast track to production and includes, harbour, camp buildings, hangars and a six km long underground tunnel in Nunngarut Plateau.

Company: ARC is a junior resource company focus-ing on exploitation of gold, zinc and lead in Green-land, at two previously operating mine sites. Shares are not publicly traded.

Website: www.arctic-resources.com.

Managing Director: Eldur Olafsson

ARC office: Reykjavik, Iceland and Luxembourg

Exploitation licence: 2003/05 (22 km2) and 2008/29 (52km2)

Exploration licence: 2010/45 (102 km2)

Site: Nalunaq gold mine (2003/05) – South Green-land – Municipality: Kujalleq and Maarmorilik zinc district (2008/29 & 2010/45) – West Greenland - Municipality: Qaasuitsup

Deposits: Gold and zinc and lead

Status: Through a joint-venture with FBC Min-ing, ARC has completed further exploration and resource identification at the two projects in 2015-16. Initial small scale gold mining at Nalunaq may be achievable in 2017. Zinc production at Maar-morilik may commence in 2018. Technical updates available in Q4 2016.

ARC (Arctic Resources)

Nalunaq Goldmine, operated by Crew Gold Corporation (2004-08) and by Arctic Mining 2010-13Former employment: Approx. 60Status: Further exploration at formerly operating mine siteInitial small scale mining may be achievable in 2017

MaarmorilikZinc and lead mine, operated by Greenex (1973 – 90)Former employment: Approx. 350Status: Further exploration at formerly operating mine siteProjected production of zinc in 2018


fects of improved air-based transportation connect-ing towns directly to international markets. The ben-efits are tangible for a range of trade and commercial sectors. At the time of this report’s publication, there is still much to be said and done regarding any new airport in Greenland – however, as of July 2016, the Government of Greenland established the company Kalaallit Airports A/S. The mandate of Kalaallit Air-ports is to undertake the needed technical and mar-ket-related studies and later to be part to negotiations and agreements concerning investments and financ-ing regarding the potential airports and runways of Nuuk, Qaqortoq and Ilulissat. Currently, the company Mittarfeqarfiit still runs and operates Greenland’s air-ports.

Natural advantagesIn relation to the mineral industry, the view that Greenland is isolated and logistically difficult in terms of operating can be challenged by the fact that there are several natural advantages to the country’s layout and position: Greenland is centrally placed between the European and North American markets; condi-tions and climate are generally not unlike Arctic and Subarctic areas where successful mining is already ongoing; shipping and port facility potential are also apt for many of Greenland’s deep fjords, providing logistical benefits in terms of transportation. With shipping possibilities via the Northwest Passage - ini-tially navigated by a commercial vessel in 2008 – the access to Asia’s markets is also set to become much more cost-efficient.

Infrastructure development in Greenland is a key is-sue. Focus is set on harbour facilities, airports and run-way expansions, urban development, energy needs and building methodology as well as building mate-rials. Certain projects have been completed in recent years e.g. Sisimiut’s new harbour facilities of 2013 while others are close to completion e.g. Sikuki-Nu-uk Harbour which is expected ready early/mid 2017. Housing/building renovation and construction is on-going through both private and public contractors, with a strengthened focus on low maintenance and inorganic materials. Urbanisation and a demographic shift towards larger towns play into the plans for de-velopment. There is a netemigration from Greenland, but a netinternalmigration from smaller settlements to larger towns. In terms of transportation needs and tying the country together, harbours and airport nat-urally play a vital role. Harbour modernisation is cen-tral in Greenland, since advancements here support dominant sectors such as fishing and cargo shipping. Furthermore, harbour berth improvements are an im-portant aspect as they relate to ferries and especially cruise ships in Greenlandic waters.

New airportsOf the infrastructural advancements planned or pro-jected in Greenland, few – if any – are getting as much attention as the proposed airports and runway exten-sions, based on Inatsisartut decision of 2 December 2015. Not only do the structures themselves present a sizeable engineering and construction assignment, but great expectations are tied to the spill-over ef-

INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS


Investment scenarios via private partners or/and funds (e.g. the EU, pension or venture) are being looked into by the Government of Greenland as well as the municipalities. Investor cases may come to include not only airports and harbours, but also new housing areas, renovation of current buildings, as well as dorm rooms/colleges.

Strong business casesDue diligence efforts and a thorough breakdown of potential investment schemes behind respective pro-jects are to correlate with presentations of relevant investment opportunities and business cases. Hence, contract tenders, actual construction and potential tenders for operation following these infrastructural projects could still be some time away. As such, 2017 or parts of it may be a time of planning, negotiations, preparation and hopefully signed agreements.

ProcurementSmall and medium sized Greenlandic based engi-neering and construction companies will look towards tenders including manageable sub-contracts and/or partnerships with larger international partners. In-bound international contractors can do well in estab-lishing partnerships will local companies to get onsite know-how. Some public contract stipulations may also necessitate a certain amount of local content in workforce and/or business partnerships.

Public funding by the Greenlandic treasury alone is not an option if the wanted infrastructural devel-opment projects are to be initiated and completed. Looking ahead, from 2017 to 2020, the Government of Greenland is proposing a conservative approach in terms of public spending. Hence, the call for invest-ments and viable financial models for ventures with investment partners is currently subject to much consideration. Public-Private-Partnerships (PPP), Public-Private-Cooperation (PPC) and similar mod-els have been presented by advisory parties at semi-nars in both Copenhagen and Nuuk. Such investment models and partnerships are well established in e.g. the UK and Denmark, and may – tweaked to suit lo-cal conditions and legislative framework – provide the necessary economic leverage to materialise some of the plans for new infrastructure.

Private capitalPrivate investors will look towards equity, revenue streams and certainty surrounding legislative frame-work and agreed documents. Initially, the crux of the matter will be the ability to present attractive and well managed business cases to capital investors and operating companies, at the same time ensuring that the public contractor is guaranteed a fulfilment of functional requirements. Risk management and well-balanced contractual agreements that satisfy all the involved shareholders will be at the centre of any successful and lasting venture towards the develop-ment of Greenlandic infrastructure through private investments.

Collaboration and investments


MINING PROJECTSExisting and potential mining projects in Greenland

Kangerlussuaq – runway upkeep, new port & road to SisimiutRunway: 150 million DKKATV road: 22 million DKKHarbour: 50 million DKK

Nuuk AirportEstimated construction costs: 1,297 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 2,200 m in late 2018

Nuuk HarbourEstimated construction costs: 59,2 million USDA total area of 47,320m2 with a terminal capacity of 3,290 TEU

Arctic capital7,000 new homes

Ilulissat Airport Estimated construction costs: 73 million DKKCurrently anticipated run-way: 2,200 m in 2019

Selected infrastructure projects in key figures

Ittoqqortoormiit AirportEstimated construction costs: 152 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 650 m in late 2018

Tasiilaq AirportEstimated construction costs: 257 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 1,199 m in 2022

Qaqortoq AirportEstimated construction costs: 681 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 1,199 m in 2018

Source: Estimates for Ilulissat Airport / Nuuk Airport / Qaqortoq Airport / Tasiilaq Airport & Ittoqqortoormiit Airport are based on the Transport Commission 2011 report (2010 price index). Further restrictions apply to baseline estimates.


Sikuki – Nuuk Harbour

The company Sikuki Nuuk Harbour A/S was founded 23 December 2013.

The purpose was to construct, own, operate and de-velop harbour areas in Nuuk and to perform related business activities. Prequalification proceedings were completed in 2014, with tender proceedings ending 31 October 2014 for a turnkey contract. Construction commenced Q1 2015. New buildings and construc-tion include 310 m quay at 13 m of depth and 50 m at 8 m of depth. A total area of 47,320 m2 with a terminal capacity of 3,290 TEU and ability to receive and operate container vessels of up to approx. 2,500 TEU. Adding to this is refrigerated/freezer storage of; 1,250 m2 warehouse and 1,200 m2 workshop build-ing. As a new model for Greenlandic harbours, com-mercial use and access to some facilities from foreign vessels will entail ship dues and payments on services delivered.

The capital base is based on government funding, through equity and loans as well as external financ-ing, the latter (and primary) part via Pareto Securities investment Q1 2015.

Board Chairman: Lars Erik Karlsson

CEO: Pall Hermannsson

Total cost of construction: Approx. 59,2 million USD

Main construction contractor: Per Aarsleff Greenland ApS

Status: Expected close to completions by end of February 2017 – final details concluded during summer 2017.

Nuuk HarbourEstimated construction costs: 59,2 million USDA total area of 47,320m2 with a terminal capacity of 3,290 TEU


Nuuk Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S)

The capital of Greenland may get a modernised air-port and an extension of the current 950 m runway, which only accommodates smaller propel based fixed-winged aircrafts and helicopter traffic. Interna-tional traffic to Nuuk is currently primarily serviced via a hub in either Kangerlussuaq (2,810 m runway) or in Iceland. Although concerns are raised about reg-ularity and discussions are ongoing about an exten-sion of current runway vs. construction at different-location, an international traffic connection to Nuuk is well anticipated by travellers and businesses alike. Cruise ship operators have remarked on the potential of Nuuk as transit hub, if airports planes are carried out to service international flights. Other serious in-vestments may follow suit – both in the tourism sector and in other industries. As the administrative centre of Greenland and home to the majority of the larger companies’ headquarters, Nuuk already sees a great deal of international business travellers. A direct in-ternational connection would be a boon to these as well as Nuuk, an emerging tourist destination. The fjords and backcountry of Nuuk offer potential for tourist related growth and currently the summer sea-sons have ample modern hotel capacity.

Board Chairman: Leo Bruno Larsen

CEO: Jákup Sverri Fonsdal Kass (interim). Steffen Ulrich-Lynge (as of 1 December 2016)

Previous estimations on construction cost: 1,297 million DKK (2010-index! / Transport Commission 2011)

Currently anticipated runway: 2,200 m (minimum) in late 2018 / International airport

Status: Geo-testing, drilling and blasting have commenced as part of initial survey, September 2016. Studies concerning feasibility, construction costs and investment partners/models are on - going as of late 2016.

Nuuk AirportEstimated construction costs: 1,297 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 2,200 m in late 2018


Ilulissat Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S)

The premier tourist destination of Ilulissat was the first to see geotechnical surveying in relation to the extension of the current 845 m runway. Today inter-national traffic to Ilulissat is primarily serviced via hub in either Kangerlussuaq or Iceland. Home to the UN-ESCO World Heritage site listed Icefjord, Ilulissat’s magical sceneries have put the city on the forefront when it comes to the allure of Greenland as a tourist destination. Home to massive icebergs and award-ed hotels from where you can enjoy the scenery, the town has seen a rise in incoming tourists to the point where overnight capacity has very little vacancy in high seasons. With direct international flights, the town could further advance it’s already thriving tour-ism industry as well as provide further opportunities for the well-developed fishing industry. Investments into added capacity are already ongoing from local operators – from expansion on situated hotels to new developments of luxury overnight facilities next to the fjord. A partnership between the municipality of Qaa-suitsup, the Greenlandic Government and Realdania is behind the aspiring project of Ilulissat’s coming Icefjord Centre – planned to open in 2020.

Board Chairman: Leo Bruno Larsen


Previous estimations on construction cost: 73 million DKK (2010-index! / Transport Commission 2011 – cost only related to extension to 1,199 m!)

Currently anticipated runway: 2,200 m (minimum) in 2019 / International airport

Status: Geo-testing, drilling and blasting have commenced as part of initial survey, September 2016. Studies concerning feasibility, construction costs and investment partners/models are ongoing as of late 2016.

Ilulissat Airport Estimated construction costs: 73 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 2,200 m in 2019


Six km of road have already been laid down by the municipality of Kujalleq in South Greenland, connect-ing the town of Qaqortoq to the placement of a future potential airport. Since the final decision on any of the airports has not yet been made, this road certain-ly speaks to the proactiveness and expectations of the southern region. International traffic to Qaqortoq is currently primarily serviced via hub in Narsarsuaq (1,830 m), connecting via ferries and helicopter. Qa-qortoq and the rest of southern Greenland is rich on art, culture and Norse history and boast several ad-venture opportunities for visitors wishing to enjoy the lush mountains region. Old ruins and hot springs are among the regions attractions, as well the region be-ing home to both fishing industries, agriculture and farmers - thus fittingly called the country’s food stor-age. Local hotels have been modernising and plans are on the ready for a boom in business.

Qaqortoq Airport (Kalaallit Airports A/S)

Board Chairman: Leo Bruno Larsen.


Previous estimations on construction cost: 681 million DKK (2010-index! / Transport Commission 2011).

Currently anticipated runway: 1,199 m (minimum) in 2018 / North Atlantic airport

Status: Geo-testing, drilling and blasting have commenced as part of initial survey, September 2016. Studies concerning feasibility, construction costs and investment partners/models are ongoing as of late 2016.

Qaqortoq AirportEstimated construction costs: 681 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 1,199 m in 2018


Previous estimations on construction cost: 257 million DKK (2010-index! / Transport Commission 2011– cost related to 1,199 m gravel).

Currently anticipated runway: 1,199 m (minimum) in 2022/ North Atlantic airport

Status: Initial weather and climate related technical surveys are under way. Studies concerning feasi-bility, construction costs and investment partners/models are ongoing as of late 2016.

An airport in Tasiilaq is also one of the politically pri-oritised airport projects, however this location is not currently included in the scope of Kalaallit Airports A/S. Today, Tasiilaq is serviced internationally primar-ily via flights from either Kangerlussuaq or Iceland, connecting to the settlement of Kulusuk (1,199 m/gravel). From Kulusuk, Tasiilaq can be reached either by boat, helicopter or dogsled/snowmobile. Tasiilaq is the largest city on the east coast and presents visitors with a dramatic roughed landscape and a less devel-oped feel as compared to the larger towns of the west coast. Well-established outfitters and remote cabins combine to make the dramatic landscape accessi-ble for adventures. With close proximity to Iceland, Icelandic tourists have the option of adding an East Greenland trip to their itinerary and collaboration between Icelandic and local tour operators is set for further advancement. The current traffic structure creates a bottleneck for in/outbound travellers to/from Tasiilaq and an airport would open up a range of possibilities in terms of volume and investment. Tasiilaq-based operators are currently reporting up-ward trending revenues.

Tasiilaq Airport

Tasiilaq AirportEstimated construction costs: 257 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 1,199 m in 2022


Previous estimations on construction cost: 152 million DKK (2010-index! / Transport Commission 2011 – cost related to 1,199 m gravel)

Currently anticipated runway: 650 m (minimum) in late 2018 / Regional airport

Status: Initial weather and climate related technical surveys are under way.

As part of the new parliament coalition between the parties of Siumut, IA and Partii Naleraq, the 2016-2018 coalition-agreement also directs focus at the potential for gravel runways in Qeqertasuaq, Qa-sigiannguit, Kangaatsiaq, Narsaq and Nanortalik.

An airport in Ittoqqortoormiit is also part of the po-litically prioritised airport projects, but like Tasiilaq it is not currently included in the scope by Kalaallit Airports A/S. Ittoqqortoormiit is about as remote as it goes for Greenlandic towns. Currently serviced internationally via flights from either Kulusuk or Ice-land, connecting to the landing strip at Nerlerit Inaat also known as Constable Point (1,000 m/gravel). From Nerlerit Inaat, one reaches Ittoqqortoormiit either by boat, helicopter or dogsled/snowmobile. Situated next to the world’s largest and deepest mul-ti-branched fjord system, the town gives visitors to an experience few other places can match in terms of seclusion and uniqueness. Expedition vessels and cruise ships may call to port, but generally the scene is dominated by nature, wildlife and possibilities for adventure. Tourism as a larger business is not estab-lished, however there is a tourist office and willing op-erators. Like Tasiilaq, the current traffic system can create bottlenecks to/from Ittoqqortoormiit and ex-peditions to the National Park may bypass the town completely setting out directly from Nerlerit Inaat. A direct flight from Iceland would be more cost-effec-tive and open the town to tourist related investments.

Ittoqqortoormiit Airport

Ittoqqortoormiit AirportEstimated construction costs: 152 million DKKCurrently anticipated runway: 650 m in late 2018


A new and modern port in Kangerlussuaq is also being discussed. Plans for a port have been agreed upon on a regional level but still need to be discussed further on a parliamentary level in order to secure government funding. A larger port, with 10 m depth and ability to accommodate vessels up to around 230 m in connection with Kangerlussuaq would work in conjunction with the international airport and be par-ticular favourable in terms of transferring cruise ship guests. The port is planned to be situated about 10 km further down the fjord than the current facilities, hence part of the plan involves road construction. To-tal construction cost is estimated at approximately 50 million DKK.

A long-standing wanted item on the regional itin-erary has been a road connecting Kangerlussuaq to Greenland’s second largest town of Sisimiut. To-tal construction cost of a passable two-lane gravel road on the 160 km expanse has been estimated to be somewhere between 300 and 500 million DKK. The municipality of Qeqqata has instigated a light approach to this sizeable undertaking by funding an ATV (all-terrain vehicle) track following the outline of the proposed road. The ATV road construction will be completed in tempi through 2016 and 2017. Estimat-ed cost of construction is around 22 million DKK.

Kangerlussuaq serves as the main hub for redirecting and handling incoming international traffic in Green-land. In itself, Kangerlussuaq has plenty to offer vis-itors and the local hotel is currently renovating and modernising. Road access to mountains, fjords and the icecap is among the settlement’s attractions. Kangerlussuaq airport, originally build as an Ameri-can airbase in 1941, is well situated for air traffic in terms of weather and high regularity. With the ongo-ing discussions new international airports in Green-land, there is some uncertainty regarding the exact future of Kangerlussuaq airport – the area, however, holds plenty of potential and several projects are be-ing brought up. Forward mineral projects are situated in Kangerlussuaq fjord.

Kangerlussuaq airport’s runway is nearing the need of an overhaul due to permafrost damages. This re-lates to about 300 m of the 2,810 m runway, however there are currently no problems regarding a full and safe use of the airport. The exact cost of the overhaul has been the matter of some discussion, ranging from up to 2 billion DKK for a completely new tarmac to a 2011-estimate around 150 million DKK from the Transport Commission. In relation to the scope of the project, a survey of the extent of needed repairs has been ongoing in 2016. In Kangerlussuaq and the municipality of Qeqqata, there is a natural vested in-terest in keeping Kangerlussuaq airport and runway.

Kangerlussuaq – runway upkeep, new port and road to Sisimiut

Kangerlussuaq – runway upkeep, new port and road to SisimiutRunway: 150 million DKKATV road: 22 million DKKHarbour: 50 million DKK


Nuuk is at the core of much of Greenland’s policymak-ing, central administration, businesses, education-al institutions, healthcare, cultural scene and large event venue. The Arctic capital’s strategy is not a pro-ject as such, but still bears mentioning here due to the scale, scope and potential development projects. The ambitious forward-looking strategy for the capital of Nuuk was presented in June 2016 by the munici-pality of Sermersooq. A strategy including plans for serious commercial, recreational and residential de-velopment. Looking towards 2030, the strategy envi-sions and lays out the basis of being home to 30,000 inhabitants – almost twice the number of citizens today. Such plans naturally call for attention towards qualified prospects, land allotments, surveying, foun-dation and general land development including road, sewer and energy grids. And certainly also planning, construction and investments. Nuuk’s hydropower plant at Buksefjorden, currently able to produce 45 MW, might not house a fourth turbine. Surging more power for Nuuk may be possible by adding a second hydropower plant on the same stream, effectively de-riving power from the same water stream twice. Pow-er transmission lines installed from the current plant to Nuuk can handle up to 100 MW.

Nuuk harbour and a potential new international air-port is unsurprisingly at the heart of the connectivity of Nuuk’s future, as well as innovation, sustainable energy and buildings that are aesthetically pleasing in harmony with the surrounding nature. In housing

alone, the strategy sets out a goal for constructing 7,000 new homes by 2030. Plans are looking to-wards connecting a string of islands south of Nuuk to the town and thus expanding the layout of buildable areas considerably.

The strategy sets goals for business development within key sectors such as fishery, raw materials, tourism and general commercial growth. Business areas have been identified, creating a commercial band with attractive sites for companies.

International funding possibilities to animate and underpin the strategy are currently being explored. Advisory partners are working together with the mu-nicipality of Sermersooq to bring the vision to life in a sustainable fashion where public partners see that functional requirements are met and investments op-portunities are presented in attractive partnerships.

As the title hints, the strategy aims at Nuuk being not only a centre of Greenland, but also on the world agenda as a leading town in the Arctic providing a range of opportunities for business growth and a thriving population.

As of November 2016, the municipality of Sermer-sooq has budgeted 240 million DKK towards con-struction and building expenditure in 2017. A larger part of which is directed towards the capital.

Development strategy for Nuuk – Arctic Capital

Arctic capital7,000 new homes


pany is installing charging stations for electric cars as part of a focus on sustainable fuelled transportation. Efforts are also ongoing in East and South Greenland in order to surge levels of hydro plant turbine capaci-ty, by increasing water flow and resources access.

Shared energyActive research is going into identifying further wa-ter resources for hydropower, in particular how they may correlate with attractive areas for mineral oper-ations. Such surveys must be based on several years, even centuries’ of data, and as such the current most forward mineral project plans in Greenland are still based on fossil fuel generators. Asiaq – Greenland Survey an independent, but nationally owned com-pany is currently working toward mapping resources and accumulating further data.

Towards 90 per cent Renewable energy in 2030Options to introduce wind energy in combination with battery bank modules into Greenland’s energy source mix are currently being investigated. Alaska and The Faroe Islands are providing basis for best-practice and lessons learned. In any way that Greenland and its industries are to interchange towards future growth, utility systems and energy distributing will need to fol-low a parallel road of expansion and services. Looking ahead towards 2030 – the political ambition is that 90 per cent of the country’s energy needs will be covered by renewable energy by 2030.

Energy and utility needs of the future is another im-portant matter in the onward development of Green-land. This relates to urban expansion and town growth models, to the vital fishing industry, to the mineral sector and to business development in general.

HydropowerGreenland is ahead of the curb when it comes to clean energy. Currently around 62 per cent of the country’s electricity needs is covered by hydropower. This is a result of proactive and forward-thinking investments, starting already in the 1990s. several of the larger towns are serviced, through the country’s five hydro plants however settlements and smaller towns are still relying on oil based generators. Solutions for dis-placement of oil and fuel are actively being pursued, with investigations into smaller mixed source energy solutions. A combination of sun and wind power is be-ing piloted along with options for geothermal energy.

Nukissiorfiit The public utility company Nukissiorfiit is responsible for producing and delivering electricity, heating and water throughout the entire Greenlandic districts. The company is publicly funded by a yearly grant, but as part of an instated agreement, this grant is reduced on a year-to-year basis, pushing Nukissiorfiit to seek cost efficiency in its operations. With a responsibility that relates to not only producing, but also delivering utilities, Nukissiorfiit is behind a steady stream of pro-ject tenders and look into advancing the use of green energy even further. In Nuuk, for instance, the com-

HYDROPOWER AND CLEAN ENERGY


1

2

3

5

4

1 BuksefjordenSupplies: Nuuk, West GreenlandConstructed: 1990 – 1993 and 2008 (third turbine installed)Construction budget: 1,071 million DKKMain contractor: Nuuk-Power consort Effect: Three turbines producing 45 MW

2 Sisimiut Supplies: Sisimiut, West Greenland Constructed: 2007 – 2010Construction budget: 500 million DKKMain contractor: Ístak (Phil & Son)Effect: Two turbines producing 15 MW

3 Qorlortorsuaq Supplies: Narsaq and Qaqortoq, South GreenlandConstructed: 2004 – 2007Construction budget: 500 million DKKMain contractor: The EnergyConsort Effect: Two turbines producing 15 MW

Hydro plants in Greenland

4 Tasiilaq Supplies: Tasiilaq, East GreenlandConstructed: 2002 – 2005Construction budget: 59 million DKKMain contractor: Phil & Son GreenlandEffect: One turbine producing 1.2 MW

5 Ilulissat Supplies: Ilullissat, West GreenlandConstructed: 2010 – 2013Construction cost: 568 million DKKMain contractor: Phil & Son GreenlandEffect: Three turbines producing 22.5 MW


Municipalities ° Qaasuitsup Kommunia (North) ° Qeqqata Kommunia (Northwest) ° Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq (West & East) ° Kommune Kujalleq (South) ° Kanukoka – Association of Greenland’s munici-

palities

Naalakkersuisut – The Government of Greenland

Naatsorsueqqissaartarfik – Statistics Greenland

Nukissiorfiit – Greenland’s National Utility Company

Pinngortitaleriffik – Greenland Institute of Natural Resources

Polaroil – Energy and oil supply company

Royal Arctic Line – National shipping and harbour company

Sermersooq Business Council – Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq based business council

SIK – Greenland Trade Union (largest employee trade union)

Sikuki – Nuuk Harbour

Sulisitsisut – Greenland Business Association (GE) (largest employer association)

TELE-POST – National Communications Provider and Postal Services

Visit Greenland – National Tourism Council

Arctic Umiaq Line – National passenger shipping company

Air Greenland – Greenland’s National Airline

Asiaq – Greenland Survey

Educational Institutions ° Arctic Technology Centre (ARTEK) ° Greenland School of Minerals & Petroleum ° Imarsiornermik Ilinniarfik – Greenland’s Maritime

Centre ° Ilisimatusarfik – University of Greenland

Diskoline – Passenger shipping company

Flugfélag Ísland - Air Iceland GEUS – Geological Survey of Denmark and Green-land

Greenland Business / Greenland Venture – Busi-ness counselling and venture capital

Kalaallit Airports – National Airport development company (Nuuk, Ilullissat & Qaqortoq)

Kalaallit Nunaanni Eqqartuussiviit – Greenland’s Courts

KNAPK – Association of Fishers and Hunters in Greenland

Mittarfeqarfiit – Greenland Airports

KEY ORGANISATIONS


OUTLOOK

A British polar explorer once said: The plans were great, the expectations were even greater, but greatest of all was the disappointment. Ten years ago, the expectations were great in Greenland. We could not open any Danish or Greenlandic newspaper without reading about the huge mining, oil and gas potential. Investors were just waiting to close deals. The Chinese were coming in big numbers, any day now they said. Today we know better. The articles on Greenland’s mining adventure are fewer and have perhaps also found a more realistic tone. In a way a very understandable development. It has been a steep learning curve for many of us. Understanding the mining industry and the econom-ic and political DNA of the industry takes time.

It has also taken time to develop an adequate and sound policy framework in Greenland finding the right balance between the interest of the investors, the need to protect the fragile environment and the interest of the people in Greenland.

Even though there are fewer articles in the papers on Greenland these days, there is a certain buzz again. New licenses are issued and more companies are moving into the exploitation phase. On a political level, we see new movements in working towards a new joint Danish-Greenlandic investment fund and a new coalition government taking the exploration industry seriously.

At ACRM, we stand ready to grasp this new brighter window of business opportunities. But the government in Greenland also needs to be ready. We cannot afford any bot-tle necks in the administration process or any political hick-ups. The policy framework needs to be carved in stone so we in the near future know the costs and rules of operat-ing in Greenland. The industry is set to go. We have many competencies in and outside Denmark and in Greenland. So for the future in Greenland, I allow myself to have great expectations and not to be disappointed.

Niels Tanderup Kristensen Director, ACRM


SOURCES

Asiaq – Greenland Survey // www.asiaq.gl

Business Potentials – planning for the future of oil, gas and minerals // Published by Sermersooq Business Council 2013

Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland // www.geus.gl

Greenland Benchmarking Report 2016 // Published by the Arctic Cluster of Raw Materials (ACRM) in collaboration with the Confederation of Danish Industry (DI) February 2016

Greenland’s oil and mineral strategy 2014-2018 // Published by The Government of Greenland – Ministry of Industry and Mineral Resources & Ministry of Environment and Nature February 2014

Grønlands Økonomi – The Economy of Greenland // Year-ly reports published by The Economic Council 2010 – 2016

Government of Greenland // www.naalakkersuisut.gl & www.govmin.gl & www.inatsisartut.gl

Greenland Statistics // www.stat.gl

How to set up a business in Greenland – Information guide // Published by Deloitte October 2015 (6th edition)

InfoMine // www.infomine.com

London Metal Exchange // www.lme.com

Mineral resource companies: ǐ Arctic Resources // www.arctic-resources.com

ǐ General Nice Development // www.generalnice.com.hk

ǐ Greenland Minerals and Energy // www.gme.gl

ǐ Hudson Resources // www.hudsonresources.ca

ǐ KGHM // www.kghm.com

ǐ North American Nickel // www.northamericannickel.com

ǐ Tanbreez Mining Greenland // www.tanbreez.com

ǐ Ironbark Zinc // www.ironbark.gl

ǐ True North Gems // www.truenorthgems.com

ǐ LNS // www.lns.no

Mineral Resources in the Arctic // Published by NGU – Geological Survey of Norway 2016 (1st edition)

Municipalities: ǐ Qaasuitsup Kommunia // www.qaasuitsup.gl

ǐ Qeqqata Kommunia // www.qeqqata.gl

ǐ Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq // www.sermersooq.gl

ǐ Kommune Kujalleq // www.kujalleq.gl

Nukissiorfiit // www.nukissiorfiit.gl

NunaGIS digital atlas of Greenland // www.nunagis.gl

Nuuk – Arctic Capital, Capital strategy for Nuuk // Published by Kommuneqarfik Sermersooq June 2016

Sikuki – Nuuk Harbour // www.sikuki.com

The Transport Commission of Greenland – report // Published by The Government of Greenland – Ministry of Housing, Infrastructure and Traffic January 2011 (1st edition)

Turismeudvikling i Grønland – hvad skal der til? – National Sector Plan for tourism 2016-2020 // Published by the Government of Greenland – Ministry of Industry, Labour and Trade May 2016

Visit Greenland // www.greenland.com


ACRM MEMBER COMPANIES


GREENLAND BENCHMARKING REPORT 2016 75

GREENLAND BENCHMARKING REPORT 2016 75

Visit us at

ACRM.DK

@ACRM_DK

@ACRM_DK

GREENLANDCONFERENCE 201723 NOV

business opportunities in greenland - acrmacrm.dk/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/business...business...

Documents