sampling the supergiant olympic dam iron- oxide cu-u … · sampling the supergiant olympic dam...

Sampling the supergiant Olympic Dam iron-oxide Cu-U-Au-Ag deposit, South Australia Kathy Ehrig (BHP Billiton Olympic Dam) and Francis Pitard (Francis Pitard Sampling Consultants LLC.)

11 May 2017

Disclaimer Forward-looking statements

• This presentation contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding: trends in commodity prices and currency exchange rates; demand for commodities; plans, strategies and objectives of

management; closure or divestment of certain operations or facilities (including associated costs); anticipated production or construction commencement dates; capital costs and scheduling; operating costs and

shortages of materials and skilled employees; anticipated productive lives of projects, mines and facilities; provisions and contingent liabilities; tax and regulatory developments.

• Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of terminology such as ‘intend’, ‘aim’, ‘project’, ‘anticipate’, ‘estimate’, ‘plan’, ‘believe’, ‘expect’, ‘may’, ‘should’, ‘will’, ‘continue’, ‘annualised’ or similar words. These

statements discuss future expectations concerning the results of operations or financial condition, or provide other forward-looking statements.

• These forward-looking statements are not guarantees or predictions of future performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, and which may

cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the statements contained in this presentation. Readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on forward-looking statements.

• For example, future revenues from our operations, projects or mines described in this presentation will be based, in part, upon the market price of the minerals, metals or petroleum produced, which may vary significantly

from current levels. These variations, if materially adverse, may affect the timing or the feasibility of the development of a particular project, the expansion of certain facilities or mines, or the continuation of existing

operations.

• Other factors that may affect the actual construction or production commencement dates, costs or production output and anticipated lives of operations, mines or facilities include our ability to profitably produce and

transport the minerals, petroleum and/or metals extracted to applicable markets; the impact of foreign currency exchange rates on the market prices of the minerals, petroleum or metals we produce; activities of

government authorities in some of the countries where we are exploring or developing these projects, facilities or mines, including increases in taxes, changes in environmental and other regulations and political

uncertainty; labour unrest; and other factors identified in the risk factors discussed in BHP Billiton’s filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) (including in Annual Reports on Form 20-F) which

are available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

• Except as required by applicable regulations or by law, the Group does not undertake any obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information or future events.

• Past performance cannot be relied on as a guide to future performance.

Non-IFRS financial information

BHP Billiton results are reported under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) including Underlying EBIT and Underlying EBITDA which are used to measure segment performance. This release may also

include certain non-IFRS measures including Adjusted effective tax rate, Attributable profit excluding exceptional items, Free cash flow, Gearing Ratio, Net debt, Net operating assets, Underlying attributable profit,

Underlying basic earnings per share, Underlying EBIT margin, Underlying EBITDA margin, Underlying EBITDA interest coverage and Underlying return on capital. These measures are used internally by management to

assess the performance of our business, make decisions on the allocation of our resources and assess operational management. Non-IFRS measures have not been subject to audit or review and should not be considered

as an indication of or alternative to an IFRS measure of profitability, financial performance or liquidity.

Presentation of data

• Unless specified otherwise, all data is presented on a continuing operations basis to exclude the contribution from assets that were demerged with South32 and references to Underlying EBITDA margin and Underlying

EBIT margin exclude third party trading activities.

No offer of securities

• Nothing in this presentation should be construed as either an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy or sell BHP Billiton securities in any jurisdiction, or be treated or relied upon as a recommendation or advice by

BHP Billiton.

Reliance on third party information

• The views expressed in this presentation contain information that has been derived from publicly available sources that have not been independently verified. No representation or warranty is made as to the accuracy,

completeness or reliability of the information. This presentation should not be relied upon as a recommendation or forecast by BHP Billiton.

2

Statement of Mineral Resources

Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves

The information in this presentation that relates to the FY2016 Mineral Resources (inclusive of Ore Reserves) was first reported by the Company in compliance with the ‘Australasian Code for Reporting

of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012’ (‘The JORC Code 2012 Edition’) in the 2016 BHP Billiton Annual Report of September 2016. All reports can be viewed at

www.bhpbilliton.com. The company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and, in the case of

estimates of Mineral Resources, that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially

changed. The company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcement.

Competent Person for Olympic Dam Mineral Resource is S O’Connell (MAusIMM) who is a full time employee of BHP Billiton. Competent Persons for Escondida, Pampa Escondida, Pinta Verde and

Chimborazo Mineral Resources are L Soto (MAusIMM), M Cortes (MAusIMM) who are employed by Minera Escondida Limitada.

Mineral Resource classification (100% basis) for each province, where relevant, are listed in Table 1.

Table 1

3

Province Measured Resource

(Mt)

Indicated Resource

(Mt)

Inferred Resource

(Mt)

Total Resource

(Mt)

BHP Billiton

Interest (%)

Olympic Dam

1,390 @

0.95% Cu,

0.29kg/t U3O8,

0.40g/t Au,

2 g/t Ag

4,800 @

0.78% Cu,

0.24kg/t U3O8,

0.34g/t Au,

1 g/t Ag

4,220 @

0.70% Cu,

0.24kg/t U3O8,

0.27g/t Au,

1 g/t Ag

10,400 @

0.77% Cu,

0.25kg/t U3O8,

0.32g/t Au,

1 g/t Ag

100

Escondida district

Escondida 5,470 @ 0.64% Cu 3,280 @ 0.50% Cu 11,200 @ 0.50% Cu 57.5

Pampa Escondida 294 @ 0.53% Cu 1,150 @ 0.55% Cu 6,000 @ 0.43% Cu 57.5

Pinta Verde 109 @ 0.6% Cu 87 @ 0.52% Cu 52 @ 0.48% Cu 57.5

Chimborazo 139 @ 0.50% Cu 84 @ 0.60% Cu 57.5

Today’s Presentation

•Olympic Dam Operational Overview

•Background

•Minerals

•Ore Characterisation (a.k.a. Geomet)

•Predicting Process Performance

•Conclusions

4

Sampling the supergiant Olympic Dam iron-oxide Cu-U-Au-Ag deposit, South Australia

11 May 2017

Cu Au U

bn-cp 1.5 3.5 2.5

cp-py 2.0 3.6 8.8

Sampling constant, K

Sampling – It has been a long journey

5


11 May 2017

TOS

TOS

DARK-SIDE X

Olympic Dam Operations

History

• Discovered by WMC in July 1975

• First underground access in 1982

• Production commenced in 1988

• BHP Billiton acquired WMC in July 2005

Current operation

• Mechanised sublevel open stope mining

• Grinding and sulphide concentrator

• Hydrometallurgical circuit- U extraction

• Single stage flash smelter

• Acid plant production

• ER-EW Cu refineries

• Precious metals refinery (Au, Ag)

Mechanised sublevel longhole open stope mining

Grinding and concentrator Hydrometallurgical treatment

Smelting and acid production Cu refining and PM production

Fully integrated circuit

6


11 May 2017

Olympic Dam Final Products FY16*

Ag 917,000 ounces

Cu 202,800 tonnes

Au 117,700 ounces

UOC 4,363 tonnes

* BHP Billiton Production Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2016 http://www.bhpbilliton.com/home/investors/reports/Documents/2016/BHPBillitonAnnualReport2016.pdf

7

Cu and U are co-products

Cu ~70-75% of revenue1

UOC ~20-25% of revenue1

1based on historical averages

Au and Ag are by-products

~5% of revenue1

Copper cathode, UOC, and gold and silver bullion are produced at Olympic Dam


11 May 2017

Olympic Dam – a world class deposit (IOCG-U)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Esco

nd

ida

# A

nd

ina

# E

l T

enie

nte

# C

hu

qu

icam

ata

OL

YM

PIC

DA

M

Colla

hua

si

Gra

sbe

rg

Oyu

To

lgo

i

Can

an

ea

Pe

bb

le

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

OL

YM

PIC

DA

M

Alu

m S

ha

le (

Sw

ed

en)

Elk

on

Imo

ura

ren

Kvan

efje

ld (

RE

E)

Husa

b

McA

rth

ur

Riv

er

Inka

i

Letlh

aka

ne

Cig

ar

Lake

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Witw

ate

rsra

nd C

am

p

Gra

sbe

rg (

Cop

per)

OL

YM

PIC

DA

M

Pe

bb

le (

Cop

per)

Ke

rr-S

ulp

hu

rets

Mu

run

tau

Su

kh

oi L

og

Nata

lka

Lih

ir

New

mon

t -

Nevad

a

Million tonnes Copper Thousand tonnes U3O8 Million oz Gold

Current Production

• Olympic Dam

• McArthur River

• Inkai

• Cigar Lake

Chart depicts contained metal. Sources: Company Annual Reports, press releases and International Atomic Energy Agency (BHPB f igures as at 30 June 2015, all other figures as at Sep 2014). Witwatersrand figure is BHP Billiton estimate and is approximate only. # Based on Codelco reported figures at 0.2% Cu cut-off grade. BHP Billiton Mineral Resources for Olympic Dam and Escondida district (includes Pampa, Pinta Verde and Chimborazo) are on a 100% basis. The FY2015 Mineral Resource information for Olympic Dam and Escondida district on this slide is extracted from the report entitled BHP Billiton Annual Report 2015. The report can be viewed at www.bhpbilliton.com. The company confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the original market announcement and, in the case of estimates of Mineral Resources, that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the relevant market announcement continue to apply and have not materially changed. The company confirms that the form and context in which the Competent Person’s findings are presented have not been materially modified from the original market announcement. A complete breakdown by Resource classification is provided on slide 3, table 1.

8

~760


11 May 2017

Gigantic Base Metal-Bearing Deposits

9

Largest accumulations of base metals on the planet,

+100 year mine life, polymetallic

1. Norilsk Ni-Pd-Pt-Cu

2. Olympic Dam Cu-U-Au-Ag

How do we produce mining plans for the future of these deposits?


11 May 2017

Background

10

• Ore deposits are mining companies largest assets

• Realise the value, how?

– SAMPLE it

– measure the chemical-mineralogical-physical properties of ore AND waste

– produce 3-D spatial models of the measured properties

– mine plans/schedules, design process to extract the value, build and operate

the facilities, generate wealth.

• Basic stuff…right?

• Yet, as an industry, we fail on a regular basis because we didn’t properly do this

(McCarthy, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2011, 2014….)!


11 May 2017

Mining Industry Opportunity: Think Minerals, Not Elements

11

Minerals, minerals, minerals, minerals

• Elements occur as minerals.

• Ore deposits are variable mixtures of minerals.

• Extractive metallurgy extracts elements from minerals.

• Minerals are the fundamental drivers of metallurgical performance.

Elements are proxies for minerals

• Historically, assaying at the deposit scale was the only option.

• Mineral abundances can now be estimated/measured.

• No longer necessary to rely on assaying alone to characterise an

ore deposit.

upper image source:

www.spiriferminerals.com lower image source:

www.museumvictoria.com.au


11 May 2017

Two Simple Relationships

At Olympic Dam, we predict short-, medium-, long-term metallurgical performance:

12

mineral (wt%) = ƒ(sample composition)

‘Met Performance’ = ƒ(mineralogy, ore texture, process conditions)


11 May 2017

Olympic Dam Footprint and Geology - Summary

13

Simplified deposit geology at ~450m beneath the surface


11 May 2017

680000E 682000E

6630000N

6632000N

Roxby

Downs

Granite

Olympic Dam Breccia Complex

biotite ‘out’

altered, weakly brecciated

RDG

Fe ~5%

N

0 1 2 km

resource outline

Fe 20%

2014 image RESOURCE OULINE

RD1, RD10

Olympic Dam

ODBC ~50 km2 and resource ~ 6 x 3 km x 800 m

Sampling of the Deposit

14


11 May 2017

his

torical pro

duction a

reas

new

pro

duction a

reas

Surface Diamond

Drill Holes

UG Diamond

Drill Holes

+450 km of

UG development

~ 6

km

Volume sampled ~0.0001 %

Granite- to Hematite-Rich Breccias (dominant lithotypes)

15

~3% Fe

~60% Fe • Intense brecciation and texturally destructive hematite-alteration of RDG and other lithologies

• Complex textures, yet simple mineralogy


11 May 2017

Element - Physical Property Correlations

16


11 May 2017

Fe wt%

Co

ncen

trati

on

(w

t%)

Al, Be, Ca, Hf, K, Li, Mg, Mn, Na, Rb, Si, Th, Ti, and Zr

Ag, As, Au, Ba, Bi, Cd, Co, CO2, Cr, Cu, F, Fe, In, Mo,

Nb, Ni, P, Pb, S, Sb, Se, Sn, Sr, Te, U, V, W, Y, Zn, REE) mineral (wt%) = ƒ(sample composition)

Measured Modal Mineralogy (via MLA on >15,000 samples)

17


11 May 2017

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

RDG RDG-ser 2-4 4-6 6-8 8-10 10-15 15-20 20-25 25-30 30-35 35-40 40-45 45-50 50-55 55-60 >60

Mo

dal

Min

era

log

y

(wt

%)

Fe (wt%)

mafic+mag

Na-plag

orthoclase

quartz

sericite

chlorite

sulfides

fluorite

barite

siderite

hematitemineral (wt%) = ƒ(sample composition)

Olympic Dam Simplified Ore Processing Flow Diagram

Underground Mining ROM Stockpile Grinding Sulphide Flotation

Cu-Conc

Leach

Tailings Leach

Smelting Cu-anode

Electrolytic

Refining

Electrowinning

Slimes

Treatment

Cu-U SX

Counter Current

Decanation

EW

Cathode UOC

ER

Cathode

Au

Ag

bullion

U precip as ADU / calcination to UOC

Flo

tati

on

Tail

ing

s

18

Cu and U Cu and U

Cu (U)

U (Cu) U (Cu) U (Cu)

U

Cu

U (Cu)

Cu Cu (U) Cu

Cu and U

Dust leach


11 May 2017

Olympic Dam Mineralogy

Sub-Econ Minerals

(may be deleterious) Gangue Minerals Economic Minerals

Olympic Dam ‘Ores’

>100 minerals

(but 15 process critical minerals)

• Cu-Sulphides (py-cp-bn-cc)

– concentrate grade

• uranium minerals (uran-coff-bran-hem)

– uranium recovery

• Au-Ag (electrum, native Ag, tellurides)

• concentrate and cathode quality

– As-, Se-, Bi-, Te-, Sb-minerals

– Pb-, Co-, Zn-, Mo-, REY-minerals

• Hematite grinding

• Quartz grinding

• Sericite slimes

• K-feldspar

• Chlorite acid, gelling

• Siderite acid

• Fluorite

• Barite

• Wide spectrum of mineral mixtures = many ‘ore types’

• Definitions of ore types are dependent on the subprocess

19


11 May 2017

‘Met Performance’ = ƒ(mineralogy, ore texture, process conditions)

Geological and Mineralogical Documentation

Documentation consists of:

• Geological mapping of +450 km of underground development

• Geological logging of ~2.6 M metres of diamond drill core

• All diamond core is photographed

• All diamond core (ore and waste) is assayed for +26 elements

• Density and magnetic susceptibility on all assayed samples

• Abundances of 15 minerals predicted on every sample

• Quantitative mineralogy (MLA and QXRD) on >15,000 samples

• + 62 elements measured on all mineralogy and met test samples

• Extensive mineral composition database (LA-ICPMS and EPMA)

• Ongoing geological internal and external research projects

20

Olympic Dam Resource Model

• ~ 20 million blocks in the resource model

• 5x10x5m up to 30x30x15m block size

• ~11,000 diamond drill holes

• ~1.7 million assayed samples

• Spatial distribution and concentrations models for 15 minerals and density

• models for Cu, U, Au, Ag, Cu:S, plus 18 other elements

We do even more!

Geometallurgy-Enabled Resource Block Model

21

Geometallurgical testing (1,000x less samples)

• ~2,500 samples with full metallurgical testing

• Comminution, rougher-cleaner flotation, and leaching tests

• Ore characterisation tests

• Mineralogy/assaying on sized samples of all met testing products

• Mineral (wt%) = ƒ(sample composition)

• ‘Met Performance’ = ƒ(mineralogy, ore texture, process conditions).

Ore characterisation (~100x less samples)

• ~15,000 samples with assays for +62 elements

• Mineralogy (MLA and XRD)

• Mineral (wt%) = ƒ(sample composition)

Resource drill core assaying

• ~1.7 million assayed samples

• Density and geological/geotechnical logging

• 15 estimated minerals for every assayed sample

• Most extensive database available!

Met

Testing

Ore

Characterisation

Resource Drill Hole Samples

(assayed + estimated mineralogy)

Resource Block Model

(~ 10Bt resource)

~2,500

~15,000

~150,000

~1.7M

samples

~20M

blocks


11 May 2017

Quantitative Bornite-Chalcopyrite-Pyrite (-400mRL)

bornite chalcopyrite pyrite

wt% sulfide

Cu (wt%)


11 May 2017 22

Quantitative Hematite-Orthoclase-Sericite (-400mRL)

hematite orthoclase sericite


11 May 2017 23

Quantitative Siderite-Fluorite-Barite (-400mRL)

siderite fluorite barite


11 May 2017 24

Quantitative Mo-Pb-Zn (-400mRL)

Mo

proxy for molybdenite

Pb

proxy for galena

Zn

proxy for sphalerite

25

Geometallurgy – Predicting Process Performance

26

• 26 elements

• physical prop

• geology, etc

Drill Core

-

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

80.0%

82.0%

84.0%

86.0%

88.0%

90.0%

92.0%

94.0%

96.0%

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

Flo

tati

on

Co

pp

er

He

ad

Gra

de

(%

)

Flo

tati

on

Co

pp

er

Re

co

ve

ry (

%)

Financial Year

Flotation Copper Recovery

Copper Recovery

Copper Grade

Optimal Mine Plans/Schedules

for any mine plan or plant configuration

$$$

$$$ $$$

Supported by:

• assays & mineralogy

• metallurgical testing

• TOS principles

• QAQC programs

Geomet Predictive Models mineral (wt%) = (assays)

‘recovery’ = (assays, minerals)

Maps

• + 26 elements

• density and magnetic susc

• + 50 metallurgical parameters

* Economic return on each block *


11 May 2017

Conclusions

27

• Sampling underpins all of our resource estimation and performance predictors.

• We use TOS principles when collecting and subsampling all geology and

geometallurgy samples.

• We have well established QAQC programs for diamond drill core assaying and

geometallurgical testing.

• We seek expertise on a regular basis.


11 May 2017

Don’t become disfunctional when things go wrong – FIX IT!

28

Hear no evil See no evil,

even though he is still looking

Speak no evil

Pitard Sampling Clan


11 May 2017