Content uploaded by Michael Harrison Smith
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Michael Harrison Smith on Jul 06, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
Doubling Australia’s energy
productivity by 2030
Re-energising the mining sector to
improve its competitiveness
10 June 2015
Consultation Draft (Version 1.3)
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
Thanks
The Board and staff of the Australian Alliance to Save Energy (A2SE) gratefully acknowledge our
colleagues Jonathan Jutsen, Anita Stadler, Fiesal Musa (Energetics) and Michael Smith (Energy
Change Institute at the Australian National University) as the primary researchers and authors of this
text.
We also acknowledge the considerable intellectual and practical contributions of Sarah Boucaut of the
Coalition for Eco Efficient Comminution (CEEC) and Mary Stewart of Energetics and CEEC.
This work has been supported by financial contributions to various components of the Australian
Energy Productivity Roadmap project made by the Commonwealth Department of Industry, the New
South Wales Office of Environment and Heritage and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
This work would not have been possible without the exceptionally generous support of the Institute for
Sustainable Futures (ISF) at the University of Technology, Sydney and Energetics. ISF hosts A2SE
and the Roadmap project. Energetics provides significant in-kind support, notably through
contributions to the project by Jonathan Jutsen, Anita Stadler and Fiesal Musa.
We acknowledge our project collaborators: ClimateWorks Australia at Monash University, the Low
Carbon Living CRC at the University of New South Wales, the Energy Change Institute at the
Australian National University, the Newcastle Institute for Energy & Resources at the University of
Newcastle and the Energy Flagship program at CSIRO.
Citation: Stadler, A, Jutsen, J., Musa, F. & Smith, M. (2015). Doubling Australia’s energy productivity
by 2030: Re-energising the mining sector to improve its competitiveness, Draft Version 1.3. Sydney:
Australian Alliance to Save Energy.
The views expressed in this text are those of A2SE and not necessarily those of our supporters and
partners. We have taken all care to ensure that data is correct. All responsibility for the text rests with
us.
© Australian Alliance to Save Energy 2014
c/- Institute for Sustainable Futures
University of Technology, Sydney
Level 11, Building 10
235 Jones Street, Ultimo, NSW 2007
email: info@a2se.org.au phone: 02 9514 4948
web: www.a2se.org.au abn: 39 137 603 993
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
i
Executive summary
Australia’s capacity to capture the next wave of mining investment and to secure future
export revenues in an environment of strong supply competition depends critically on
regaining national competitiveness.
(Minerals Council of Australia, 2014a)
The Australian Energy Productivity (2xEP) Roadmap initiative commenced in July 2014. The
Australian Alliance to Save Energy (A2SE) is working on the program with the support of
governments, businesses, industry associations and thought leaders from a range of institutions.
Energy productivity is a declared policy priority for federal and state governments. Improving energy
productivity is about increasing the economic value added per unit of energy used and dollar of energy
spent. In a period of rapidly increasing energy prices in Australia, a holistic approach to energy
productivity can make a major contribution to Australia’s overall productivity and competitiveness.
This report provides an overview of issues that need to be addressed to substantially enhance energy
productivity in the mining sector. It also provides a starting point for discussion with stakeholders in the
mining sector and the development of the Mining Sector 2xEP Roadmap, to address the opportunities,
barriers, policy recommendations and implementation for 2xEP in the mining sector.
Why focus on energy
productivity in
mining?
Economic productivity in many sectors of the Australian economy, including
mining, has been flat or declining in recent years. The long-term decline in
base and precious metal ore grade is one of the key drivers of this trend in
mining. This also has a direct impact on the energy intensity of production
and is therefore the energy productivity of the mining sector.
Australia is also amongst the bottom half of all G20 countries with regard to
both economic value per unit of energy input and rate of growth in energy
productivity (World Bank, n.d.). If the decline in economic and energy
productivity is not addressed, Australia’s long-term competitiveness is at risk.
Mineral resources are critical to future global development as well as the
performance of the Australia’s economy and the living standards of our
people. The sector has such a dominant influence on the Australian economy
and energy demand that addressing economic (including energy)
productivity, without considering developments in the mining sector, would be
ineffectual.
As illustrated below, the mining sector now accounts for about 11% of GDP.
During the recent extended commodity price boom the sector contributed
significantly to increased disposable income and employment (BREE, 2014b,
Downes, Hanslow, & Tulip, 2014). In fact 50% of national income growth over
the period 2002 to 2012 are attributable to factors associated with the
commodity price boom (Gruen, 2012).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
ii
The commodity price boom supported an increase in the average profit margin
of miners from 10% in 2001/02 to 43% in 20011/12. Mining companies
increased their capital investment over this period, from 14% of operating cost
to an aggregate sector Capex:Opex ratio of 40%. Since then the decline in the
commodity prices resulted in a sharp drop in both the aggregate profit margin
and Capex:Opex ratio of the sector (ABS, 2014a, 2014d, 2014g; RBA, 2014a).
The prevailing market conditions amplify the intrinsic challenge faced by the
resources industry, i.e. making long-term capital commitments when medium
term revenue projections are volatile at best. Currently, long range price
projections suggest that prices will remain subdued for some time as
illustrated1 with reference to thermal coal below. Unless Australian sites in the
third and fourth quartile move down the production cost curve, the negative
impact on the Australian economy, rural communities and investors could be
significant (RBA, 2014b; Kannan, 2015).
A lower Australian dollar will not be a major factor as US dollar strength also
1
Cost curves, reproduced from the RBA, August 2014 Statement on Monetary Policy (RBA, 2014b)
7.8% 11%
0
50
100
150
200
Index, 2012/13 = 100
Base metals prices – A$ Bulk commodities prices – A$
Terms of trade
… and
real disposable
income by 13% /
real wages by 6%
unemployment rate
by ≈1.25%
2004 to 2013:
Mining’s share of
GDP increases*
2000-2012:
50% of national income
growth due to boom-
time factors
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
iii
impacts the currencies of other major producers. Given that diesel is a major
cost to many mines, the drop in oil prices could improve the performance of
sites, but on a per tonne basis the impact on coal (for example) is only
expected to translate to a $US1.80 per tonne drop in costs (Macdonald-Smith,
2015). In some regards, the drop in oil prices could make Australian producers
less competitive on a CFR-basis (i.e. cost inclusive of freight), pushing them
higher up the cost curve. As highlighted in a 2015 Bloomberg report, the drop
in bunker fuel prices wiped out the price advantage of leading Australian iron
ore producers over Brazil’s Vale SA, which could land a tonne of iron ore
cheaper than its Australian rivals in China (Riseborough & Spinetto, 2015).
Energy cost can therefore be a determinant of the relative competiveness of
Australia’s resource sector on the global stage, especially at a time when
global demand is weakening.
Energy cost represents between 10–20% of operating cost on most mine
sites (Energetics, 2014). At a company level, institutional investors are
increasingly taking note of how miners manage their energy (Smith, 2013).
However, energy is a manageable cost, with demonstrable savings of 5–30%
in energy use across core processes such as comminution and haulage. The
mining services, equipment and technologies sub-sector (METS), identified
by the Commonwealth as one of the five Australian Industry Growth Centres
can be a key competitive differentiator for Australia in the global mining
services market (Australian Government, 2014).
Investment in energy efficient equipment and processes could have capital
and labour productivity benefits. Improved energy productivity also provides a
hedge against future price rises, with 100% of diesel, the main energy source
in mining, expected to be imported in the near future (Blackburn, 2014).
Mining remains a major employer and large energy user, and the response of
the sector to improving productivity, including energy productivity, will shape
its future competitiveness and, to a large extent, that of Australia.
The 2xEP initiative In response to these factors, the A2SE 2xEP initiative proposes doubling
energy productivity across the Australian economy by 2030 from $222 real
GDP (2010$) per unit of energy input (primary energy measured in GJ) in 2010
to $444 in 2030. This target is in line with other major economies, and needs to
be achieved to avoid entrenching the competitive disadvantage that has
emerged in recent years.
At a mining sector level an appropriate 2030 energy productivity target, relative
to the current trajectory, needs to be set by the industry. Many mining
companies are familiar with targets of this nature, having already set and
achieved targets to improve the productive use of energy. For example,
BHPBilliton achieved a 15% improvement in energy intensity over the period
2006–2012, exceeding its target of 12% (BHPBiliton, 2014).
For companies, an energy productivity target is in many regards ‘easier’ to
achieve than an energy efficient equivalent, since some of the improvement is
driven by increased value of production output. This is evident from the
performance of the mining industry over the recent past as illustrated below
(Stadler,2015). In this way the energy productivity metric ‘recognises’ the
shareholder value imperative of growing outputs faster than inputs. Since the
energy productivity metrics are sensitive to both commodity and energy prices,
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
iv
it can be a volatile measure. Therefore, the metric is best presented as a
moving average over at least 3–years as presented in the table below for the
mining industry (i.e. resources sector, excluding oil and gas production). The
relative performance on the secondary metric, compared to other key
commodity export nations has not been assessed yet. Such a comparison
would reveal the trend in relative energy price competitiveness of Australian
miners.
Energy productivity trends 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Average
annual change
Primary metric: Real
Revenue ($2010) /
Primary energy (GJ)
255 286 292 299 4.06%
Secondary metric:
Nominal Revenue $ /
Nominal $ energy spend
19 20 20 1.72%
In order to double energy productivity from a 2010 base year, the industry
would need to broadly maintain the current pace of improvement in energy
productivity (i.e. 4% vis-à-vis a target of 3.5 % per annum. This is a significant
challenge given that the improvement over the last four years was recorded at
a time of historically high commodity prices and direct federal government
policy support for energy efficient investments. Maintaining energy productivity
at current levels may be challenging in itself, given the decline in ore grade and
the forecast weakness in global commodity prices (Minerals Council of
Australia, 2014a).
It is envisaged that an appropriate voluntary 2030 energy productivity target
will be established for the mining sector, by the sector. A2SE will consult with a
diverse range of stakeholders about what this target should be. The
determination of optimal pathways to achieve the target could be different for
sub-sectors or groups within the sector. Views of the industry will also be
sought about the best approach for tracking progress towards such a voluntary
target, as well as what collaborative action the industry could take to support a
significant improvement in energy productivity including with regard to action
by government to reduce or remove barriers to achieving such a target.
Potential strategies
for improving energy
productivity.
Since energy productivity is a ratio of economic output per unit of energy
(primary energy or cost as illustrated in the table below), the potential to
achieve a voluntary energy productivity target could be influenced by adopting
complementary strategies that:
increase economic output; and/or
reduce the relative demand for energy.
Energy ‘productivity’ is not simply energy ‘efficiency’ by a different name.
Energy efficiency, which generally focuses on using less energy to deliver the
same output, is, however, an important element of one of the four key
strategies, as illustrated below.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
v
The key strategies to enhance energy productivity are summarised below:
‘Traditional’ energy management – e.g. improving energy efficiency
through better management of energy use including the implementation
of innovative energy-use technologies, electrification, on site renewable
energy and demand-management programs, as well as best practice in
data management and benchmarking energy management to facilitate
decision making with regard to energy productivity.
Systems optimisation – e.g. focusing on energy aspects of the mining
and downstream minerals processing sector, such as the re-engineering
of materials handling and mining processes, as well as industry supply-
chain capacity-optimisation strategies. These changes may be
implemented for reasons of broader productivity improvement, but
greater value can be realised by bringing a deliberate energy
competency and focus to them.
Business model transformation – e.g. focussing on the energy aspects
of fundamental longer-term change in the business of mining – relating
to the design, development and operation of mining, as well as trading
and asset management.
Value creation or preservation – e.g. focussing on increased throughput,
beneficiation, and/or improving quality of ore shipped to smelters to
reduce downstream energy consumption and air pollution associated
with removing impurities during smelting (Pearse, 2014).
Opportunities to
improve energy
productivity in the
mining industry
Australia is a global leader in mining-technology innovation and the sector has
already made significant investments in improving the productive use of
energy, as reported under the Energy Efficiency Opportunity (EEO) program.
In spite of significant investment in energy efficiency, many unexploited energy
productivity opportunities remain across the mining value chain, in mining,
materials movement, comminution (intelligent blasting, mine-to-mill), ore
sorting, classification or pre-concentration, reprocessing and product recovery.
Industry best practice and many of the innovative new technologies that could
transform the energy productivity of the sector have not yet been broadly
adopted (Department of Industry 2012; Napier-Munn, Drinkwater, & Ballantyne,
2012).
The Coalition for Eco Efficient Comminution (CEEC) estimates that a 15%
improvement in energy productivity is possible by adopting best-practice
Energy
Productivity
Growth
Factors direc tly impacting energy
input Output dimensions ($ or other
perceived v alue)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
vi
energy management in comminution without investing in new equipment.
Furthermore, investing only in new comminution technologies could deliver a
further 10% to 30% reduction in energy used in this process, accounting for
approximately 36% of total mine site energy (Ballantyne & Powell, 2014b;
Brent et al., 2013). There are also significant enabling technologies to assist
improving the energy productivity of materials movement/handling and
minerals separation (Department of Industry, 2012). Mining companies are
also investing in new forms of on-site energy generation, including diesel/solar
hybrid systems (Vorrath, 2014). Investment by underground mines in energy
efficient ventilation systems also has occupational health and safety benefits
by reducing diesel fumes inhaled by miners.
The optimisation of production processes by adopting lean manufacturing
principles, as well as the evolution of new business models based on
autonomous mining, truckless mines and the use of ‘big data’ across the whole
value chain from exploration to processing also holds promise for supporting
significant energy productivity improvement in the sector. However, the extent
to which the Australian mining industry considers energy as part of the evolving
operating and business models is not evident.
Given the energy intensity of many mining processes and lessons from other
sectors, ensuring energy is a central tenet in the design and operation of these
new models will have a major influence on their success and the sustainability
benefits. On-site renewable energy solutions could in certain cases help
improve energy productivity by 2030. The intent is to explore the role of on-site
renewables in the 2xEP Roadmap in a separate cross sector report.
Benefits from 2xEP
for mining
As price takers, with very limited value added or product differentiation by
producers, miners have two key strategies for optimising operating income:
minimising costs and maximising throughput. Energy is already a significant
cost to many mining companies. However, the convergence of declining ore
grade, falling international commodity prices and declining profit margins
across many Australian mining sectors since 2012–13 (ABS, 2014d) makes
energy an increasingly important cost to be managed in the industry.
The benefits of a significant improvement in mining energy productivity will
depend on the voluntary target and actions agreed by the industry, but could
include:
Energy efficiency improvements and cost savings for mining companies.
These will significantly improve profitability and also reduce emissions.
Improved capacity utilisation and throughput.
Multiple dividends in terms of reduced maintenance and labour
costs/unit of output, with a likely multiplier of up to 2.5 times the benefits
directly attributed to energy savings.
Mining program
objectives
A successful outcome from an A2SE 2xEP Roadmap process will be a
realistic, but challenging, energy productivity target and plan developed by the
industry, with the support of a broad spectrum of industry representatives to
lead changes in the sector and their individual businesses to achieve the
target. It is envisaged that an A2SE 2xEP roadmap will comprise:
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
vii
Definition of pathways to significantly enhance energy productivity, with
reference to the different subsectors and scale of operations.
Identification of opportunities to collaborate to enhance Australia’s
leadership position in mining and mining services.
Mechanisms to create greater awareness and adoption of emerging
R&D innovations that can help mining sub-sectors achieve a step
change in energy efficiency.
Strategies to overcome barriers to adoption of new, more efficient
processing technologies
The initiation of new, or the strengthening of existing, programs to
support businesses to achieve 2xEP.
Recommendations adopted by federal and state governments to enact
policy changes to facilitate these activities and support 2xEP in mining.
These outcomes could be achieved through a collaborative process, involving
miners, researchers and industry associations, with government engagement
to accelerate innovation, transformation and value adding in the sector.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
viii
Table of contents
1.Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1.Limits of this report ....................................................................................................................... 1
1.2.Structure of this report .................................................................................................................. 2
2.The case for 2xEP in the Australian mining sector ................................................................. 3
2.1.Significance of the sector in the Australian economy and energy market .................................... 3
2.1.1.Impact on GDP and employment ........................................................................................ 3
2.1.2.Energy spend in the mining industry ................................................................................... 4
2.2.Australia’s international economic and energy competitiveness .................................................. 5
2.3.Linking economic productivity of the mining sector with energy use ............................................ 7
2.4.Prevailing market conditions for key commodity sectors ............................................................ 10
3.Energy productivity in the context of the mining sector ...................................................... 15
3.1.Defining energy productivity ....................................................................................................... 16
3.2.Measuring energy productivity improvements in the mining sector ........................................... 18
3.2.1.Proxy for gross output at sector level and choice of energy metric ................................... 18
3.2.2.Short term volatility in the value of output ......................................................................... 19
3.2.3.Conceptual integrated measurement framework for consideration ................................... 19
3.3.What does a doubling of Australia’s energy productivity mean for the mining sector? .............. 20
4.Potential for energy productivity improvements ................................................................... 23
4.1.Status quo? ................................................................................................................................. 24
4.2.Application of energy in the mining sector .................................................................................. 25
4.3.Strategy area 1: Traditional energy management ...................................................................... 26
4.3.1.Ore characterisation and feed preparation ........................................................................ 26
4.3.2.Comminution processes .................................................................................................... 27
4.3.3.Froth floatation/ minerals separation ................................................................................. 27
4.3.4.Hauling/materials movement ............................................................................................. 29
4.3.5.Ventilation .......................................................................................................................... 31
4.3.6.Fuel switching .................................................................................................................... 31
4.3.7.Data and management practices....................................................................................... 32
4.4.Strategy area 2: System optimisation ......................................................................................... 32
4.4.1.Mine site ............................................................................................................................ 33
4.4.2.Beyond the mine site ......................................................................................................... 35
4.5.Strategy area 3: Business model transformation ....................................................................... 36
4.5.1.Autonomous mining ........................................................................................................... 36
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
ix
4.5.2.Truckless mines ................................................................................................................. 37
4.5.3.Real-time ‘big data’ transformation .................................................................................... 38
4.6.Strategy area 4: Preserve/increased output and quality ............................................................ 39
5.Barriers to energy productivity ................................................................................................ 41
5.1.Energy is not a ‘big enough’ issue .............................................................................................. 41
5.2.Short payback threshold for investments ................................................................................... 42
5.3.Management practices and cultural barriers .............................................................................. 42
5.4.Split incentives for energy efficient site development and operations ........................................ 43
5.5.Information, knowledge and expertise ........................................................................................ 43
6.Overcoming the barriers .......................................................................................................... 45
6.1.Collaborative innovation ............................................................................................................. 45
6.2.People and organisational capabilities ....................................................................................... 46
6.3.Investment in energy programs .................................................................................................. 47
6.4.Incentives .................................................................................................................................... 47
6.5.Regulation and standards ........................................................................................................... 48
6.6.Other considerations................................................................................................................... 49
6.6.1.Address energy competitiveness issues arising from escalating energy prices ............... 49
6.6.2.Role of co-generation and renewable energy ................................................................... 49
7.Next steps .................................................................................................................................. 50
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
x
List of figures
Figure 1: Mining energy spend by fuel type ............................................................................................ 4
Figure 2: Energy productivity of selected G20 countries ......................................................................... 6
Figure 3: Mineral exploration activity in Australia .................................................................................... 8
Figure 4: Correlation between energy productivity and ore grade .......................................................... 9
Figure 5: Energy as a percentage of operating cost (based on estimates by Energetics) ................... 10
Figure 6: Profit margins declining across key mining sub-sectors ........................................................ 10
Figure 7: Thermal coal production cost curve – marginal mines at different price points (US$) .......... 11
Figure 8: Gold producers’ all-in sustaining cost is well below the current gold price (A$) .................... 11
Figure 9: Iron ore production cost curve ................................................................................................ 12
Figure 10: Key determinants of energy productivity .............................................................................. 16
Figure 11: Conceptual overview of integrated measurement framework – applied to mining .............. 20
Figure 12: High level mining sector opportunity framework .................................................................. 23
Figure 13: Energy consumption by end use area at the mine site (energy units) ................................. 25
Figure 14: PwC MEPI – Open-pit loader and truck performance index (2003 = 1) .............................. 30
Figure 15: Where in the value chain will innovation create the greatest value over the next 10 to 20
years? .................................................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 16: Headline results from the 2013 Mining Innovation State of Play survey.............................. 42
Figure 17: Decline in the mining sector MFP ........................................................................................ 63
Figure 18: Increase in real cost per metre drilled .................................................................................. 65
Figure 19: RBA weighted commodity price index for base and bulk commodities ............................... 66
Figure 20: Increase in Australian resources and export volumes ......................................................... 67
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
xi
Note:
All dollars ($) are Australian dollars unless otherwise stated
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
1
1. Introduction
Every one percent improvement in mining productivity translates to a $170 million saving
for the Australian mining industry
Andrew MacKenzie, CEO of BHP Billiton, cited in Vella 2013
This report provides a preliminary compilation of industry thought, leadership and analysis to support
engagement with the mining sector in the Alliance to Save Energy (A2SE) Doubling Energy
Productivity (2xEP) Roadmap program. It presents the rationale for action and summarises issues,
opportunities and barriers. It considers the potential for industry-led energy productivity improvement
initiatives in the mining sector.
Using this report as a starting point, it is envisaged that the project will build on existing expertise and
initiatives in the sector to develop a mining sector Roadmap, guide in-depth analysis of opportunities
and challenges and develop policy responses. A2SE will canvass voluntary energy productivity targets
that are realistic though challenging and related performance metrics. The A2SE project team will
provide coordination and support.
1.1. Limits of this report
Some energy productivity issues are common across the resources sector.2 However, this initial report
excludes the oil and gas sub-sectors, principally because:
The industry associations are generally different, with some exceptions, and may have
developed different approaches to energy policy issues.
The energy challenges and commercial rationale for action on energy productivity are quite
different. The oil and gas industry ‘self-generates’ and therefore does not pay directly for
most of the operational energy consumed. The mining industry pays directly for the energy it
consumes.
Opportunities for process-related improvements are different.
A2SE recognises the diverse nature of processes across the mining sub-sectors, and even between
mines of the same commodities. It is difficult to generalise the opportunities. In this primer developed
to support the start of a dialogue between a diverse group of stakeholders, we aimed to highlight a
cross spectrum of opportunities. It is not intended as a comprehensive coverage of opportunities
across the mining sub-sectors. Furthermore, the report does not address transport. This will be
covered in a separate report dealing with freight transport across the economic sectors.
The energy productivity of the metals smelting industry is included in the A2SE 2xEP Manufacturing
Sector Overview. From a lifecycle perspective it is acknowledged that the mining industry can
influence the energy intensity of downstream processing often beyond the Australian borders:
Downstream metal recovery is absolutely dependent on the judicious expenditure of
comminution energy which in turn depends on mining method (particularly blasting), but
these three are not usually treated as an optimisable continuum in financial analyses
Professor Tim Napier-Munn, founding Director, CEEC International Limited
2 Reference will be made to the oil and gas industry throughout the document as deemed appropriate, as well as indicating
where data cannot readily be separated.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
2
However, given the downstream efficiency gain can be tenfold (Pearse, 2014),3 both the mining and
manufacturing sectors could consider how this cross-sectoral issue is best addressed within the 2xEP
Roadmap program.
Furthermore, the focus of the report is on electricity, diesel and gas consumed on mine sites and in
transport from mines to ports. ‘Blast’ energy can have a significant impact on processing energy, and
is discussed in this report. However, due to lack of data, we have not considered chemical energy
contained in explosives as an ‘energy input’ in the calculation of energy productivity. Furthermore,
whilst it is acknowledged that grinding media (e.g. forged steel balls) contains a great deal of
embodied energy, this embodied energy is not a consideration within the scope of this report.
1.2. Structure of this report
A background to the rationale for the doubling of energy productivity (2xEP) program is provided in
Section 2, with specific reference to application in the mining sector. An overview of the contribution of
the sector to the Australian economy, energy use and spend is provided, as well as the link between
the productivity of the mining sector and energy use. This is framed in the context of Australia’s
economic and energy competitiveness, as well as the prevailing market conditions for mining
commodities.
Section 3 provides an introduction to how the A2SE 2xEP initiative proposes to define and measure
energy productivity, considerations for setting energy productivity improvement targets in the mining
sector, as well as potential strategies for achieving significant energy productivity improvements.
In Section 4 we discuss potential opportunities for improvement in each of the energy productivity
strategy areas with specific reference to the mining sector.
Barriers to energy productivity in the mining industry are discussed in Section 5, followed by an
overview of potential policy responses and other actions that could address such barriers in Section 6.
Potential next steps are presented in Section 7.
3 For example, low-grade concentrate shipped to China for smelting could result in significantly more energy being used to smelt
out impurities, which could have been ground out locally with much less energy.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
3
2. The case for 2xEP in the Australian mining sector
The mining sector has a significant influence on the Australian economy in general and energy
demand in particular. Attempts to address economic (including energy) productivity, without
considering developments in the mining sector, would likely be ineffectual. In this context, economic
and financial factors framing the energy productivity debate in the Australian mining sector are
introduced using the following structure:
Significance of the sector in the Australian economy and energy market
Australia’s international economic and energy competitiveness
Linking economic productivity of the Australian mining industry with energy use
Prevailing market conditions for key commodities
This section of the report provides the context for a discussion of the technical building blocks of
energy productivity presented in Section 3.
2.1. Significance of the sector in the Australian economy and energy market
According to a recent McKinsey study, mining is one of only four sectors4 in which Australia is deemed
to possess existing strength and endowments to win in global markets (Lydon, Dyer & Bradley, 2014).
The contribution of the sector to the Australian economy and energy use in the sector are briefly
discussed below.
2.1.1. Impact on GDP and employment
During 2013–14, mining contributed about 11% of Australia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP), up from
7.8% over the preceding 10 years (BREE, 2014b). Mining support services and exploration
contributed a further 1% (ABS, 2014b). Furthermore, the mining sector employed 2.3% of the total
Australian workforce, whilst mineral exports contributed around 61% of Australia’s exports (BREE,
2014b).
Australia is consistently ranked amongst the top five mineral producers in the world for bauxite,
alumina, rutile, and zircon, as well as gold, iron ore, lead, zinc, lithium, manganese ore, uranium,
nickel, brown coal, industrial diamond and silver (Australian Government, 2012), but much of the
production growth over the last decade can be attributed to iron ore and liquefied natural gas (LNG). In
2012–13 iron ore accounted for 46% of the mining sector’s Gross Value Added (GVA) of $114.4
billion. Coal and the oil and gas subsectors each account for approximately 20%, with the remaining
attributed to other mining (ABS, 2014a, 2014d). The mining equipment technology and services
(METS) sector is valued at about $90 billion (Austmine, 2013).
Although the contribution of the mining industry to the Australian economy varies from year to year as
commodity prices fluctuate in response to global demand and supply, the impact of developments in
the mining sector on the whole of the Australian economy is well illustrated by a 2014 Reserve Bank of
Australia (RBA) study that estimates the mining boom:
4 The other sectors are agriculture, tourism and education
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
4
Raised the Australian real per capita household disposable income by 13%
Raised the average real wages by 6%
Lowered the national unemployment rate by about 1.25%
On the downside, the same RBA study estimates that manufacturing output in 2013 was 5% lower
than it would have been without the mining boom, as a result of the impact of the strong Australian
dollar. However, the de-industrialisation effect had been somewhat muted as some manufacturing
sub-sectors benefitted from higher demand for inputs to mining (Downes, Hanslow, & Tulip, 2014).
2.1.2. Energy spend in the mining industry
Mining, excluding extractive industries, accounted for approximately 13% of energy consumed in
Australia in 2011–12 (517 PJ), excluding the transportation of products from mine sites (ABS, 2013b;
Stadler 2015). This is likely to have increased in the last two years as the sector recorded strong
output growth over this period, whilst demand for electricity from the economy as a whole has declined
(Australian Energy Market Operator, 2014). As illustrated in Figure 1, liquid fuels (mainly diesel)
represented 59% of the industry’s energy bill of $9311 million in 2011–12 (equivalent to 8% of total
end-use energy cost to the Australian economy). This is not surprising as the Western Australian
mines are generally off grid, generating their own electricity from diesel. Electricity is the second
largest energy cost to the mining industry, accounting for 28% of energy use per annum (ABS, 2013b).
Figure 1: Mining energy spend by fuel type
The mining sector is, therefore, particularly sensitive to diesel price movements and a potential
disruption to supply. With 91% of crude oil and refined fuels imported, Australian diesel prices (tracked
by the global Singapore diesel price) are influenced by the Australian dollar exchange rate, as well as
the level of government excise (and excise exemption). It is predicted that Australia will have no
refining capacity by 2030 (Blackburn, 2014). Disruption of supply routes due to natural disasters,
regional conflict or other factors will become an important business risk to be managed by miners as
Australia’s in-country stockholdings of crude oil and refined fuels are as low as 23–30 days (Australian
Institute of Petroleum, 2013).
Other, $ 378 mil, 4%
Natural Gas, $ 825
mil, 9%
Liquid fuel, $ 5485 mil,
59%
Electricity, $ 2623 mil,
28%
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
5
2.2. Australia’s international economic and energy competitiveness
Productivity, in its most basic form, is the ratio of output produced to input used. Productivity is a key
expression of the relative competitiveness of nations; competitive economies tend to grow faster over
time and their populations tend to enjoy a higher standard of living.
The productivity level ... determines the rates of return obtained by investments in an
economy, which in turn are the fundamental drivers of its growth rates.
(Schwab, Sala-i-Martin, & World Economic Forum, 2014)
Historically, productivity growth has been the dominant source of income growth in the Australian
economy, with other sources of income growth being the terms of trade and labour utilisation.
However, half the growth of Australia’s Gross National Income (GNI) over the period 2000–2012 is
attributed to ‘one-off boom-time factors’ such as the favourable terms of trade during the extended
mining boom5 (Gruen, 2012). This masked Australia’s virtually stagnant national multifactor
productivity (MFP) 6 index over in the period 1995–2013 (ABS, 2013c). The competitive challenge for
trade exposed sectors was exacerbated by an exchange rate well above the historical average
(Lydon, Dyer, & Bradley, 2014). The cycle is now turning, as prices for key Australian commodities
decline from their earlier highs and labour participation rates are likely to remain flat due to an ageing
population (Gruen, 2012). Therefore, the only option for improving national income is to improve MFP,
namely capital, labour and intermediary inputs such as energy.
Total energy spend by end use sectors7 of the Australian economy was $111 bn in 2011–12,
equivalent to 8% of GDP (ABS, 2013a, 2013b; Stadler, 2015). Energy productivity (see Box 2 below)
could therefore play a central role in a broad based national strategy to lift GNI.
Australia’s energy productivity, measured as GDP per unit of primary energy input, is 14% lower than
the average of the G20 countries in US$ purchasing power parity terms as illustrated in Figure 2.
Over the period 1995–2012, Australia improved its energy productivity by a relatively low 1.1% per
5 Ratio between the prices of Australia’s exports and the prices of its imports.
6 This refers to capital, labour and other resource inputs
7 Excludes the cost of energy to the electricity, gas and petroleum refineries subsectors.
Box 1: Fuel taxation in the mining sector
As most diesel in mining applications is for off-road use the mining industry receives a Fuel Tax Credit of
$0.38146 per litre. The rebate has been reviewed on several occasions, including in the run up to the 2014
Federal Budget. The Minerals Council of Australia advocates strongly for retention of the rebate on the basis
that removal would lead to ‘double taxation’ (Deloitte Access Economics, 2014).
Box 2: Measures of energy productivity
Energy productivity, measured as real GDP per unit of primary energy input, is a complex measure that
reflects efficiency gains, as well as the effect of shifts in the economic structure and increased economic
output. The relative cost per unit of energy inputs adds a further ‘competitiveness’ dimension to energy
productivity, which reflects the relative cost competitiveness of countries in the use of their energy.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
6
annum (World Bank, n.d.). The latter part of this period coincided with significant policy support for
energy productivity investment which resulted in improved energy productivity for some sectors
(ClimateWorks, 2013). However, many of the Federal Government programs aimed at stimulating
energy efficiency investments have now concluded, including the Clean Energy Technology
Investment Program (CTIP) and the Energy Efficiency opportunity program.
Figure 2: Energy productivity of selected G20 countries8
Not only are G20 countries, on aggregate, adding more economic value per unit of energy consumed,
they are also improving faster than Australia, whilst leaders such as the European Union and USA
have also set aggressive improvement targets:
The European Union targets a 20% reduction in energy intensity9 by 2020 compared to 1990
levels and is now considering an extension of that target to 30% by 2030 (European Commission,
2013).
The USA has adopted a target to double energy productivity by 2030 compared to 2010 levels
(The White House, 2013).
China, although currently lagging Australia on energy productivity, improved its energy productivity
by 153% between 1990 and 2009. China is targeting a further improvement in energy productivity
of 16% between 2011 and 2015 (Institute of Industrial Productivity, 2011; World Bank, n.d.).
In short, G20 peers are accelerating away from Australia at a time when domestic energy prices are
increasing rapidly and prices in Europe and the USA are steady or declining in real terms (Stadler,
Jutsen, Pears & Smith, 2014). Consequently, the potential contribution of energy productivity
improvement to Australia’s overall economic productivity is now at an historic high. The country is
8 Latest available data for all countries was 2011 or 2012.
9 This is the inverse of the energy productivity measure.
$8.40
$7.20
1.1%
-1%
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Average annual growth in energy productivity
1995 –2012
GDP per unit of primary energy use
(constant 2011 PPP $ per kg of oil equivalent)
Latest available Average annual growth rate
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
7
coming from a low base, coupled with relatively high real energy prices. This means that in future the
use of energy as a production input will have a more material impact on the profitability of mining
companies and Australia’s economic growth compared with recent years.
2.3. Linking economic productivity of the mining sector with energy use
The decline in overall productivity of the mining sector over nearly two decades is well documented. A
brief discussion of drivers is presented below with more detail provided as Appendix D.
Compared to the 1990s, the mining industry now achieves 56% less output per hour worked by
employees and 44% less output in terms of capital employed (ABS estimate, cited in PwC, 2014a).
However, a Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE) decomposition analysis of the
reduction or erosion in mining sector productivity shed light on the impact of key factors influencing
economic productivity as measured by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS):
For Australian mining as a whole, after removing the influence of both output quality
depletion and production lags, multifactor productivity grew at an average annual rate of
2.5 per cent between 1985–86 and 2009–10.
(BREE, 2013)
The decline in mining sector MFP should therefore be understood in the context of the convergence of
the following factors during the mining boom:
Bulk commodity and base metal prices were at long-term historical highs between 2006
and 2011, as illustrated in Figure 19 in Appendix D (RBA, 2014a). Because they are price
takers, this was an opportune time for miners to maximise throughput, with a lesser focus on
cost management.
A peak investment phase10 that has lasted at least five years (BREE, 2014b).
Continued decline in ore grade (metal extracted per tonne of ore.)
It is generally accepted that the high commodity prices and capital investment cycles have peaked
(BREE, 2014b; RBA, 2014a). Prices have declined sharply, with gold experiencing a 27% drop, the
largest in 30 years (KordaMentha, 2013; PwC, 2014b) and coal at a five year low (Paton &
Riseborough, 2014). Furthermore, nearly half of the over $400 billion11 of resources, energy and
related infrastructure projects undertaken in Australia over the last decade are now operational.
Approximately $220 billion of projects are still under development (BREE, 2014b).
As the industry enters a new cycle characterised by lower commodity prices and higher output as new
capacity comes online, one of the three factors listed above, deteriorating ore grade, is likely to
persist:
The historical trend in the average ore grade for copper, gold, lead, zinc, uranium, nickel and silver
is down (Mudd 2009, as cited in Fisher & Schnittger, 2012). Over the last 30 years, the average
grade of mined Australian ore bodies halved, while the waste removed to access the minerals
more than doubled. This has led to a 6% per annum increase in energy consumption across
mining operations in recent years (Department of Industry, 2012).
10 Note that investment in energy-efficient capital equipment will be accounted for in the capital productivity component of the
ABS MFP calculation.
11 Note this includes energy (i.e. oil and gas).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
8
The number of ‘giant’ and ‘major’12 discoveries reported in Australia has declined since the 1990s
(Productivity Commission, 2013).
The real cost of exploration per metre drilled has increased significantly since the 1990s, with a
sharp drop in exploration activity evident since 2012, as illustrated in Figure 3 (ABS, 2014e, 2014f).
A further 10% drop in exploration capital expenditure is predicted for the 2014 financial year (PwC,
2014b).
Figure 3: Mineral exploration activity in Australia
Deterioration in ore grade has a direct impact on energy demand at mine sites (see shaded box
below). The continued decline in ore grade, all else being equal, will place further downward pressure
on the official MFP index for the mining sector.
12 ‘Major’ is defined as greater than: 1 million oz Au; 100kt Ni; 1 million tonnes Cu equivalent; or 25kt U3O8 (Productivity
Commission, 2013).
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Sep-2003
Feb-2004
Jul-2004
Dec-2004
May-2005
Oct-2005
Mar-2006
Aug-2006
Jan-2007
Jun-2007
Nov-2007
Apr-2008
Sep-2008
Feb-2009
Jul-2009
Dec-2009
May-2010
Oct-2010
Mar-2011
Aug-2011
Jan-2012
Jun-2012
Nov-2012
Apr-2013
Sep-2013
Feb-2014
Metres drilled ('000)
Mineral exploration expenditure by type of deposit ($-
million)
Brownfield ($ million)
Greenfields ($ million)
Total Metres Drilled ('000)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
9
As price takers, with very limited value added or product differentiation by producers, miners have two
key strategies for optimising operating income (and GVA13): minimising costs and maximising
throughput. Energy is already a significant cost to many mining companies, as illustrated in Figure 5.
13 Notwithstanding that GVA is statistically a different concept from operating income.
Box 3: Declining ore grade and energy use
Ore grade drives key production metrics such as tonnes of material moved (TMM) as a ratio of saleable
ore tonnes (TMM/t). However, declining ore grade does not only mean breaking and moving more rock to
get the same output. It is also often associated with:
Increased mine depth and overburden ratio (waste material to ore or coal production).
Moving rock over greater distances to reach processing facilities on the mine site.
More remote sites, which imply increased costs in providing energy for processing, coupled with
additional investment in transport infrastructure to move production outputs from sites to the
market as well as transporting labour and other production inputs to these sites.
Increased complexity of terrain/mine geology.
Reduced quality of ore (impurities, milling characteristics), which often demand more complex
extraction methods.
Low-grade ores have a finer liberation size and, therefore, require finer grinding (using more energy) or
alternative processing strategies. Simply put, when mining low-grade ore using current processing
strategies, much more energy is consumed in breaking, sorting, processing and moving rock before
saleable ore leaves the mine gate and then in transporting it from the mine to markets. These processing
strategies were designed for high-grade ores, not low-grade ores, but the industry seems reluctant to
adopt new approaches. The correlation between energy productivity and ore yield, of which grade is one
of the key determinants, is well illustrated by the figure below, reproduced from the Co-operative
Research Centre for Optimising Resource Extraction (CRC ORE) and Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral
Research Centre (JKMRC) presentation (Ballantyne & Powell, 2014a.).
Figure 4: Correlation between energy productivity and ore grade
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010
Index
Energy
productivity
Yield
(grade)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
10
However, the convergence of declining ore grade and the prevailing market conditions, as discussed
below, will make energy an increasingly important cost to be managed.
Figure 5: Energy as a percentage of operating cost (based on estimates by Energetics)
2.4. Prevailing market conditions for key commodity sectors
The commodity price boom has also supported an increase in the average profit margin of miners from
10% in 2001–02 to 43% in 20011–12. Mining companies increased their capital investment over this
same period rising from 14% of operating cost to an aggregate sector Capex:Opex ratio of 40%. Since
then falling international commodity prices combined with high costs and distance from markets have
put pressure on the profit margins of most Australian mining sub-sectors since 2012–13, as illustrated
in Figure 6. This has also resulted in a sharp drop in the Capex:Opex ratio of the sector (ABS, 2014a,
2014d, 2014g; RBA, 2014a).
Since 2011–12, falling international commodity prices combined with high cost and distance from
markets to put further pressure on the profit margins of most Australian mining sub-sectors, as
illustrated in Figure 6 (ABS, 2014d).
Figure 6: Profit margins declining across key mining sub-sectors
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Coal(opencutvs
underground)
Ferrousmetals Bauxite(Max:
Alumina)
Gold Non‐ferrous
(Oxides/Sulphides)
From To Max
31%
25%
18% 19%
14%
‐22%
29%
4% 3%
‐21%
0%
‐35%
‐40%
‐30%
‐20%
‐10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
Ironore Coal CopperOre Goldore Silver‐lead‐zinc
ore
Bauxite&
nickel
Aggregateoperatingprofitmarginfor
miningsub‐sectors
2011
–
12 2012
–
13
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
11
The HSBC Global mining index shed 46% of its value from 2011 to 2013, before showing signs of
stabilising performance from mid-2013, with share price movements trending in line with the broader
market (PwC, 2013b). However, temporary shut-downs in response to a global over-supply and falling
prices are not uncommon and suggest that this is unlikely to be a broad-based trend (Paton &
Riseborough, 2014).
The prevailing market conditions amplify the intrinsic challenge faced by the resources industry, i.e.
making long-term capital commitments when medium term revenue projections are volatile at best.
Currently long range price projections suggest that prices will remain subdued for some time as
illustrated in Figure 7 14 with reference to thermal coal below. Unless Australian coal sites in the third
and fourth quartile move down the production cost curve, the negative impact on the Australian
economy, rural communities and investors could be significant (RBA, 2014b; Kannan, 2015).
Figure 7: Thermal coal production cost curve – marginal mines at different price points (US$)
The extent of the pressure obviously varies across the mining industry. With the current gold price
above $1,400 / oz (Gold Price, 2015), most Australian gold producers would be viable with an average
C1 cash cost of roughly A$860/oz (
Létourneau,2014)
and all-sustaining cost below $1,100 (See Figure
8 reproduced from Goldcorp, 2014).
Figure 8: Gold producers’ all-in sustaining cost is well below the current gold price (A$)
14
Cost curves, reproduced from the RBA, August 2014 Statement on Monetary Policy (RBA, 2014b), based on average
variable costs of production of mines
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
12
However, as illustrated in Figure 915 many Australian iron ore producers will be concerned at the
current price level of approximately $60 / tonne.
Figure 9: Iron ore production cost curve
A lower Australian dollar will not be a major factor in improving the performance of Australian
producers, as US dollar strength also impacts the currencies of other major producers. Given that
diesel is a major cost to many mines, the drop in oil prices could improve the performance of sites, but
on a per tonne basis the impact on coal (for example) is only expected to translate to a $US1.80 per
tonne drop in costs (Macdonald-Smith, 2015). In some regards, the drop in oil prices could make
Australian producers less competitive on a CFR-basis (i.e. cost inclusive of freight), pushing them
higher up the cost curve. As highlighted in a 2015 Bloomberg report, the drop in bunker fuel prices
wiped out the price advantage of leading Australian iron ore producers over Brazil’s Vale SA, which
could land a tonne of iron ore cheaper than its Australian rivals in China (Riseborough & Spinetto,
2015). Energy cost can therefore be a determinant of the relative competiveness of Australia’s
resource sector on the global stage, especially at a time when global demand is weakening.
As commodity prices decline and move ever closer to the ‘break-even point’ for many sites, the
miners’ focus has shifted from being totally output-focused to recognising the need to balance volume
growth and operating cost. Cost drivers are diverse, but relatively high labour costs, declining ore
grade (which also drives increased energy use) and energy price escalations (see shaded Box 4
below), are all putting pressure on the operating profit margins of many mining sub-sectors and
individual mines.
Much of the initial productivity improvement programs are focused on cutting easily controllable costs
(i.e. quick fixes), such as headcount reduction and negotiating price reductions from suppliers
(KordaMentha, 2013; PwC, 2013b). This is not deemed to represent sustainable productivity gains.
15
ibid
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
13
In order to improve the economic productivity of the sector, the cost management focus needs to
move beyond quick-fix cuts to sustainable efficiency gains based on best practice, smart investments
in operations and innovative management approaches.
Assigning a greater priority to energy-related considerations in decision-making can have a significant
impact on delivering worthwhile improvements in operating profit (see the shaded box below: ‘Another
lens through which to view energy cost as the industry enters a new cycle?’)
Box 4: Energy prices
The key energy cost driver for mines is often diesel prices. Diesel at terminal gate prices (TGPs) increased
by about 40% from 2004-05, before stabilising from 2011-12 due to the strong Australian dollar. Due to
global market conditions, the price dropped sharply towards the end of 2014, before gradually increasing
again during 2015 as illustrated below (Australian Institute of Petroleum, 2015). The upward trend is
expected to continue, albeit gradually (EIA, 2015).
Western Australia gas prices increased rapidly over the last decade, before easing back in recent years.
Now large users on the Australian east coast have to deal with the prospective doubling of natural gas
prices through to 2017-18, in addition to a 40% increase in real electricity prices for industrial users since
2005. This is double the rate of increase experienced by European industrial electricity users (Stadler et al,
2014).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
14
Box 5: Another lens through which to view energy cost as the industry enters a new cycle?
Traditionally the ‘importance’ of energy to the business is expressed, as in Figure 5, by stating energy
cost as a percentage of operating cost. This approach does not take into account the operating margins
of the business. It would be appropriate if energy was a fixed cost and the industry was not exposed to
volatile commodity prices; but this is not the case. In spite of the significant initiatives already embarked
upon to improve the use-efficiency of energy in the mining industry, there are many more opportunities
(some of which we will refer to in subsequent sections). A quote from the CEO of AngloGold is
increasingly relevant to the industry as a whole:
It is best to be prepared for a low gold price environment, so you are better
positioned to tackle an upside in the gold price
Srinivasan Venkatakrishnan, CEO AngloGold (Australian Mining, 2013)
In order to illustrate this point, we made the following assumptions about an ‘average’ iron-ore mine in
2012–13, when the industry aggregate margin was 29% (see Figure 6), all else being equal:
The TMM/t for this mine is 2.8 and remains constant over the next few years
The energy cost as a percentage of operating cost is 10% (see Figure 5)
Diesel prices increase by 10%, largely due to exchange-rate fluctuation
Commodity prices decline from a realised $/t ore of $110 in 2012–13 to $97 in 2013–14.
What happens – in one year – when an increase in energy prices converges with a decline in commodity
prices under these assumptions?
Key parameter % change 2012–13 2013–14
Energy cost as a % of operating cost 1% 10% 11%
Cost of production per tonne (energy cost in
brackets)
1% $78 ($8) $79 ($9)
Operating margin -10% 29% 19%
Profit/tonne -44% $32 $18
A $1/tonne reduction in energy cost will be equivalent to: 2012–13 2013–14
An increased sales price of iron ore per ton $3/t $5/t
This modest improvement in the energy performance of the mine under these reasonable assumptions
will translate under the 2013–14 scenario to a 27% improvement in operating profit per tonne; from $18 to
$23/tonne (or increasing the profit margin from 19% to 24%). Alternatively, this is equivalent to a
reduction in 14 tonnes of ‘dirt moved’ (TMM) for every 100t of saleable ore produced.
As the operating margins of the industry decline in line with a drop in commodity prices, the ‘sales
equivalent’ value of a dollar of energy saved per tonne of ore produced will increase proportionally.
Note: These calculations exclude energy project cost. However, many energy projects have a payback of
between one and four years, whilst cash flow neutral financing options are available for many energy
solutions.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
15
3. Energy productivity in the context of the mining sector
Reaching agreement on the voluntary targets and associated metrics is a significant aspect of the
work to be undertaken by A2SE and stakeholders. This section introduces some of the technical
building blocks for consideration by mining sector stakeholders to support a mining-sector energy-
productivity Roadmap process. These concepts are discussed in more depth in the 2xEP Framing
Paper. However, a principle to highlight at the outset is that the 2xEP Roadmap is not engaged in the
pursuit of energy productivity instead of capital or labour productivity. Energy productivity is an integral
part of economic productivity. This approach is detailed in the A2SE 2xEP Framing Paper. The
rationale is summarised in the shaded box below.
This section introduces energy productivity, possible measures, challenges in applying these
measures to the mining sector and what they may mean in the context of doubling energy productivity.
This discussion is structured as below:
Defining energy productivity in general
Measuring energy productivity improvements in the mining sector
Exploring what a doubling of Australia’s energy productivity means for the mining sector.
Box 6: The multiple links between economic productivity and energy ...
Energy productivity is an integral part of economic productivity, which is typically defined by the three
elements of the productivity equation, namely capital, labour and intermediate inputs. Energy use in the
production process is included in the ‘intermediate inputs’ element of the equation, but a focus on energy
productivity also impacts capital, labour and the productive use of other intermediate inputs.
Capital Productivity: Investment in energy-efficient equipment is embedded in capital input. In
addition, consideration of energy productivity as a step in the design, financing and operation of
infrastructure and productive assets can support the optimal allocation of capital and enhance the
return on assets over the life of the mine.
Labour Productivity: Energy-related investments directly contribute to job creation (i.e. increased
labour-participation rate) in the energy sector, but can also indirectly influence the output-per-unit of
labour in all other sectors (e.g. smart ventilation in mines can save energy and improve the health of
miners).
Intermediate Inputs: The effective use of energy can also influence the effective use of other
production inputs and associated waste streams to be managed. It therefore acts as a multiplier, with
an IEA Study estimating that for every dollar saved in energy cost 2.5 x savings are realised elsewhere
in the value chain.
However, the relationship between the elements of economic productivity and energy is not linear.
Improving energy productivity is as much about efficiencies (i.e. doing the same things better or more cost
effectively) as it is about innovation (i.e. doing things differently to achieve a better or even new value
added outcome) (Stadler et al, 2014).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
16
3.1. Defining energy productivity
Energy ‘efficiency’ and energy ‘productivity’ are frequently, but erroneously, used interchangeably. It is
therefore useful to start by defining energy efficiency. Energy efficiency is the ability to deliver the
same level of service or output using less energy. Energy efficiency is generally measured as end use
energy consumed (typically in GJ) per unit of output (typically tonnes).
Energy productivity aims to capture ‘multiple dividends’ that accrue from investment in more efficient
plant and equipment including reduced operating and maintenance costs, as well as reducing
downtime. In some cases this also includes increased output or improved quality of output, but in all
cases it considers the qualitative dimensions of the societal impacts of production, including the
management of water, chemicals and waste.
Energy productivity is a measure of the total economic value delivered from each unit of energy
utilised. The equation used in the A2SE’s 2xEP Framing Paper to develop a preliminary estimate of
the scale of the task involved in doubling Australia’s energy productivity by 2030 is presented below:
Equation 1: Basic energy productivity measure
2010$
Energy productivity is thus more than traditional energy management, including energy efficiency,
although it is one of the strategies to be considered as part of the 2xEP Roadmap, as illustrated in
Figure 10 below.
Figure 10: Key determinants of energy productivity
While it is understood that 2xEP may have a less direct influence on some elements included in the
figure than others, it would nevertheless be valuable to bring a greater focus to the implications for
energy productivity of initiatives targeting elements of both the input and output sides of the equation.
The four energy productivity strategy areas are:
Strategy area 1: ‘Traditional’ energy management – e.g. a focus on improving energy
efficiency through better management of energy use, including the implementation of
innovative energy-use technologies and demand-management programs, best practice in
Energy
Productivity
Growth
Factors directly impacting energy
input Output dimensions ($ or other
perceived value)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
17
data management, and benchmarking energy management to facilitate energy productivity
decision making.
Strategy area 2: Systems optimisation – e.g. a focus on the energy aspects of mining and
minerals processing, such as the re-engineering of materials handling and mining processes,
as well as industry supply-chain capacity-optimisation strategies. These changes may be
implemented for reasons of broader productivity improvement, but greater value can be
realised by bringing a deliberate energy-specific competency and focus to them.
Strategy area 3: Business model transformation – e.g. a focus on the energy aspects of
fundamental longer term change in the business of mining – relating to the design,
development and operation of mining, as well as trading and asset management. An
example of a new operating model is the RioTinto Mine of the FutureTM, which changes the
fundamental relationship between capital and labour inputs in the industry, with clear energy
productivity benefits (see shaded box below).
Strategy area 4: Value creation or preservation – e.g. a focus on increased throughput,
beneficiation16 and/or improving the quality of ore shipped to smelters to reduce downstream
energy consumption (by up to 10 times) and the air pollution associated with removing
impurities during smelting (Pearse, 2014).
Consequently, energy productivity is not just about reducing inputs: it is also about increasing the
value and quality of outputs. In some instances, this may lead to increased domestic energy
consumption but improved energy productivity.
16
It is recognised that bulk commodities, by their very nature, are not focused on value-adding product features, though there
are some exceptions. For example, the copper chain where ore is mined at 20%, upgraded to 80% in the minerals processing/
beneficiation stage and then refined to 99.99%.
Box 7: ’s Mine of the Future
TM
Picture re
p
roduced from Rio Tinto
,
2013
In operation since 2008, this initiative has enabled
RioTinto to monitor operations in real time,
improving unit cost and productivity through:
Contractor cost savings
Truck cycle time
Improved maintenance and life extension
Better performance of tyres
Reduced fuel consumption
Safety
The concept being deployed at new Hope Downs
4 with expected planned total material movement
with three fewer trucks, yields a 14% improvement
over business as usual (Australian Bulk Handling
Review, 2013);(RioTinto, 2013).
RioTinto is reported to have saved over $80
million through tracking data from both their
processing plants and trucks (Edwards, 2014).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
18
3.2. Measuring energy productivity improvements in the mining sector
Applying the macro-level energy productivity metric (Equation 1) to the mining sector presents a
number of challenges. In particular:
Gross output data is not available at sector level in Australia, necessitating the use of a
proxy. Furthermore, primary energy as a denominator, though preferred as a national
denominator (see A2SE 2xEP Framing Paper), is a less useful concept at the site level
Commodity price volatility can cause significant variability in the value of outputs (i.e. the
numerator) over short periods of time
Geological factors (e.g. ore grade) can result in change over time in the ‘nature of the task’
required to deliver the same output (i.e. digging deeper, moving rock further. or grinding ore
finer).
The effect of declining ore grade will be less sharply accentuated over a longer period of time. It has
also been discussed in detail in Section 2.3. The following sections identify the key issues pertaining
to the measurement of energy productivity due to the non-availability of gross sector output, choice of
energy denominator and volatility in the value of outputs from the mining sector. This is followed by an
introduction to the conceptual integrated measurement framework as a starting point for consultation
with the mining industry stakeholders.
3.2.1. Proxy for gross output at sector level and choice of energy metric
Gross Value Added is frequently used as a proxy for sector gross output. If this option is adopted,
applying the common energy productivity metric (Equation 1) at the sector level could, therefore, be
presented as illustrated in Equation 2 below:
Equation 2: Sector-level energy productivity measure derived from Equation 1
$
However, GVA as a productivity numerator, by its very definition,17 excludes energy and other
intermediate inputs that could contribute to a change in productivity. This presents a challenge for
industries with vertically integrated supply chains, characterised by large inter-industry transfers (ABS,
2007). A recent European Commission paper also cautioned against the use of value added as an
industrial output variable as it improperly implies that ‘efficiency-enhancing’ improvements in
technology exclude intermediate inputs such as energy and other materials (European Commission -
Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs, 2014).
In order to overcome the weakness associated with using GVA, the dollar value of sales (i.e. value at
factory gate) in real terms could be used as the numerator of a primary mining sector energy
productivity indicator. Since energy costs are embedded in the ‘gross value of sales’ metrics, this
overcomes the weakness associated with ‘value added’ as a numerator. This approach has been
17Industry value added is equal to the total value of gross outputs at basic prices less the total intermediate consumption at
purchasers' prices.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
19
adopted by the American Alliance to Save Energy in measuring sector-level energy productivity
performance.
Primary energy could be replaced conceptually by delivered or final energy (see A2SE 2xEP Framing
Paper) when cascading energy productivity to site level.
3.2.2. Short term volatility in the value of output
The numerator, whether GVA or ‘gross value of sales’, can be very volatile (see the shaded box
below), with prices for most minerals determined on international markets such as the London Metal
Exchange. There are, of course, differences between the sub-sectors, with for example bulk
commodities (i.e. coal and iron ore) trades typically based on long-term contracts and the diamond
industry where De Beers exercise some control over supplies. Furthermore, the value of the dollar can
fluctuate significantly over relatively short periods of time.
In order to align the longer timeframes in which energy productivity manifests and to smooth out
volatility in numerators, measurement regimes typically adopt rolling averages over a timeframe
reflective of the industry dynamics.
3.2.3. Conceptual integrated measurement framework for consideration
For the purpose of tracking energy productivity over time, it will be necessary to develop a framework
that is flexible enough to accommodate the diverse issues impacting the sector, as well as to
counterbalance what is, in the short term, a volatile metric (e.g. by adopting a three- or five-year
moving average).18 It is envisaged that an integrated framework will ultimately guide the cascading of
metrics from the consolidated (i.e. total sector) level down to the level of the individual mine site.
To ensure the relevance of measures at the sector, sub-sector and individual mine levels, this
flexibility, could be attained through the development of a ‘dashboard of metrics’ with three levels:
Primary (Sector and Sub-sector measure as per Equation 3): This metric is intended to most
closely align with a national measure of energy productivity used to set targets and compare
relative energy productivity at an international level.
Equation 3: Proposed primary sector level energy productivity measure
$$
18 The A2SE Framing Paper (Stadler et al, 2014) discusses these issues more extensively.
Box 8: Established and ‘new’ links between metals and financial markets
adds to volatility of metals prices
It is well recognised that the gold price is driven by investment market sentiment, with prices typically moving
counter cyclically (KordaMetha, 2013). Copper has now joined gold as a ‘financial currency’, according to
Goldman Sachs/Bloomberg, quoted in the PwC Mines 2014 report. Apart from traditional consumption
demand, copper has been stored in bulk and used as collateral for lenders in China. In early 2014, ‘cash for
copper’, rather than industrial demand, was deemed to be the dominant market factor driving copper prices
(PwC, 2014b).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
20
Secondary (Sector and Sub-sector measure as per Equation 4): This is an indicator of
energy price competitiveness – i.e. the value created for each dollar spent on energy – could
assist in reflecting the relative importance of energy as the operating margin of miners
fluctuates with the rise and fall of commodity prices. Also note that a further key difference
between Equations 3 and 4 is that the denominator used below refers to delivered or final
energy, whilst Equation 3 uses primary energy.
Equation 4: Proposed secondary sector level energy productivity measure
$
$
Tertiary (flexible suite of measures applicable at sub-sector and mine-site level): A set of
tertiary level index-based indicators can be developed. These measures are unit insensitive
and can be particularly useful at mine site level (i.e. tonnes, dollars or any other output unit
that is an appropriate measure of economic value added in a sub-sector). Nonetheless, in
some cases, simpler energy efficiency metrics may suffice. For example, a composite yield
and energy use (GJ) index may be a practical and sufficient operational indicator of energy
productivity at some sites.
These indexes could be rolled up into a higher-level composite energy-productivity index for mining,
which, in turn, could be incorporated in a national index. Appropriate methodologies will be developed
as part of the A2SE 2xEP roadmap process. The proposed measurement framework at the sectoral
level (e.g. mining) is illustrated below.
Figure 11: Conceptual overview of integrated measurement framework – applied to mining
3.3. What does a doubling of Australia’s energy productivity mean for the
mining sector?
An empirical analysis of 28 OECD countries spanning 32 years provides statistical evidence19 of the
relationship between energy efficiency and GDP. Studies from organisations as diverse as the World
Bank, McKinsey Global Institute and the Alliance Commission on National Energy Efficiency Policy
also analysed the relationship between economic growth and energy efficiency. Typically the potential
beneficial impact on global GDP by 2030 of adopting energy-efficient practices is estimated at around
2%, with 3.2% being the upper range of forecasts (Stadler et al, 2014). This is a significant
19
The study found that there is a less than 1% chance that the statistical results have been obtained by chance.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
21
contribution to GDP, given that the Group of 20 (G20) nations will aim to lift their collective GDP from
all economic activity by more than 2% above the trajectory implied by current policies over the coming
five years (G20, 2014).
In Australia, the 2xEP program is proposing a doubling of energy productivity by 2030 as the target for
the economy-wide program. This target is estimated to equate to an increase in GDP from $222/GJ to
$444/GJ of final energy demand, based on preliminary analysis (Stadler, 2015).
This reduction equates to a 3.5% per annum improvement in energy productivity across the economy.
About 60% of this change is expected to come from structural changes in the economy, such as a
decline in heavy manufacturing and an increase in ‘services’ and economic growth (i.e. an increase in
output). The remainder – a 1.4% annual improvement across the economy – will need to come from
energy-productivity improvements. This is well above the overall long-term historical trend (0.4% p.a.
over the last two decades) (Stadler, et al 2014). As discussed later in this paper, energy-productivity
investment incentives and associated policy settings have deteriorated in their ability to stimulate
energy efficiency investments.
For companies, an energy productivity target is in many regards ‘easier’ to achieve than an energy
efficient equivalent, since some of the improvement is driven by increased production output. This is
evident from the performance of the mining industry over the recent past as illustrated below
(Stadler,2015). In this way the energy productivity metric ‘recognises’ the shareholder value imperative
of growing outputs faster than inputs. Since the energy productivity metrics are sensitive to both
commodity and energy prices, it can be a volatile measure. Therefore, the metric is best presented as
a moving average over at least 3–years as presented in the table below for the mining industry (i.e.
resources sector, excluding oil and gas production). The relative performance on the secondary
metric, compared to other key commodity export nations has not been assessed yet. Such a
comparison would reveal the trend in relative energy price competitiveness of Australian miners
Table 1: Recent mining industry-level energy-productivity performance (3-year moving average)
Energy productivity trends 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 Average annual
change
Primary metric: Real Revenue
($2010) / Primary energy (GJ) 255 286 292 299 4.06%
Secondary metric: Nominal Revenue
$ / Nominal $ energy spend 19 20 20 1.72%
In order to double energy productivity from a 2010 base year, the industry would need to broadly
maintain the current pace of improvement in energy productivity (i.e. 4% vis-à-vis a target of 3.5 % per
annum). This is a significant challenge given that the improvement over the last four years was
recorded at a time of historically high commodity prices and direct federal government policy support
for energy efficient investments. Maintaining energy productivity at current levels may be challenging
in itself, given the decline in ore grade and the forecast weakness in global commodity prices
(Minerals Council of Australia, 2014a).
Modelling at the sectoral level will seek to develop robust estimates of the potential contribution from
the mining sector. Whatever the agreed target is, it will be industry-driven and voluntary. However,
there are a wide range of opportunities available to miners, as discussed in Section 4, across all four
strategic areas that could support a range of pathways to improved energy productivity for all types of
mines.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
22
Consultation notes ...
Key points for consultation include:
what a feasible target for the sector should be, considering that ore grade deterioration is likely to
increase rather than decrease in the years to come.
how the target should be measured.
e.g. would a realistic target be to stabilise or flatten the current increasing levels of energy intensity by
2025-30 using the general metric used in other sectors, or can a ore-grade factor be included in the
calculation of a measure? Are there other options?
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
23
4. Potential for energy productivity improvements
This section provides an overview of the status quo, sketching, by reference to a few industry sources,
the likely scope for improvement. It also provides a brief introduction to the application of energy in the
sector as background to the discussion of opportunities. The section covers both established best
practice and emerging opportunities that, if more broadly adopted, could have a material impact on
energy productivity in the sector. These opportunities will be discussed within the four broad strategy
areas supporting an energy-productivity agenda introduced in the previous section, namely: traditional
energy management, system optimisation, business-model transformation and value
creation/preservation as illustrated in Figure 12 below.
Figure 12: High level mining sector opportunity framework
Please note ...
A2SE compiled a preliminary collection of practices that could provide a starting point for discussion with
mining sector stakeholders on potential pathways to improving energy productivity. This is by no means
intended as a complete or comprehensive list of opportunities in a diverse and dynamic sector.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
24
However, it should be noted that two themes run across all four strategy areas, namely innovation, be
it technology, process or whole of business model, as well as data management, which is an
increasingly central part of mining operations.
4.1. Status quo?
The industry has already made significant investments in energy efficiency. For example, mining
companies participating in the EEO Program identified 6 PJ in diesel savings (equivalent to 6% of total
diesel consumption by mines). A total of 66% of these opportunities were adopted as early as 2008–
09 (Department of Industry, 2011). Furthermore, a 2013 evaluation of the EEO Program estimated
that the mining industry saved 19.4 PJ during the first five-year cycle, of which 8.5 PJ were attributed
to the impact of the EEO Program (ACIL Tasman, 2013).
Historically, upsizing equipment and technology innovation have driven most of the improvement in
mining operations. In the case of copper mines, technological innovation has been the key driver, as
illustrated in the diagram from a 2010 MinEx Consulting study reproduced in the shaded box below
(Schodde, 2010). Possible options to realise further reductions in energy costs through an integrated
approach to energy productivity – covering technology, process, systems, and business models – will
be discussed in subsequent sections.
In spite of significant investment in energy efficiency, many unexploited energy productivity
opportunities remain across the mining value chain, in mining, comminution concentration and
materials handling. According to CEEC, adopting best practice can deliver up to 15% improvement in
comminution, without any equipment replacements. Furthermore, the energy efficiency of some key
end-use applications has not yet been optimised. For example, with reference to comminution,
crushers are estimated to be 75% energy efficient and a ball mill 3–15% efficient in producing the
Box 9: Impact of technological innovation
A 2010 study by MinEx Consulting across a number of copper mines in Chile and the USA indicated that
economies of scale contributed 30% to the reduction in $/ton ore between 1905 and 2007, with the
remaining 70% attributed to cost savings from new technologies.
Reproduced from Schodde, 2010
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
25
same size distribution as single particle breakage with significant improvement potential of up to 30%
identified (Tim Napier-Munn, 2014).
With specific reference to comminution, a founding director of CEEC in the keynote address at
Comminution 2014 highlighted that:
There is a strong consensus in the literature and anecdotally amongst the experts that
savings in the range 5–30% are attainable now by implementing what is already known,
i.e. by adopting and sustaining best practice. This is not easy in an industry that has
decimated its experience base in recent years but can and is being done. In the longer term
(10–20 years), with investment in the new technologies discussed above and with the
opportunity to build new energy-efficient plants in brown- and green-field developments,
savings exceeding 50% are possible
(Tim Napier-Munn, 2014)
4.2. Application of energy in the mining sector
Very broadly, energy use at the mine sites is split 50:5020 between mining/materials handling and
processing (i.e. ore concentration at the mine), with additional energy expended transporting
production from the mine to markets. This is broadly in line with a study on energy use in mining
conducted in 2007 by the U.S. Industrial Technologies Program (U.S. Department of Energy, 2007) to
identify energy saving opportunities in underground coal, metals and mineral mining. The average
energy consumed by area from that study is reproduced in Figure 13 below.
Figure 13: Energy consumption by end use area at the mine site (energy units)
Across all types of mines, the energy consumption associated with grinding far outweighs the energy
consumption of other operations. Grinding consumes about 42% of energy use, while materials-
20 Rule of thumb provided by Energetics for Australian mining operations.
2% 2%
6%
7%
10%
4%
18%
42%
5%
4%
Blasting
Dewatering
Drilling
Digging
Ventilation
Electric equipment
Diesel equipment
Grin ding
Crushing
Separation
Processing
51%
Ma teria l Handling
22%
Mining
27%
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
26
handling diesel equipment is the next largest energy consumer, accounting for 18%, or less than half
of the energy required for grinding. The third largest energy consumer is ventilation, accounting for
only 10% of total energy use. Although upstream energy consumption is relatively low, it should be
noted, as discussed in the sections following, that actions taken earlier in the value chain (e.g.
blasting) can have as much as a 40% impact on energy consumed downstream.
The end-use break-up differs materially between open-cut and underground mines. Typically open-cut
mines use diesel for the fleet, whereas underground mines use more electricity for ventilation and
moving rock, as well as some diesel (for moving people). In off-grid mines, electricity is typically
provided by diesel generation sets, so all the energy used is diesel. Each of the top three energy end
use areas illustrated in Figure 13 is briefly discussed in more detail in Appendix C.
4.3. Strategy area 1: Traditional energy management
The traditional energy management strategic area includes the use of energy-efficient equipment,
electricity and gas demand management, energy data management and practices to embed energy
efficiency into the corporate and site-management culture. Opportunities exist in a wide range of
areas, but we will briefly discuss this strategic area in the following sub-categories:
Ore characterisation and feed preparation
Comminution processes
Froth floatation / mineral separation
Hauling/materials movement
Ventilation
Fuel switching
Data and management practices
4.3.1. Ore characterisation and feed preparation
Significant energy can be saved downstream by reducing the amount of rock moved for processing.
Ore characterisation and feed preparation opportunities, where the impact of investment is primarily
amplified in downstream processing benefits, will be discussed with system optimisation in Section
4.4. In this section, we highlight some of the opportunities that impact upstream energy productivity,
namely:
Improved characterisation of ore bodies by using 3D geometallurgical models to target the
highest concentration ore bodies for blasting and extraction (Department of Industry, 2012)
Smarter blasting (discussed in more detail on page 33)
in-situ processing underground
Early gangue rejection strategies, such as coarse gravity separation, low-grade pebble
rejection from SAG product, and pre-concentration by screening and ore sorting (Ballantyne,
Hildren, & Powell, 2012)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
27
Improving the efficiency of crushing and grinding ores by pre-concentration also reduces
water requirements and, therefore, the pumping requirements (Smith, 2014a)
Feed-quality improvement using screening- and sensor-based techniques to sort and reject
low-grade ore/waste at the earliest stage possible (Department of Industry, 2012), thus,
eliminating the transport and handling from mine-to-mill.
Sorting at multiple points prior to grinding
Blending of ore and stockpile management to determine best feed blend, which can increase
processing throughput.
4.3.2. Comminution processes
Key areas for potential improvement include:
Flow-sheet optimisation; modifying the existing circuit to push size reduction forward (i.e.
crushing) so that less grinding is required (Buckingham et al., 2011)
Choosing the optimum target size(s) at each stage of the circuit through understanding
liberation size; the target size could be increased, which means less material going to further
size reduction (Pokrajcic, 2008)
Automation of circuit operation using expert control systems; this includes optimising the use
of existing control systems with regular tuning and maintenance of the systems (Australian
Government, 2010)
Using more efficient comminution equipment (e.g. more crushing, HPGR and IsaMIl);
tumbling mills are generally the least-efficient comminution machines and should be phased
out where possible (Napier-Munn, in press).
Improve the energy efficiency of motor systems. Electric motors are used to drive crushing
and grinding mills. These consume a significant percentage of energy in comminution and
hence improving their efficiency can make a significant difference (Ravani von Ow &
Bomvisinho, 2010). For example, Barrick Gold Corporation achieved 4.4% energy efficiency
improvements in their motor systems in their mills (Smith, 2014b)
4.3.3. Froth floatation/ minerals separation
Electrical energy contributes significantly to the running costs of mineral separation through froth
floatation. There are many energy efficiency opportunities to reduce these costs as illustrated in The
relative performance on the secondary metric, compared to other key commodity export nations has
not been assessed yet. Such a comparison would reveal the trend in relative energy price
competitiveness of Australian miners
Table 1 (reproduced from Murphy, 2013)
Table 2: Energy saving opportunities in an existing flotation plant
Process Maintenance Re-engineering
Feed size optimisation
Pulp density optimisation
Airflow rate optimisation
Correct drive train alignment
Correct belt tensioning
Maintaining lubrication schedule
Alternate flotation mechanisms
Pipe re-routing
Sump design
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
28
Process Maintenance Re-engineering
Impeller speed optimisation
Revision of control philosophy
Wear component replacement Re-size pumps
Assess high efficiency motors
Assess variable speed drives
Opportunities also exist to maximise a plant’s energy efficiency in the design phase. Design, layout
and equipment selection should all be performed with the view to optimise the energy efficiency of the
circuit. Key considerations in this regard, when selecting a new froth floatation separation plants are:
Utilise maximum possible flotation particle size.
Maximise use of gravity flow of intermediate streams rather than pumping.
Evaluate the power use of process equipment such as flotation tanks and pumps on
predicted energy consumption rather than installed motor power.
Ensure energy usage is included in the decision making process and is highlighted in the
financial evaluation of different options.
Judiciously use safety factors in flowsheet design. Overdesign can lead to a less energy
efficient process (Murphy, 2013).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
29
4.3.4. Hauling/materials movement
There are many opportunities to improve the energy efficiency of materials at mine site and beyond.
On-site energy-efficiency improvement opportunities can be broadly grouped into the following three
areas:
Improve haul truck fuel efficiency or use alternatives such as conveyer belts (i.e.
electrification) or Rail-Veyor® systems21
Retrofit electric draglines to make them more energy efficient, or use overburden slushers
(OS) instead of traditional electric draglines (Department of Industry, 2012, as cited in Smith,
2014a)
Loader efficiencies
21 The Rail-Veyor® systems combined the functionality of rail haulage, trucks and conveyor. More information is available at
http://www.railveyor.com/about-rail-veyor-bulk-material-handling/
Box 10: Emerging developments in froth floatation
Currently, mineral ores are crushed and ground down to a size small enough to undergo froth floatation to
separate out the valuable minerals from the mineral ore. Thus, there is an upper limit on the size of the
particles that can be treated at present, so all the material to be floated must be ground to below this size.
The top grinding size for flotation with current technology is typically 150 microns, not much bigger than a
human hair. If the top size were raised to 600 microns, the grinding energy would be reduced by half.
(Smith 2014b). This is because the amount of energy needed to grind particles into smaller and smaller
pieces rises exponentially as illustrated in the diagram below, reproduced from the CEEC website (CEEC,
2012). So reducing the size required for froth floatation has significant energy efficiency implications
Laureate Professor Graeme Jameson,
based at Newcastle University, is
developing a new flotation process – the
Fluidised Bed Flotation Cell – especially for
the flotation of coarse particles. He
reasoned that the cause of the low
recoveries achieved with coarse particles
was the high degree of turbulence in
conventional flotation cells. Instead of
using a mechanical agitator, he found that
if the particles were levitated with an upflow
of water in a fluidised bed, he could provide
a gentle environment for contacting
bubbles and particles.
Very high recoveries have been achieved with mineral particles up to at least 1.4mm in size – three times
the size of an average grain of sand. This offers the potential to save energy in crushing and grinding by
an order of magnitude. As well as saving energy, the fluidized bed cell has the potential for significant
reductions in water use, because it can take feed slurries that are twice as dense as used in current
practice. The new technology will soon be trialled on real ores at an operating concentrator (Smith 2014b).
Further information about this new flotation process, currently in the R&D phase, please click here.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
30
We will briefly discuss opportunities related to truck performance improvement in more detail given the
cost associated from both a capital and diesel usage perspective. Furthermore, the recent PwC Mining
Equipment Productivity Index (MEPI) suggests that the performance of trucks in particular has been
declining since 2009. A graphic from the recent PwC Mine 2014 report is reproduced as Figure 14 to
illustrate this point (PwC, 2014b).
Figure 14: PwC MEPI – Open-pit loader and truck performance index (2003 = 1)
The efficiency of hauling processes is influenced by mine planning, production scheduling, pit design,
dump design and the geography of sites (Department of Industry, 2011). The performance
assessment by PwC illustrated above has a capacity and, therefore, capital utilisation dimension, but
this will also flow through to operating dimensions impacting energy costs such as idle time, route
optimisation and other related factors, as discussed below. The range of strategies to improve the
performance of trucks includes:
Light-weighting such as the use of aluminium truck beds in coal so that less energy is used
moving the truck, thus investing the energy in moving coal
Route optimisation to minimise stoppage and gradient and maximise the duration of constant
speed
Optimised driving practices, maintenance and management
Use of conveyor systems with easily replaceable parts ensures fuel is not wasted on moving
the vehicle itself; parts can be replaced cheaply and quickly, and there is virtually no
maintenance downtime
The use of data is central to most strategies. Sophisticated on-board data collection and real-time
information display capabilities also enable the evaluation of haul road designs to maximise the
duration of optimal truck speeds, as well as improve driving practices. This has been effectively
illustrated by, for example, the Fortescue Metals Group, which identified 768kL in fuel savings
associated with a single unnecessary stop per payload cycle across its fleet at the Cloudbreak and
Christmas Creek sites (Department of Industry, 2011).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
31
4.3.5. Ventilation
Underground mines can use 15–20 tonnes of air to produce 1 tonne of ore (Natural Resources
Canada, 2013) making ventilation one of the biggest contributors to energy use. Ensuring that
redundant workings are not ventilated and have been properly closed off can make for relatively easy
savings. Recent innovations in ventilation include polymer ducts and improved controls to promote
optimum ventilation. Rigid polymer ducting, which reduces air friction, is an energy-efficient alternative
to large ducts made of fabric. Transport costs are also reduced, as the sheets are assembled at the
mine (Mining Association of Canada, 2012).
Optimum ventilation is important from both a labour productivity and energy-management perspective.
Air quality, temperature and pressure (i.e. air conditions) are essential for maintaining a satisfactory
work environment for miners. However, since 2012 there has been an increased obligation on the
industry to mitigate health risks. This is a consequence of the World Health Organisation adding diesel
particulate matter to its list of Grade 1 carcinogens, after concluding that long-term exposure to the
fumes was a cause of lung cancer (International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2012).
Consequently, although maintaining optimal air conditions is complex, it is essential from a productivity
and safety risk-mitigation perspective. Advanced control systems are available that support more
energy efficient ventilation, enabling the supply of air only when it is required and where it is needed
and adapting the flow to the specific needs of those areas. Using thermodynamic modelling, these
systems simulate airflow, including the movement of diesel particles, pressure and temperature
(Mining Association of Canada, 2012).
Innovative, cash-flow neutral financing solutions for advanced ventilation systems are also available in
the Australian market.
4.3.6. Fuel switching
Fuel switching could become an attractive alternative to diesel trucks and diesel electricity generation,
especially given that nearly all liquid fuels are imported and the forecast is for the Australian dollar to
continue its downward adjustment. A number of options that are increasingly gaining attention are:
Diesel-solar hybrid generation sets that can provide cost-effective and reliable supplemental
power in remote and regional areas (Vorrath, 2014)
Wind turbines, which can be financed though power purchase agreements
Consultation note ...
In light of technological advances, is there scope to review the ‘rules of thumb’ used on the industry to
trigger reviews to move from decline to shaft designs and / or trucks to conveyer belts?
Is there scope for wide spread electrification using e.g. hybrid diesel-renewable energy solutions to assist
marginal mines in moving down the production cost curve? What factors, other than high upfront capital
cost (e.g. operational flexibility of trucks) is limiting the uptake?
What options should be considered to de-risk such a major capital commitment in an industry characterised
with volatile revenue streams? What is the scope for:
innovative ownership models
government policies such as accelerated depreciation
other?
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
32
Electric powered underground vehicles (Mineweb, 2013) and LNG driven trucks – e.g. Shell
Canada and Caterpillar signed an agreement in December 2013 to test a new engine and
fuel mix using LNG, which could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and operating costs
(PwC, 2014b)
Energy generation from waste coal seam gas (see shaded box below).
4.3.7. Data and management practices
Best practice energy management is pervasive across all the areas discussed above, including data
collection, monitoring and control. In this section, we highlight a few general areas of potential
improvement, namely:
Benchmarking,
Energy contract management; and
Procurement.
Achieving progress on energy efficiency is underpinned by corporate support, clear plans and the
establishment of accountabilities and targets. Benchmarking is a key tool in establishing targets. Work
done by the CRC ORE, Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre (SMI JKMRC) and the University
of Queensland in benchmarking comminution energy consumption is now providing a reliable and rich
dataset to support mine specialists. Tools developed through this process can assist the industry in
identifying inefficient parts of the comminution circuit, changes in grind size to improve efficiency, and
ore upgrade strategies (Ballantyne & Powell, 2014).
Energy contract management and associated demand-management strategies can deliver savings, in
particular for mine sites using grid electricity. Many sites are not aware of the terms of the electricity
contracts negotiated by the ‘corporate office’ e.g. they don’t realise the significance of peak demand
(KW or KVA) charges for equipment of their size (drag lines, long walls, mills), and the fact that energy
consumption (kWh) often makes up less than 50% of total electricity charges.
The energy profile of many mines is determined by contract miners, rather than mine owners.
Integrating energy considerations into the performance metrics of procurement contracts of contract
miners is an essential part of any energy productivity strategy.
4.4. Strategy area 2: System optimisation
Regardless of commodity prices or ore grades, mining companies need to design processing
strategies that will withstand the cyclic nature of the industry. Whilst many energy-management
actions in mines already adopt a ‘whole of system’ view of energy, operational silos and perceived
competitive differentiation between miners in the same geographic area hinders progress.
Box 11: The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) supports fuel switching
initiatives in the mining sector
The CEFC is providing $75 million to Energy Developments Limited (EDL) for investment in new projects
generating energy from waste coal mine gas and landfill gas as well as remote hybrid renewables projects
(
CEFC
,
2013
)
.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
33
In the following two sections, we will discuss tactics and strategies that can facilitate system
optimisation at the mine level, as well as beyond the mine, upstream and downstream, across the
value chain at industry level.
4.4.1. Mine site
Systems optimisation, at site level, incorporates process control systems, which are widely used to
monitor and control particular processes within a mine site, often enabled by advanced communication
protocols, such as remote stations (sensors), automated or operator-driven commands are sent to
remote station control devices (actuators) (Department of Energy, Resources and Tourism, 2010b).
It requires management to take a broader view of the business, beyond their own operational silos,
during both design and operation stages. Adopting a system-wide view of everything that happens on
a mine site can unlock significant upstream and downstream benefits. We will discuss this with
reference to opportunities and developments pertaining to:
Smart blasting
Characterisation of ore and target mineral size
Optimal processing strategy
Whole of site operations
Smart blasting
Modifying blasting practices to achieve a more suitable mill feed size can increase throughput, as well
as reduce downstream energy demand, by as much as 30 to 40%. Chemical energy in explosives is
the cheapest form of energy used in the mines. Whilst it has been recognised for some time that high
impact blasting can reduce the need for downstream crushing and grinding, blast energy can cause fly
rock, excessive vibration, air blast and wall damage. A team of researchers recently had a
breakthrough in energy efficient blasting that could reduce the downstream energy demand by as
much as 40% whilst avoiding the environmental and safety concerns associated with high intensity
blasting (ORICA, n.d.). See shaded box below.
Box 12: Energy efficient blasting to reduce the downstream energy demand
Dr Geoff Brent and his research team was recently awarded the CEEC Medal for ground-breaking research
in ultra-high intensity blasting (x5 the standard practice) that has the potential to deliver a step change in
mine process efficiency, increasing mill circuit throughput by up to 40% (ORICA, n.d.). Upstream energy
consumption increases, but end-to-end there is a significant improvement in the use of energy in the
process. This new blasting method, which overcomes past safety and environmental concerns, involves:
dual blast layers within a single blast event that is initiated with electronic blasting
systems. An upper blast layer comprising conventional powder factors is initiated first
and the broken rock is allowed to fall to rest before initiation of the lower layer which
comprises ultra-high powder factors and hence considerably higher blast energy. The
broken rock from the earlier-firing upper layer provides an effective buffer to avoid
fly rock, enabling powder factors in the range 2–5 kg of explosives per cubic metre of
rock to be achieved with control
(CEEC, n.d.)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
34
The next challenge is to determine how to recover the ore from rock without having to make the
particles small enough so that the material presents on the surface to be dissolved. Gold recovery is
still achieved using cyanide – a process discovered in the late 1800s in Scotland. Developments in the
areas of heap leaching and in-situ leaching of rock are particularly encouraging for the gold-mining
sector where one tonne of rock is currently moved to obtain 4–8 grams of gold (i.e. 4–8 parts per
million).
Characterisation of ore and target mineral size
Characterisation of feed ore based on variability ensures that performance is optimised for different
feed characteristics. There are numerous research programs and market-ready offerings in this area,
such as the CRC ORE Grade Engineering®. The reported production impact from Grade
Engineering® includes a 5.7% improvement in throughput and 6.5% improvement in ore grade using
4.3% more energy (Scott, 2014). This occasions a net gain in energy productivity, despite increased
energy use.
The CSIRO also recently announced a new breakthrough using a magnetic resonance technique to
develop a sorting sensor designed for use at mine sites and processing plants processing larger, low-
grade deposits at thousands of tonnes per hour (CSIRO, 2013).
It is also important to target mineral ore product size, or grind size as it significantly affects the energy
intensity of the comminution. The final grind size of mineral ore particle needed to be small enough to
separate valuable mineral from ore bodies during froth flotation. Progressive mineral liberation is an
alternative strategy for the selection of a target product size for multi-mineral ores is the progressive
liberation strategy. This involves liberating one mineral or one group of minerals at a time (Department
of Industry 2012).
Optimal processing strategy
New deep-vein mining methods include in-situ or underground processing, which removes the need to
transport large volumes of waste rock to processing sites.
The CSIRO, in a joint venture with Glencore, has developed a sensor that gauges how well the mill is
working by monitoring sound waves. Acoustic data analysis from sensors across mill chambers
provides an indication of the distribution of steel balls in the mills that grind ore. According to
Glencore’s head of mineral processing technology, Lindsay Clark:
The ultimate plan for using this equipment is to reduce costs, reduce power consumption
and to also reduce maintenance costs by having the media spread throughout the mill.
(Chambers, 2014)
AngloGold Ashanti also achieved significant productivity gains, including in energy, by optimising the
control of the crushing and milling circuit at their Australian mine. This was achieved by modifying the
software logic and control algorithms, without the need for new hardware, enabling operators to
proactively use the control system to keep the plant working within defined operational parameters
(Clean Energy Ministerial, 2013).
Whole of site operations
Application of new mining methods based on the latest advances in robotics, as well as real-time
monitoring of the flow of rock and ore through the mine and processing plant, are no longer the
exclusive domain of large miners. It is increasingly the way operations are conducted.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
35
BHPBilliton and Rio Tinto have been applying Lean and Six Sigma practices for many years. More
recently, this approach has been adopted by Anglo American, which reviewed and restructured 50%
of its operations with a focus on executing planning and production in a similar way to a manufacturing
company. Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Mark Cutifani is reported as saying that the ideal scenario for
Anglo American would be similar to the Toyota operating model, such as lean manufacturing, Six
Sigma and Integrated Asset Planning to transform its mines (Leonida, 2014).
Previously Anglo worked with CRC ORE at its Mogalakwena platinum mine in South Africa to resource
characterisation, smart blasting and ore sorting, to achieve a 2-2.5 fold increase in ore body
concentration for the feed into “grinding” mills, leading to significant energy savings (CRC ORE, 2013,
cited in Smith, 2014b). The mine also slashed waste generated by 50% from 200Mt/y to100Mt/y. Over
the next 15 years, this is expected to save the company US$1.7 billion dollars. The new operating
model for Anglo’s Moranbah coal mine in Australia, implemented with no extra capital, has seen a
significant increase in production in 18 months from 3.5Mt/y in 2012 to 5.5Mt/y in 2013. The mine
broke the world record for long-wall production earlier this year (Leonida, 2014).
Finally, the design of mines can impact the energy profile of the mine and need to be a consideration
in the procurement of design services for new mines.
4.4.2. Beyond the mine site
System optimisation extends beyond the ROM and across mines to include:
Open platform development: Anglo American has worked with over 30 other companies on a
new in-situ method for mining narrow-vein deposits (Leonida, 2014)
Exploitation of regional proximities to form joint ventures to develop and operate shared
infrastructure, thus improving profit margins of existing operations, utilisation of assets and,
in turn, return on capital. An Australian example includes the potential Hunter Valley
collaboration between Glencore and RioTinto (PwC, 2014b)
Smarter exploration to detect even deeper mineral deposits and modelling deposits with
regards to their potential economic assets and challenges right from the earliest stages of
exploration. This could have a material impact on the cost:value equation in the industry from
exploration through to production.
Consultation note...
Experience from the manufacturing sector suggests that the waste or sub-optimal use of energy, often the
second largest input after raw materials in that sector, is frequently overlooked in lean problem solving as it
is deemed too complex from a technical or organisational perspective (Hammer, Rutten, & Somers, 2014).
McKinsey & Company and the Institute for Machine Tools and Industrial Management of the Technical
University of Munich have, however, found that analysing the production steps for possible energy wastage
and then developing an optimised production process typically results in sustainable energy cost reductions
of up to 10–15%, with payback time below three years (LEP, 2014).
Although miners are adopting lean principles in their operations as discussed above, information is not
readily available on the extent to which energy is a key consideration in the adoption of new operating
models based on principles of lean manufacturing.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
36
4.5. Strategy area 3: Business model transformation
With new CEOs at the helm of nearly half the Top 40 mining companies over the last two years (PwC,
2014b), coupled with prevailing industry conditions, it is not surprising that the industry expects new
business models to become a key driver of performance.
A 2013 survey of 60 mining executives from 25 companies representing $452 billion in 2012-revenue
suggested that business model transformation will play a more important role in innovation in the
future than at present.22 This is illustrated in Figure 15, reproduced from the 2013 Mining Innovation
State of Play survey by Virtual Consulting International (VCI, 2013a, 2013b).
Figure 15: Where in the value chain will innovation create the greatest value over the next 10 to 20 years?
New business models adopted by the majors, such as remotely operated and autonomous mining and
truckless mines, continue to evolve, whilst real-time information on mobile devices is finding
application across the sector. Much of the change is linked to miners adopting ‘big data’ management
as a core strategy. We will discuss a number of the emerging themes:
Autonomous mining supported by on-mine or remote operating centres
Truckless mines enabled by in-pit crushing conveyers
Real-time ‘big data’ transformation
4.5.1. Autonomous mining
In recent years, a focus in mining innovation has been the introduction of remotely operated and
autonomous mining equipment and systems. These technologies represent a class of innovations that
involve a step change in the research and development (R&D) effort and are likely to profoundly
change how minerals are mined and processed in the future. Automated equipment can be better
22
Mining and mining service company respondents based in Australian based included representatives from: BHPBIlliton,
Fortescue Metals Group, Mount Gibson Iron, Gold Fields, Realm Coal, MMG Ltd, Leighton, Ngarda Civil and Mining and the
CSIRO. Many other mining companies active in Australia participated from their Head Office locations, including RioTinto,
Newmont, AngloGold Ashanti and Anglo American.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
37
utilised, operates in a more controlled and precise manner and has a longer useful life, resulting in
significant efficiency improvements. In many instances, efficiency improvements translate into reduced
requirements for energy and consumables, as well as less waste (Fisher & Schnittger, 2012).
Furthermore, it eliminates the need to fly operators to remote mining sites. Consequently, these
innovations may initially be driven by factors other than energy efficiency, as their adoption
dramatically alters the traditional relationship between capital, labour and energy as a key production
input, and can lead to improved energy productivity.
Existing innovations range from specific pieces of equipment such as remote-controlled or
autonomous vehicles and drilling equipment to entire mines that have been designed and built around
automated systems. For example, autonomous haulers are already used by or are planned for
RioTinto, BHPBilliton and Fortescue. Autonomous load haul dump (LHD) and truck haulage
systems have on-board intelligence and perception technologies, as well as GPS to reduce fuel
consumption, extend tyre life, as well as optimise fleet utilisation (Smith, 2014b). Apart from the
on-site energy savings, remotely managed sites also reduce the transport cost of ‘fly-in-fly-out’ mine
operations that has become prevalent across much of Australia.
Rio Tinto’s Mine of the Future™ program aims to automate and remotely control almost all aspects of
the company’s Pilbara operations from Perth (See the shaded box showcasing this Rio Tinto initiative
in Section 3.1.). The Brisbane Processing Excellence Centre is the latest development in this program;
it enables a line of sight to processing data from seven operations around the world (Edwards, 2014).
Furthermore, when converting its Argyle diamond mine in Australia from an open cut to an
underground mine, Rio Tinto also invested in one of the world's largest automated systems (RioTinto,
2012). A prototype cave tracking system has been installed at Argyle that enables real-time ore flow
monitoring for block caves23 (CRCMining, 2014a).
Automated underground mining systems typically allow for greater accuracy of cutting sequences in
continuous long wall mining and haulage operations, reducing shift changes and operator fatigue.
Significant efficiency, productivity and safety improvements in underground mining can also be
achieved by investing in automated electric powered underground drilling, scooping and materials
movement machines. This kind of equipment can now replace diesel powered underground mining
machines, thereby eliminating diesel fumes, reducing the amount of ventilation required and cutting
energy demand by up to 90% (Chew, Adkins, & MacGinley, 2013; Mineweb, 2013 & Vella, 2013, cited
in Smith, 2014b)
4.5.2. Truckless mines
In a 2012 statement, BHPBilliton executive Marcus Randolph (Ker, 2012, cited in Smith, 2014a),
indicated that the company deems mobile IPCC systems to be transformative in that they will enable
virtually ‘truckless’ mine operations:
When you run a truck, it takes 10 to 11 employees for every truck. It takes 4½ to five to run
it, all the crews that do the maintenance on it, all the camp people that do the camp
cleaning and cooking and everything else. If you go truckless (and use input crushers and
conveyors) you do not need any of these staff ... at a time when you see increasing diesel
prices ... getting rid of trucks or using fewer trucks is desirable
Marcus Randolph, BHPBilliton
23 block caving increasingly becoming the method of choice for economically mining a range of massive low-grade deposits,
predicting and monitoring caving behaviour is critical to safe and efficient mine operation
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
38
Australian quarry operator Boral (see shaded box below) has been adopting the in-pit crushing
conveyers system, as has Brazilian miner, Vale, which is reported to be replacing trucks at some of its
Brazilian iron ore mines with IPCCs. Replacing haul trucks with in-pit crushing conveyers has the
potential to reduce energy costs by up to 70%, but also yields significant labour productivity and
maintenance gains. In-pit crushing conveyers replace the need for many haul trucks, which also
reduces water consumption as less water is needed for dust suppression in open-cut mining (Smith,
2014a).
4.5.3. Real-time ‘big data’ transformation
Transforming ‘big data’, including information on ore grade, fleet, production, financials, safety,
equipment temperature and fuel consumption, into real-time information to support operational
decision-making will become a key differentiator for high-performing mines.
Real-time information to support effective decision-making on site has already brought about a step-
change in Fortescue Metals Group’s Cloudbreak iron ore mine. Supervisors have intuitive visual
Box 13: Anatomy of a truckless system
Reproduced from Australian Bulk Handling
Review, 2013
Boral’s strategy is to optimise its quarrying
process by moving away from the traditional
load and haul methodology. By adopting in-pit
crushing conveyer systems, it has been able to
reduce the number of trucks and people moving
between the blast site and the fixed crushing
plant.
In a conventional crushing plant, a drill and blast
team blast the shot and develop a muck pile. A
front-end loader at the muck pile loads haul
trucks, which transport the rock to a fixed
primary crusher.
With the in-put crushing solution at Peppertree,
an excavator located on the muck pile loads
material directly into the Lokotrack’s hopper.
The rock moves along a grizzly feeder that
passes undersized rock directly onto the
machine’s outbound conveyor.
Only the large rock that needs to be crushed
passes through the jaw crusher. In this way,
energy isn’t wasted on passing small material
through the crusher.
Metso’s Lokotrack LT160 in-pit crusher for Boral’s
Peppertree quarry
Crushed rock is then transported to the fixed, in-pit belt conveyor via two mobile conveyors. The fixed
conveyor carries crushed rock from the in-pit crusher to the fixed plant for further processing.
After the blast, a wheel loader cleans the quarry floor and the Lokotrack moves to the new muck pile. The
in-pit crusher can be relocated in minutes by an operator via a remote console worn around the operator’s
waist.
(
Australian Bulk Handlin
g
Review, 2013
)
.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
39
dashboards at their fingertips, so that issues can be rectified mid-shift (e.g. moving trucks from
different pits to optimise the fleet and maximise productivity). IT News reports that Fortescue’s fleet of
RH340 diggers each produced over 5500 tonnes per hour over the first three months of 2014, up 11%,
while its trucks are hauling over 70 more tonne-kilometres per truck every week. Fortescue expects to
realise $30 million in annual cost savings from the real-time reporting of productivity data to the mobile
devices of its field operations team (Winterford, 2014).
4.6. Strategy area 4: Preserve/increased output and quality
Quality in this context relates to both the product, as well as the real and perceived impact of the
output on the quality of the environment or society in general.
Most of the systems optimisation and transformative business models will, as discussed, have as their
explicit intent, increased throughput. Some of the improvements and emerging models also have an
impact on the ‘quality’ of output from a societal perspective, for example:
Anglo American’s Mogalakwena platinum mine, i.e. reduced waste, as discussed earlier
Improving the efficiency of crushing and grinding ores by pre-concentration improves
throughput, but also reduces water requirements and, therefore, pumping requirements
(Smith, 2014a)
Emerging markets, such China and India, are key customers of Australian coal and iron ore exports.
Changing environmental standards in these export markets suggest that value-adding activities such
as washing coal to reduce sulphur content or grinding out impurities before shipping iron ore will
become important in preserving market share. As reported by PwC in Mine 2014, northern Chinese
steel mills that typically use low quality iron ore are struggling to limit carbon emissions from blast
furnaces. This is resulting in a push for so-called ‘green iron ore’ to address pollution concerns in
major Chinese cities. Suppliers of iron ore are being encouraged to deliver a blend of ore that will
reduce emissions (PwC, 2014b). Responding to this key customer’s demands will be particularly
important for Australian miners in the current supply environment.
Consultation note...
Do we understand the full benefit case for ‘big data’? Evidence of the ‘energy specific’ application of ‘big
data’ on mines is not readily available. Industry views and contributions to enhance the evidence base will
be sought during the 2xEP consultation process.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
40
Consultation note...
This section presented a range of opportunities, but we recognise that the type of mine, size and technological
sophistication vary significantly. The pathways to energy productivity improvement are, therefore, likely to be
different. So, where is the common ground? Is there scope to continuously improve the sector’s productivity if
the industry combines resources (i.e. time, knowledge and investment) in:
signing up to specific standards (e.g. data communication)?
promoting best practices and establishing performance benchmarks?
progressing specific emerging technologies?
other?
Ultimately, is there sufficient commonality to develop a series of pathways targeting energy productivity
opportunities and barriers for industry or ‘groups’ of miners?
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
41
5. Barriers to energy productivity
Australia’s METS sector is a world leader in energy-efficient equipment, technology, services and
knowledge. Investment in innovations has led to world-class solutions for improved efficiency in
mining. However, take-up rates of these energy-efficient technologies in Australia are low and,
according to CEEC, in some cases these technologies have been more widely adopted in other
countries. It is imperative that barriers to the adoption of new technologies and improved energy
productivity are overcome to improve returns on research investment and maintain the
competitiveness of the Australian mining sector.
The primary reasons for a lack of focus on energy productivity in the Australian mining sector to date
are:
Energy cost is not a ‘big enough’ issue; a small share of operating cost
Short payback thresholds for investments for ‘non-core’ assets
Management practices and cultural barriers (i.e. the way things are, or have always been,
done in the company or industry)
Split incentives for energy efficient site development and operations
Information, knowledge and expertise.
Each of the above barriers will be briefly discussed below.
5.1. Energy is not a ‘big enough’ issue
Rapid change in the mining sector over the last 10 to 15 years has masked significant changes that
have also occurred in the energy sector over this period, reflected in the three distinct stages below:
Era 1 – energy is cheap and therefore viewed as a small fixed overhead to production
Era 2 – energy cost started to increase, but with healthy margins during the peak of the
commodities boom (or super cycle) from 2005 to 2013, mine managers’ focus remained
steadfast on growing output whilst operating costs were a lower order consideration
Era 3 (starting 2013) – commodity prices ‘normalise’, whilst the focus remained on volume
throughput to maintain revenues. With declining margins, miners recognised the need to
reduce operating costs/tonne in order to remain profitable.
Although energy cost may still be as low as 5–10% of total operating costs (see Figure 5) falling
commodity prices and declining margins, mean that the management of energy cost is now a
significant issue, especially for marginal mines (see Figure 6).
Please note...
This section is intended to provide a starting point for engagement with mining sector stakeholders in
considering what action the industry could take to address barriers and where action or support may be
required from government to remove or reduce such barriers.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
42
5.2. Short payback threshold for investments
Quarterly performance expectations place pressure on short ROI cycles. This results in short-term
decision making while energy productivity strategies often require longer ROI periods. Furthermore,
with the deterioration in mine profitability in FY 2013 (Figure 6) and the reported drop in return on
capital employed (ROCE) by the Top 40 miners to 5% as at December 2013,24 investor sentiment has
shifted and shareholders are now placing pressure on mines to improve returns in the short term
(KordaMentha, 2013; PwC, 2014b).
Although the typical mine life and planning horizon is very long, reporting cycles are shorter and this is
clearly a time when the focus of miners will shift towards:
Reduction in operating expenditure, beyond ‘quick fix’ headcount reductions
Added scrutiny of capital investment and deferment as management is more likely to
continuing running operations with old and possibly inefficient equipment as persistently low
commodity prices may shorten the productive life of a mine site.
However, the unrealistically short payback periods (as short as one to two years) often demanded in
Australia hinder investment in sustainable energy productivity gains. This is partly an internal company
issue, but it is exacerbated by the terms available from commercial lenders. Mainstream financiers
typically do not recognise cash-flow benefits associated with energy projects, whilst the loan duration
of three to five years is often significantly shorter than the useful life of the equipment.
5.3. Management practices and cultural barriers
One hundred per cent of participants in the 2013 Mining Innovation State of Play Survey recognised
that innovation is key to meeting corporate objectives. However, 73% indicated that management
focus is on ‘incremental innovation’ and 69% focus on innovation efforts over a zero to three-year
period. The headline findings from this survey are reproduced from the Virtual Consulting International
report as Figure 16 below (VCI, 2013b).
Figure 16: Headline results from the 2013 Mining Innovation State of Play survey
24 Compared to 10% in 2009 during the global financial crisis.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
43
Miners’ perceptions of the historical success of innovation at their operations (i.e. only 25% are
deemed successful) may contribute to greater risk aversion, possibly explaining in part why many of
the opportunities discussed in the previous section have not been adopted broadly by miners. This
trend may be partly explained by the prolonged ‘mining boom’, impacting the way mining businesses
operate, as reflected in a quote from Ernst & Young in their Business risks facing mining and metals
2014–15:
The super cycle lasted for so long it had the impact of altering the DNA of mining
companies to adapt the processes, performance measures and culture solely toward
growth. The size and scale of the problem is too large for conventional single point
solutions to work. To attain the improvements needed for sustainable productivity gains at
profitable growth levels requires broad business transformation
(Ernst & Young, 2014)
The above quote amplified CEEC’s finding during their 2012 roadmap development process. They
found a focus on maximising throughput at almost any cost. Consequently, current organisational
practices do not encourage maximising efficiency. Many mining companies also suffer from ‘silo
structures’, with weak accountability for energy efficiency across these silos. With obvious exceptions,
CEEC’s finding confirmed the generally conservative, risk-averse nature of the industry, which
contributed to a reluctance to adopt new technologies or support alternative strategies. Finally, a lack
of systems knowledge in the face of increasing systems complexity provides little incentive to be an
early adopter, with the gap between project owners and engineers on one side and technology
developers on the other hindering innovative technology transfer (Tim Napier-Munn, 2014).
These issues identified by CEEC are in sharp contrast to the list of attributes of ‘successful companies
in addressing the productivity challenge’ as listed in the recent Ernst & Young report, some of which
are listed below:
Bold, not incremental
Take an end-to-end view
Eliminate silos
Learn from history, but be open to innovation (Ernst & Young, 2014)
5.4. Split incentives for energy efficient site development and operations
Unless energy is a key consideration in contracts with mine designers, developers and operators, the
long-term energy profile of mines can be adversely impacted and energy cost becomes a driver of
operating expenses. A soon to be published guide produced by the Department of Industry illustrates
this point by means of an example in which a mine owns and operates the mills, but contracts out the
extraction and transport of ore bodies from mine-to-mill on a $/tonne basis. This KPI in itself does not
consider the energy cost associated with crushing and grinding rocks into smaller particle sizes.
Spending more on smart blasting to break up ore bodies into smaller particle sizes could save much
more energy (and cost) in the crushing and grinding phase of mineral processing (Smith &
Stasinopoulos, 2014).
5.5. Information, knowledge and expertise
There is no doubt that the mining industry employs some of the smartest, most talented and
sophisticated managers and professionals. However, there is a perception that the industry has
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
44
‘decimated’ its comminution knowledge base in recent years (Tim Napier-Munn, 2014). Furthermore,
‘silo’ structures, as discussed above, limit the cross pollination of ideas, shared insights and
understanding of ‘the whole picture’.
Lack of site-level awareness of the structure of energy contracts and the impact of peak demand
charges on the total cost of electricity, in particular, can undermine energy productivity programs (e.g.
energy savings do not translate into financial savings if consumption constitutes less than 50% of total
electricity charges.)
Furthermore, unless companies use comprehensive energy-auditing systems on an enterprise-wide
basis, the true energy cost of operations will be difficult to determine. This is not a common practice.
Therefore building a business case to justify investment in more energy productive systems is
challenging.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
45
6. Overcoming the barriers
Barriers typically cannot be addressed independently of each other. Unless business is confident
about its future, it will not invest; if staff on sites do not have suitable data, they will not be able to
make business cases confidently; without the skills and training to use information, they will not be
able to design effective solutions; and without good quality business cases, finance will not flow to
fund capital projects. Multiple barriers need to be addressed simultaneously. The areas for
consideration are discussed under the following headings:
Collaborative innovation
People and organisational capabilities
Investment on energy programs
Incentives
Regulation and standards
Other considerations.
6.1. Collaborative innovation
The A2SE 2xEP Roadmap considers innovation in its broadest context, including technological,
process and business model innovation. It is therefore central to all four strategic areas of focus for
improving energy productivity.
The NSW Government’s support for industry-led Innovation Hubs is well-timed to exploit the significant
opportunities to increase the value-add of products and services delivered by the Australian economy
through enhanced partnerships. The first of these hubs, the NSW Energy Innovation Knowledge Hub,
based at Newcastle Institute for Energy and Resources (NIER), was launched in September 2014.
CSIRO Mining also carries out strategic research into technologies that maximise the long term value
of resources.
A recent report on Industry Research Collaboration highlights that 80% of Australian business leaders
believe that innovation is the main driver of a competitive economy and that businesses engaging in
collaborative innovation with research organisations are more likely to report increases in productivity
(NSW Business Chamber, 2014). This is particularly relevant to the mining sector in light of the 2013
Mining Innovation State of Play Survey results discussed earlier, and the R&D spend by the mining
industry:
Please note...
This section is intended to provide some ideas for discussion with mining stakeholders in the course of
developing the 2xEP roadmap over the next six months. This section is not intended to prescribe solutions. It
provides an initial ‘list’ of potential concepts for a co-ordinated sector-wide program.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
46
Mining is significantly lagging behind other industries when it comes to innovation.
For example, our total R&D spend is probably 10% of what the global petroleum sector is
spending this year. If we don’t make step changes in technology, leadership practices and
production, someone else will. The organisation is the starting point for change...This sort of
change (open platform collaboration) is imperative to the future of the mining industry …
working to achieve a common goal and no one will get to keep the intellectual property.
Initially, it was a painful process to establish this, but it has yielded huge gains and going
forward, this type of approach will be key.
Mark Cutifani, CEO Anglo American, cited in Leonida, 2014
Many industry players already recognise this and are not only investing in research, but have been
implementing cutting-edge solutions from such collaborations. For example, RioTinto embraced this
philosophy back in 2007 when it established the Rio Tinto Centre for Mine Automation (RTCMA) at the
University of Sydney, funded by Rio Tinto with $21 million for an initial period of five years. It focuses
on robotics, sensing technologies, data fusion and systems engineering. RTCMA is one of a number
of research centres with links to universities funded by Rio Tinto (Fisher & Schnittger, 2012).
Mechanisms through which business, industry and research institutions can collaborate on innovative
solutions can also provide a platform for information sharing and capacity building. However, this will
require investment in knowledge aggregation and distribution systems built around communities of
interest, bringing together the many great initiatives already underway, such as CEEC International
Ltd.
6.2. People and organisational capabilities
Energy productivity first and foremost must come from corporate and mine-site leadership, reinforced
by organisational performance-management practices. Energy productivity needs to be considered as
a cross-functional metric and accountabilities assigned accordingly. CEEC International has already
done extensive work in this regard focussed on comminution (see shaded box below)
Please consider...
Innovation and knowledge hubs exist around the country and the globe. What needs to be done to ensure
knowledge is shared and linked, and funding does not duplicate existing programs?
Box 14: Existing CEEC Roadmap
The CEEC industry roadmap, developed in 2012,
proposed four steps:
Measure performance
Adopt best-practice technology
Implement appropriate business drivers and
KPIs
Communicate the benefits, motivate, engage
and train
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
47
Recruitment practices are an important determinant of on-the-job productivity. Individual differences
between operators, identifiable during the selection and recruitment process, can account for roughly
14% of output produced by mining equipment (PwC, 2014b). Furthermore, the role of formal and on-
the-job training programs to support an energy productivity agenda will also be important. Good
examples of programs already available include:
JKTech, the technology transfer company for the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI) at the
University of Queensland, offers a range of courses and training on plant optimisation and
sustainable productivity.25
Sustainable Minerals Institute – Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) provides
tailored training on social aspects and impacts of extractives and energy projects. The
training is designed to suit a range of groups, from frontline community relations practitioners
to community representatives, government officials and regulators, journalists as well as
industry executives. Short courses and master classes are designed to build capacity across
the industry and up-skill external stakeholders to engage with industry in a productive way.
Australian TAFE Certificate IV qualification Automation Technician, developed in response to
the rapid adoption of automated mining practices. This course targets electrical workers
wishing to up-skill in instrumentation, digital technology, process control, SCADA and human
machine interface (HMI) in automated industrial applications (CRCMining, 2014)
6.3. Investment in energy programs
Until the last 12 months, external debt finance was not readily available for energy projects. The Big 4
banks are gradually coming to grips with some energy asset classes, often with the support of the
CEFC. Some financial institutions are now offering attractive debt financing (particularly to their
existing customers) with terms of up to seven years. Off-balance-sheet options are also becoming
more common e.g. third-party build/own/operate models where clients enter into power purchase
agreements. Nonetheless, there are still some major obstacles in this area. Key among them are:
Understanding of energy use in key processes at a mine site
Reducing the perceived risk of energy projects
Overcoming the relatively small scale of many energy projects, which makes them
unattractive to financiers and not ‘deserving’ of management attention given the perceived
‘bigger’ opportunities in other parts of the operation
Turning energy-saving ideas into compelling business cases for financing, internally and
externally.
Where novel approaches are being developed to close the financing gap, it is critical that the
approaches and lessons be widely communicated through case studies.
6.4. Incentives
There is reliable evidence that incentive programs motivate companies to invest in improved energy
productivity. These can be in the form of grants, tax incentives, white certificate programs and other
25 http://www.minemanagers.com.au/sb_cache/associationnews/id/17/f/mirm
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
48
external funding. But these programs are expensive and need to be funded. Generally, this funding
comes either from government-consolidated revenue (taxpayers) or from energy users (through small
environmental charges in retail tariffs or wholesale energy prices).
The past two years have seen the conclusion of most Commonwealth Government programs and it is
not expected that the current government will introduce significant new programs (Department of
Industry, 2014a). The exception is the Commonwealth’s Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), which
offers financial incentives in the form of payments per tonne of carbon abated. The first auction
awarded contracts at an average price of $13.95 per tonne of abatement (Department of the
Environment, 2015). Thus, the ERF could provide competitive incentive payments for energy
productivity improvements, but it is unlikely to have an impact on energy project viability.
The ERF legislation could eventually require carbon-intensive companies to cap their emissions. The
rules for the operation of the safeguard mechanism should be released in October 2015, however it
will not commence until 1 July 2016 (Innes, 2014).
Given the uncertainty in revenue due to commodity price volatility and the associated impact on mine
life, miners are typically risk averse when it comes to capital intensive projects. In spite of the long
term benefit of reduced operating cost major capital projects, such as electrification of mine operations
(e.g. moving from trucks to conveyers powered by hybrid diesel-renewable system) are unlikely to be
implemented in the prevailing market conditions without some form of incentive (e.g. accelerated
depreciation).
6.5. Regulation and standards
In the current political environment, regulation is not generally accepted as a policy to achieve change
in markets (Department of Industry, 2014a). While the 2xEP program will prioritise other mechanisms
to drive change, well-targeted and designed regulation should be considered, as it can be cost-
effective in accelerating market transformation e.g. use of minimum performance standards for
equipment (see shaded box). Furthermore, policy certainty on matters such as the diesel rebate is
required.
Suppliers also play a key role, as illustrated by Caterpillar and Komatsu in the advent of autonomous
trucks. Optimising data flow across the diverse set of operational technologies and asset classes is
Please consider...
Application for approval of a methodology is costly and in most cases will not justify the investment for a single
company. Is there scope and interest for industry-wide approved methodologies under the ERF?
Box 15: Performance standards for industrial equipment...
The Equipment Energy Efficiency (E3) program has been predominantly focused on domestic appliances. It
was estimated in 2010 that minimum energy efficiency performance standards (MEPS) applied to industrial
and manufacturing equipment could save at least $1.5 billion per annum in industry energy costs and
provide annual greenhouse abatement of up to 2.8 Mt CO2e (COAG, 2010, cited in Smith, 2013).
Increasing coverage of industrial products beyond certain classes of motors and drives is planned. Electric
and gas process and industrial equipment standards are now projected to account for 33% of the estimated
101.9 PJ energy savings attributed to the E3 program between 2014 and 2030 (Department of Industry,
2014b).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
49
essential for real-time decision making, but the associated technology investments to ensure
compatibility can be a huge cost driver. Industry and government support for initiatives to drive
common communications and data exchange protocols and standards will become increasingly
important to ensure that the benefits of ‘big data’ are available to miners of all sizes in the years to
come.
There are many other examples of regulation used internationally to drive energy efficiency. For
example, in the UK and Germany there is a requirement for companies to voluntarily enact measures
to improve energy efficiency (and in Germany to implement energy management standards) to avoid
paying a significant tax. In Canada, utility companies partner with mining companies to support energy
audits and improvements programs.
6.6. Other considerations
6.6.1. Address energy competitiveness issues arising from escalating energy prices
While not included in the formal scope of work for the 2xEP program, industry has expressed concern
that this program also recognise and communicate other element of the energy competitiveness issue
i.e. how governments should respond to increasing energy prices, as efforts to reduce energy prices in
the medium term would greatly assist efforts to improve energy competitiveness in parallel with
measures to improve energy productivity. It is proposed that 2xEP communicate the need for action to
minimise energy prices in order to improve competitiveness, alongside our main message of doubling
energy productivity.
6.6.2. Role of co-generation and renewable energy
Defining the role of on-site renewables (wind, solar PV and solar thermal) in improving energy
productivity in the mining sector needs further consideration. With regard to the secondary energy
productivity metric, this could include consideration of renewable energy as a hedge against future
energy cost rises.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
50
7. Next steps
This report establishes a starting point for discussion with (and amongst) mining sector stakeholders to
address the opportunities, barriers, policy recommendations and a potential 2xEP implementation plan
for the mining sector. Key issues for consultation include:
Agreeing the metrics for measuring energy productivity improvement in the sector (and
determining whether different metrics are needed for sub-sectors), and cascading metrics
down to plant level.
There is sufficient evidence that a step change in energy productivity, relative to current
trends, is achievable. This provides a starting point for discussion. More detailed analysis of
opportunities in mining sub-sectors, with due consideration for the likely return on investment
from these opportunities could assist in providing a firmer estimate of the likely scale of
commercially attractive opportunities.
Agreeing an energy productivity improvement target for 2030 for the sector. Whichever
target is set, it will also be important to set milestones for achievement year by year and a
process for tracking progress.
Defining the barriers (and they may between sub-sectors) and developing a detailed and
integrated industry-led program to overcome these barriers and support businesses to make
substantial energy productivity savings.
Implementing initial programs during the 2xEP Roadmap development activity if possible.
Particular consideration could be given to designing and launching a voluntary leadership
and recognition program (‘2xEP Challenge’) in parallel with implementing the energy
productivity pathways.
Developing recommendations for government policy measures to facilitate 2xEP
achievement by business.
Modelling the costs and benefits of recommended measures.
Modelling the total benefits of the suite of measures for the mining sector.
Communicating the outcomes of the industry roadmap and marketing the benefits of
implementing the program.
Delivering and measuring the outcomes.
A2SE is looking forward to working with mining sector stakeholders to scope opportunities, consider
options and drive improvement in energy productivity.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
51
References
ACIL Tasman (2013). Energy efficiency opportunities: Program review. Canberra: Department of
Resources Energy and Tourism. Retrieved from http://eeo.govspace.gov.au/files/2013/05/EEO-
Program-Review-Final-Report.pdf
Alliance to Save Energy. (2013). Doubling US energy productivity by 2030. Washington, DC: Author
AustMine. (2013). Australia’s new driver for growth: Mining equipment, technology and services.
Sydney: Author. Retrieved from https://interactivepdf.uniflip.com/2/88168/312940/pub/document.
pdf
Australian Bulk Handling Review. (2013, November 12). In-pit crusher for Boral’s Peppertree quarry.
Retrieved from http://www.bulkhandling.com.au/news/2013/november/november-13-2013/other-
news/in-pit-crusher-for-boral2019s-peppertree-quarry
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2007). Information paper: Experimental estimates of industry
multifactor productivity Australia (Catalogue No 5260.055.001). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2013). Estimates of industry multifactor productivity (Catalogue
No. 5260.55.002). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014a). Australian industry 2012–13 (Catalogue No. 8155.0).
Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014b). Consumer price index (Catalogue No. 6401.0).
Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014c). Energy accounts 2011–12 (Catalogue No. 4606).
Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014d). Gross value added by industry, Chain volume
measures (Catalogue No. 5206). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014e). Mineral and petroleum exploration, Australia
(Catalogue No. 8412). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014f). Mining operations, Australia 2012–13 (Catalogue No.
8415). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS). (2014g). Private new capital expenditure and expected
expenditure, Australia (Catalogue No. 5625). Belconnen, ACT: Author.
Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO). (2014). Electricity statement of opportunities for the
national energy market. Melbourne: Author.
Australian Government. (2012). Rio+20 and mining for sustainable development. Canberra: Author
Retrieved from http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/pages/1b844ecd-138b-4786-982a-
bf1c9508c53a/files/rio-factsheet-mining.pdf
Australian Government. (2014). Industry innovation and competitiveness agenda. Canberra: Author
Retrieved from
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
52
http://www.dpmc.gov.au/publications/Industry_Innovation_and_Competitiveness_Agenda/docs/in
dustry_innovation_competitiveness_agenda.pdf
Australian Institute of Petroleum. (2013). Maintaining supply security and reliability for liquid fuels in
Australia. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from http://www.aip.com.au/pdf/Maintaining_Supply_
Security_and_Reliability_for_Liquid_Fuels_in_Australia.pdf
Australian Institute of Petroleum. (2015, May). AIP TGP data. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.aip.com.au/pricing/tgp.htm
Ballantyne, G. R., & Powell, M. S. (2014a.). Benchmarking comminution energy consumption for
improved efficiency - Achieve more metal from less energy. Paper presented at the 12th AusIMM
Mill Operators’ Conference 2014 – Achieving more with less, Townsville, Australia
Ballantyne, G. R., & Powell, M. S. (2014b). Benchmarking comminution energy consumption for the
processing of copper and gold ores. Minerals Engineering, 65, 109–114. doi:10.1016/j.mineng.
2014.05.017
Ballantyne, G. R., Hilden, M., & Powell, M. S. (2012, April). Early rejection of gangue – How much
energy will it cost to save energy? In B. Wills (Ed.), Comminution ’12: 8th International
Comminution Symposium, Cape Town, South Africa.
BHPBilliton. (2014). Our actions on climate change. Retrieved at
http://www.bhpbilliton.com/home/society/climatechange/Pages/Climate-Change.aspx
Blackburn, J. (2014). Australia’s liquid fuel security Part 2: A report for NRMA Motoring Services. North
Strathfield, NSW: NRMA. Retrieved from http://www.mynrma.com.au/images/About-PDF/Fuel-
Security-Report-Pt2.pdf
Brent, G. F., Rothery, M., Dare-Bryan, P., Hawke, S., Gomez, G., & Humeres, I. (2013) Ultra-high
intensity blasting for improved ore comminution. In P. K. Singh & A. Sinha (Eds.), Rock
fragmentation by blasting (pp.163–170). London: Taylor & Francis. Abstract retrieved from
http://www.ceecthefuture.org/publication/ultra-high-intensity-blasting-improved-ore-comminution
Buckingham, L., Dupont, J.-F., Stieger, J., Blain, B., & Brits, C. (2011, September). Improving energy
efficiency in Barrick grinding circuits. Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference on
Autogenous and Semiautogenous Grinding Technology (SAG2011), Vancouver, Canada.
Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (2013). Resources and energy quarterly (June).
Canberra: Author.
Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (2014a). 2014 Australian energy statistics data.
Retrieved from http://www.bree.gov.au/publications/australian-energy-statistics/2014-australian-
energy-statistics-data
Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics (BREE). (2014b). Resources and energy quarterly
(September). Canberra: Author.
Chambers, M. (2014, April). Big data adds up to big savings for miners. The Australian. Retrieved from
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/big-data-adds-up-to-big-savings-for-
miners/story-e6frg9df-1226896385976
Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC). (2013). CEFC finances expansion of low emissions
generators. Retrieved from http://www.cleanenergyfinancecorp.com.au/media/
releases-and-announcements/files/cefc-finances-expansion-of-low-emissions-
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
53
generators.aspxCouncil of Australian Governments (COAG). (2010). Improving the energy
efficiency of industrial equipment. Barton, ACT: COAG Equipment Energy Efficiency Committee.
Clean Energy Ministerial. (2013). Global Energy Management System Implementation: AngloGold
Ashanti Australia (EEO Case Study). Retrieved from http://www.ceecthefuture.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/12/GSEP_EMWG_case_study_AngloGold_10-2013.pdf
Coalition for Eco-Efficient Comminution (CEEC). (2012). Why Smart Companies Focus on
Comminution. Melbourne: CEEC. Retrieved from http://www.ceecthefuture.org/why-smart-
companies-are-focusing-on-comminution/
CRCMining. (2014a). Cave Tracking Technology. Pinjarra Hills, Queensland: CRC Mining. Retrieved
from http://www.crcmining.com.au/breakthrough-solutions/cave-tracking/
CRCMining. (2014b, September). Did you know..? Bridging the automation skills gap. CRCMining
Newsletter, 29, p6. Retrieved from http://www.crcmining.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2013/02/CRCMining-News-Issue-29.pdf
CRC ORE. (2013). Mogalakwena Selective Blasting Trail. St. Lucia: University of Queensland,
Australia. Retrieved from
http://www.crcore.org.au/images/docs/General/CRC%20ORE%20Annual%20Report%202010-
11.pdf
CSIRO. (2013). Ore sorting: Sound technology making waves. Resourceful, 2. Retrieved from
http://www.csiro.au/Portals/Publications/Magazines/resourceful/Issue-2/2-sound-technology.aspx
(Original work published 2012)
Curry, J. A., Ismay, M. J. L., & Jameson, G. J. (2014). Mine operating costs and the potential impacts
of energy and grinding. Minerals Engineering, 56, 70–80. doi:10.1016/j.mineng.2013.10.020
Deloitte Access Economics. (2014). The economics of fuel taxation in the mining sector. Report
prepared for the Minerals Council of Australia. Barton, ACT: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.minerals.org.au/file_upload/files/reports/DAE-MCA_Fuel_Tax_Credit_-
_1_July_2014_sent_to_client.pdf
Department of Energy, Resources and Tourism (2010a). Analyses of diesel use for mine haul and
transport operations – Case study. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from http://eex.gov.au/files/2014/
06/Analyses-of-Diesel-Use-for-Mine-Haul-and-Transport-Operations.pdf
Department of Energy, Resources and Tourism (2010b). Case studies in system optimisation to
improve energy productivity. Canberra: Author.
Department of Industry. (2012). Mining Energy Efficiency Exchange web portal developed by Dr
Michael H Smith (ANU) and Adjunct Professor Alan Pears. Retrieved from
http://eex.gov.au/industry-sectors/mining/
Department of Industry. (2014a). Energy white paper: Green paper. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from
http://ewp.industry.gov.au/files/egp/energy_green_paper.pdf
Department of Industry. (2014b). Impacts of the E3 program: Projected energy, cost and emission
savings. Canberra: Author. Retrieved from http://www.energyrating.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/
Energy_Rating_Documents/Library/General/Equipment_Energy_Efficiency_Program_(E3)/Impac
ts-of-the-E3-Program.pdf
Department of the Environment (2015). Emissions Reduction Fund update (April). Canberra:
Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved from
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
54
http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/5e2fe53b-9eae-4d9c-8851-
80c32de9387d/files/erf-update-april-2015.pdf
Downes, P., Hanslow, K., & Tulip, P. (2014). The effect of the mining boom on the Australian economy
(Reserve Bank of Australia Discussion Paper RDP 2014-08). Sydney: Reserve Bank of Australia.
Retrieved from http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/rdp/2014/pdf/rdp2014-08.pdf
Edwards, M. (2014, July). Dig data analytics: The hottest disruptive technology in mining right now?
Mining IQ. Retrieved from http://www.miningiq.com/it-data-security/articles/big-data-analytics-
the-hottest-disruptive-technolo
Eneregtics. (2014). Energy as a percentage of operating cost in the Australian Mining Sector.
Personal communication with Dr Mary Steward. Sydney
Ernst & Young. (2014). Business risks facing mining and metals (2014–15). Sydney: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.ey.com/GL/en/Industries/Mining---Metals/Business-risks-in-mining-and-metals
European Commission (EC). (2013). Europe 2020 indicators – Climate change and energy. Retrieved
from http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Europe_2020_indicators_-
_climate_change_and_energy
European Commission – Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs. (2014). Energy
economic developments in Europe. Brussels: Author. doi:10.2765/72195
Fisher, B. S., & Schnittger, S. (2012). Autonomous and remote operation technologies in the mining
industry: Benefits and costs (BAE Research Report 12.1). Canberra: BAEconomics. Retrieved
from http://www.baeconomics.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Mining-innovation-
5Feb12.pdf
GoldCorp (2014, November 20) Goldman Sachs Metals and Mining Conference, Retrieved from
http://www.goldcorp.com/files/Goldcorp_GoldmanSachs-2014_November_v001_p220b4.pdf
GoldPrice. (2015).Retrieved from http://goldprice.org/gold-price-australia.html
Grafton, Q. (2013, March). Australian mining productivity. Paper presented at the ANU-Harvard Public
Symposium: Creating a Productive Future: Social and Economic Challenges, Policy &
Governance, Canberra. Retrieved from https://crawford.anu.edu.au/pdf/events/2013/8801/
Grafton-Australian-Mining-Productivity-18-March-2013-Finalversion.pdf
Group of 20 (G20). (February, 2014). Communiqué: Meeting of finance ministers and central bank
governors. Sydney: Author. Retrieved from https://www.g20.org/sites/default/files/g20_resources/
library/Communique%20Meeting%20of%20G20%20Finance%20Ministers%20and%20Central%
20Bank%20Governors%20Sydney%2022-23%20February%202014_0.pdf
Gruen, D. (2012, November). The importance of productivity. Paper presented to the Productivity
Commission-Australian Bureau of Statistics Productivity Perspective Conference, Canberra.
Hammer, M., Rutten, P., & Somers, K. (2014). Bringing lean thinking to energy. McKinsey Quarterly
(February). New York, NY: McKinsey & Co. Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/
energy_resources_materials/bringing_lean_thinking_to_energy
Heber, A. (2013, 17 September). AngloGold braces for tougher times. Australian Mining. Retrieved
from http://www.miningaustralia.com.au/features/anglogold-braces-for-tougher-times
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
55
Innes, B. (2014). Your guide to preparing for the ERF’s first auction. North Sydney: Energetics.
Retrieved from http://www.energetics.com.au/insights/latest-news/climate-change-matters/your-
guide-to-participating-in-the-erf
Institute of Industrial Productivity. (2011). China (CN-2): Energy and carbon intensity targets of the
12th five year plan (Industrial Efficiency Policy Database). Retrieved from
http://iepd.iipnetwork.org/
policy/energy-and-carbon-intensity-targets-12th-five-year-plan
International Agency for Research on Cancer. (2012, June 6). Diesel engine exhaust carcinogenic
(World Health Organisation Press Release No 213). Lyon: World Health Organisation. Retrieved
from http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2012/pdfs/pr213_E.pdf
Kannan, D. (2015, May). Citibank cuts coal price outlook on renewables, weak China demand. Platts
McGraw Hill Financial. Retrieved from http://www.platts.com/latest-news/coal/singapore/citibank-
cuts-coal-price-outlook-on-renewables-27454313
Ker, P. (2012, November 1). BHP aims to dump trucks. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from
http://www.smh.com.au/business/bhp-aims-to-dump-trucks-20121031-28k9h.html#ixzz2k8EjoxUf
KordaMentha. (2013). Gold ore mining: All that glitters is not gold (Publication No 13-4). Melbourne:
Author. Retrieved from http://www.kordamentha.com/docs/publications/13-04_gold-ore-mining.
pdf
Leonida, C. (2014, June 10). Fighting talk. Mining Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.mining
magazine.com/panorama/fighting-talk
Lernfabrik für Energieproduktivität (LEP). (2014). Das Lernkonzept der LEP – Innovativ und praxisnah.
Retrieved from http://energielernfabrik.de/de/1_lep.html
Létourneau, A. (2014, November 6). If Roubini's Right, $1,000 Gold Catastrophic For Gold Miners. Kito News.
Retrieved from http://www.kitco.com/news/2014-11-07/If-Roubini-Right-1000-Gold-Catastrophic-For-Gold-
Miners.html
Lydon, J, Dyer, D. & Bradley, C. (2014). Compete to prosper: improving Australia’s global
competitiveness, Sydney: McKinsey Australia
Macdonald-Smith, A. (2015, 2 April). Russia rides devalued rouble into Australian coal export markets.
Financial Review. Retrieved from http://www.afr.com/business/mining/coal/russia-rides-
devalued-rouble-into-australian-coal-export-markets-20150402-1mdaf0
Minerals Council of Australia. (2014a). 2013 annual report. Kingston, ACT: Author.
Minerals Council of Australia. (2014b). 2014–15 pre-budget submission. Kingston, ACT: Author.
Mineweb. (2013). Greener underground mining – Electric vehicles leading the way. Mineweb.
Stockholm. Retrieved from http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/content/en/mineweb-sustainable-
mining?oid=187840&sn=Detail
Mining Association of Canada. (2012). 100 innovations in the mining industry. Quebec: Minalliance.
Mudd, G. M. (2009). The sustainability of mining in Australia: Key production trends and their
environmental implications for the future (Research Report No RR5). Melbourne: Department of
Civil Engineering, Monash University and Mineral Policy Institute.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
56
Murphy, B. (2013). Floatation energy consumption and opportunities for improvement. Paper
presented at the AusIMM Mill MetPlant 2013 Conference 2014, Perth, Australia
Napier-Munn, T. (in press). Is progress in energy-efficient comminution doomed? Minerals
Engineering. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/
S0892687514002076
Natural Resources Canada. (2013). Green mining initiative energy efficiency. Retrieved from
http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/mining-materials/green-mining/8218
NSW Business Chamber and Sydney Business Chamber. (2014). Industry research collaboration:
Discussion paper. North Sydney: Author. Retrieved from http://www.nswbusinesschamber.com.
au/NSWBC/media/Forms/Final-Report_-Thinking-Business-Industry-Research-Collaboration.pdf
Orica. (2014, August). Improving mine productivity through ultra-high intensity [Media release].
Retrieved from http://www.orica.com/news---media/improving-mine-productivity-through-ultra-
high-intensity-blasting#.VFs8f00cSUk
Paton, J. & Riseborough, J. (2014, November 15). Glencore to shut Australian coal mines for three
weeks. Bloomberg. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-13/glencore-to-
shut-australian-coal-mines-for-three-weeks.html
Pease, J. (2014, September). The future of mineral processing: Improving energy and cost outcomes
through efficient comminution. Paper presented at the International Mining and Resources
Conference, Melbourne.
Pokrajcic, Z. (2008). Energy efficient comminution circuits: A modified grinding strategy and the
selection of a target product size. In CSRP ’08: Delivering sustainable solutions to the minerals
and metals industries (pp. 35–38). Kensington, WA: Centre for Sustainable Resource
Processing.
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2014a), How do you know if you lead or follow? Mining
Benchmarking Insights Report. Retrieved from http://www.pwc.com.au/industry/energy-utilities-
mining/assets/Mining-Benchmarking-Report-Jul14.pdf
PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). (2014b), Mine 2014: Realigning expectations. Retrieved from
http://www.pwc.com.au/industry/energy-utilities-mining/assets/imarc/Mine-Jun14.pdf
Productivity Commission. (2013). Mineral and energy resource exploration (Productivity Commission
Inquiry Report No 65). Melbourne: Author. Retrieved from http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/
pdf_file/0003/128469/resource-exploration.pdf
Ravani von Ow, T. & Bomvisinho, L. (2010). Use of the Latest (Motors and Drivers) Technology to
Overcome the Demands of Mill Operation. BadenDättwil: ABB Switzerland Ltd. Retrieved at
http://www05.abb.com/global/scot/scot244.nsf/veritydisplay/76da98c581d48708c12576e200508
4cb/$file/Paper_CMP_2010_Ravani_Bormvisinho.pdf
Reserve Bank of Australia. (2014a). Index of commodity prices. Retrieved from http://www.rba.gov.au/
statistics/frequency/commodity-prices.html
Reserve Bank of Australia. (2014b, August). Statement on Monetary Policy. Retrieved from
http://www.rba.gov.au/publications/smp/2014/aug/pdf/0814.pdf
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
57
RioTinto. (2012). Argyle Diamonds Underground mine. Melbourne: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.argylediamonds.com.au/docs/Argyle%20underground%20facts%20at%20a%20glanc
e_Aug%2012.pdf
RioTinto. (2013). Site visit to iron ore operations in Western Australia. Melbourne: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.riotinto.com/documents/Investors/130902_Presentation_Site_visit_to_iron_ore_
operations_in_Western_Australia.pdf
Riseborough, J. & Spinetto, J.P. (2015, January 12). Vale seen overtaking BHP, Rio as Cheapest iron
shipper. BloombergBusiness. Retrieved from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-
12/vale-s-leapfrogs-rio-bhp-as-cheapest-iron-ore-shipper
Schodde, R. (2010, March). The key drivers behind resource growth: An analysis of the copper
industry over the last 100 years. Presentation to the Mineral Economics & Management Society
(MEMS) session at the 2010 SME Annual Conference, Phoenix, Arizona. Retrieved from
http://www.minexconsulting.com/publications/mar2010c.html
Schodde, R. (2012, October). What’s the future for mineral exploration in Australia? Presentation to
the Geological Society of Australia – Victoria Division, Clayton. Retrieved from
http://www.minexconsulting.com/publications/GSAV Presentation - R Schodde 25 Oct 2012.pdf
Scott, M. (2014, April). Transforming resource extraction and its evaluation. Presentation at the 2EXP
Forum on Doubling Energy Productivity, Sydney. Retrieved from https://www.eiseverywhere.
com/file_uploads/38fca418268d339710dd371a25d7a1ea_Scott_Michael.pdf
Shonin, O., & Pronko, V. (2013). Increasing energy efficiency of mine ventilation systems via
multipurpose control of a main fan adjustable speed electric drive. Annual of the University of
Mining and Geology “St. Ivan Rilski”, 56(3) – Mechanization, electrification and automation in
mines (pp. 163–169). Retrieved from www.mgu.bg/sessions/13/03/36-13-Shonin_Pronko.doc
Smith, M. (2013). Assessing Climate Change Risks and Opportunities for Investors Mining and
Minerals Processing Sector. Canberra: Investor Group on Climate Change and Australia
National University. Retrieved from
http://www.igcc.org.au/Resources/Documents/mining_assessing%20climate_change_risks_for_i
nvestors.pdf
Smith, M. (2014a). Green growth: Unlocking new sources of productivity, profits and growth in the 21st
Century. Sydney: United States Study Centre, University of Sydney.
Smith, M. (2014b). Mining Sector – Energy Efficiency Opportunities Educational Resource for
Engineers – Detailed Lecture Notes. Canberra: Department of Industry and Australia National
University (Forthcoming)
Smith, M. & Stasinopoulos, P. (2014). Guidance for new Developments and Expansions (Version 1).
Canberra: Department of Industry (forthcoming)
Stadler. A., Jutsen, J., Pears, A. & Smith M. (2014). 2xEP – Australia’s energy productivity opportunity:
Framing paper (Draft Version 1.2). Sydney: Australian Alliance to Save Energy (A2SE).
Stadler, A. (2015). A review of available data to establish national and NSW energy productivity
baselines, (Version 1). Sydney: Australian Alliance to Save Energy (A2SE)
Syed, A. (2013, October). Measuring productivity in the Australian mining sector. Paper delivered to
the Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics Annual Research workshop, Canberra.
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
58
Retrieved from http://www.bree.gov.au/sites/bree.gov.au/files/files//presentations/australian-
mining-productivity-201310.pdf
The White House (2013), The President’s Climate Action Plan. Washington DC: Executive Office of
the President. Retrieved from
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/image/president27sclimateactionplan.pdf
US Department of Energy. (2007). Mining industry energy bandwidth study (Industrial Technologies
Program). Washington, DC: Author.
US Energy Information Administration. (2015, May 12) Short-Term Energy Outlook. Retrieved at
http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/prices.cfm
Virtual Consulting International (VCI). (2012). Remote operating centres: Introduction. New York, NY:
Author. Retrieved from http://ds8xmukznlvjx.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Remote-
Operating-Centers1.pdf
Virtual Consulting International (VCI). (2013a). Business model innovation in resources. New York,
NY: Author. Retrieved from http://ds8xmukznlvjx.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/
Business-Model-Innovation-in-Resources-.pdf
Virtual Consulting International (VCI). (2013b). Mining innovation state of play. New York, NY: Author.
Retrieved from http://ds8xmukznlvjx.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Mining-
Innovation-State-of-Play-2013.pdf and http://govci.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Report-
Pack-VCI-Innovation-Survey-Final.pdf
Vorrath, S. (2014, April 2) ARENA backs portable solar hybrid. RenewEconomy. Retrieved from
http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/arena-backs-portable-solar-hybrid-study-13854
Winterford, B. (2014, May 12). Fortescue sends mining data mobile, saves millions. IT News.
Retrieved from http://www.itnews.com.au/News/384683,fortescue-sends-mining-data-mobile-
saves-millions.aspx
World Bank. (n.d.). World DataBank. Retrieved August 24 2014, from http://databank.worldbank.org/
data/home.aspx
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
59
Appendix A. Abbreviations and acronyms
ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics
AEMO Australian Energy Market Operator
AIP Australian Institute of Petroleum
ANZSIC Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification
boe barrel of oil equivalent
BREE Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics
CEEC Coalition of Eco-efficient Comminution
CRC ORE Co-operative Research Centre for Optimising Resource Extraction
DSR Demand Side Response
EEO Energy Efficiency Opportunity (Program)
EIA (US) Energy Information Administration
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GVA Gross Value Added
IPCC in-pit crushing conveyers
MCA Minerals Council of Australia
NRCAN National Resources Canada
OS overburden slushers
NRMA National Roads & Motorists' Association
RBA Reserve Bank of Australia
R&D research and development
ROM run of mine
ROCE return on capital employed
SAG Semi-Autogenous Grinding
SMI JKMRC Sustainable Metals Institute Julius Kruttschnitt Mineral Research Centre
TGP Terminal gate prices
TMM Tonnes material mined
USA United States of America
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
60
Appendix B. Conversions
Reproduced from BREE (2014a)
UNITS
Metric units Standard metric prefixes
J joule k kilo 10
3
(thousand)
L litre M mega 10
6
(million)
t tonne G giga 10
9
(billion)
g gram T tera 10
12
Wh watt-hours P peta 10
15
b billion (1000 million) E exa 10
18
STANDARD CONVERSIONS
1 barrel = 158.987 L
1 mtoe (million tonnes of oil equivalent) = 41.868 PJ
1 kWh = 3600 kJ
1 MBTU (million British thermal units) = 1055 MJ
1 m3 (cubic metre) = 35.515 f3 (cubic feet)
1 L LPG (liquefied petroleum gas) = 0.254 m3 natural gas
Conversion factors are at a temperature of 15°C and pressure of 1 atmosphere.
INDICATIVE ENERGY CONTENT CONVERSION FACTORS
Black coal production 30 GJ/t
Brown coal 10.3 GJ/t
Crude oil production 37 MJ/L
Naturally occurring LPG 26.5 MJ/L
LNG exports 54.4 GJ/t
Natural gas (gaseous production equivalent) 40 MJ/m
3
Biomass 11.9 GJ/t
Hydroelectricity, wind and solar energy 3.6 TJ/GWh
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
61
Appendix C. Key end-use energy applications on
mine sites
The table below provides a brief summary of energy end-use applications on mine sites, with
reference to other studies. However, it should be kept in mind that end uses vary across mine types.
Comminution
(crushing and
grinding)
Comminution of gold and copper ores is estimated to represent 1.3% of Australia’s
electricity consumption and up to 52% of mine site electrical power, or 36% of total
mine site energy (Ballantyne & Powell, 2014b; Curry, Ismay, & Jameson, 2014; Napier-
Munn, in press).
Similar estimates are provided by Natural Resources Canada, namely 45% of the
energy used in a typical open-pit mine operation is spent in rock size reduction. The
distribution of energy within this process shows that blasting accounts for 3–5%,
crushing for 5–7%, and grinding for 90% of the total energy used (Natural Resources
Canada, 2013).
Grinding mills are driven by diesel off-grid. Much of Australia’s off-grid diesel
consumption is related to running the grinding mills.
Materials handling
(diesel) Electricity used in conveyors and underground haulage systems is the biggest energy
cost for materials handling for underground mines, whereas much of the equipment
used in the transfer or haulage of materials in open-pit mining is powered by diesel
engines. Equipment includes service trucks, front-end loaders, bulldozers, bulk trucks,
rear-dump trucks and ancillary equipment such as pick-up trucks and mobile
maintenance equipment. Diesel technologies are highly energy intensive, accounting
for more than 80% of the total energy consumed in materials handling (see Figure 13).
In Australia, as of 2008–09, 40 reporting Energy Efficiency Opportunity (EEO) Program
companies in the mining sector consumed 308 PJ of energy, of which 52.5 PJ was
diesel (17%) for haulage and electricity generation (Department of Energy, Resources
and Tourism, 2010a).
Ventilation This area applies only to underground mines, resulting in the understatement in Figure
13 of its importance. In underground mining, ventilation can account for between 25–
50% of a mine’s energy consumption (Shonin and Pronko, 2013).
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
62
Box 16: Useful resource highlighting energy use improvement opportunities across the above areas
The EEO Significant Opportunities Register – Mining provides a listing of some of the significant
opportunities identified by mines as part of the EEO process. The table can be filtered to find specific types
of opportunities and is available at http://energyefficiencyopportunities.gov.au/files/2013/01/Mining-
Significant-Opportunities.xls
A report commissioned by the Australian Government, Department of the Environment and Water
Resources, entitled Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Gas Reduction contains a good description of many
common energy-efficiency opportunities and good energy-management practice. This report is available at
http://www.commdev.org/energy-efficiency-and-greenhouse-gas-reduction
The National Resources Canada’s Green Mining Initiative is also a good resource for best practices from
global industry. A high level overview of this initiative is available at http://ec.europa.eu/DocsRoom/
documents/6449/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native%20
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
63
Appendix D. Supplementary material on the
productivity of the mining sector
Mining is characterised by high labour productivity relative to other sectors in Australia, in absolute
terms (i.e. $-value of output relative to labour cost). This is not unusual given the capital intensity of
the sector and is largely reflective of the characteristics of the sector. However, the trend in the
historical multifactor productivity (MFP) index of the resources industry has been downward, as is
illustrated in Figure 17, which draws a comparison between the resources sector and the Australian
market sector for the last 18-years (ABS, 2013c).
Figure 17: Decline in the mining sector MFP
This general trend is not unique to Australia, with similar declines recorded in the USA and Canada
(Grafton, 2013). Two recent PwC studies attribute poor productivity performance in the mining industry
to its inability to execute strategy, align capital and resource allocations, poor decision making and
underutilisation of equipment (PwC, 2014a, 2014b). However, results from BREE decomposition
analysis indicates that mining MFP grew by 2.5% per annum between 1985–86 and 2009–10 if the
effect of output quality depletion and production lags are taken into account (BREE, 2013).
The following section provides additional information on factors that impact the development of an
energy productivity roadmap in the Australian mining sector now that the commodity cycle is turning
from investment to production. These factors are:
Declining ore grade (metal per tonne of ore)
Decline in major new discoveries
Increased investment, and whilst commodity prices are falling.
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
MFP h ours worked basis
(Index 2011-12 = 100)
B Mining Market Sector industries (Divisions A to N, R and S)
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
64
Declining ore grade
Whilst the life of known reserves may extend over many years, remaining deposits are typically of a
lower grade (Productivity Commission, 2013), as illustrated in the shaded box below.
Decline in major new discoveries
Some experts estimate that half of Australia’s existing mines could close in the next seven to 18 years
(Schodde, 2012), whilst it can take up to 20 years to convert a discovery into a mine. The last decade
was characterised as a period of increased exploration efforts as illustrated in Figure 3 with reference
to both ‘brown field’ (existing deposits) and ‘greenfield’ (new deposits) (ABS, 2014d). Coal and iron
ore’s share of exploration by minerals sought increased notably over this period, with a significant
decline in gold and other base metal exploration expenditure (Minerals Council of Australia, 2014b).
There has been a sharp drop in activity since 2012, with a further 10% drop in exploration capital
expenditure predicted for the 2014 financial year (PwC, 2014b). Since the mid-1990s, the real cost per
exploration metre drilled increased substantially, as illustrated in Figure 18 below (ABS, 2014e, 2014f),
whilst major new discoveries are declining (see shaded box below).
Box 17: Declining ore grade for base and precious metals in Australia
The declining ore grade for Australian base and precious metals is evident from the figure below, derived
from a detailed analysis of minerals production in Australia since the 1840s. The long-term trend in
average ore grades has been down for copper, gold, lead, zinc, uranium, nickel and silver. In addition,
there has been a dramatic increase in the extent of overburden removal required for coal, copper, gold
and uranium since the mid-20th century and especially since the 1980s (Mudd, 2009, as cited in Fisher &
Schnittger, 2012).
Reproduced from Fisher & Schnittger, 2012
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
65
Figure 18: Increase in real cost per metre drilled
In the Australian mining industry, there are fewer new resources coming online to displace the old
ones, which are, on aggregate, reporting declining ore grades, as discussed on page 64. Given the
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Sep-1988
Jul-1989
May-1990
Mar-1991
Jan-1992
Nov-1992
Sep-1993
Jul-1994
May-1995
Mar-1996
Jan-1997
Nov-1997
Sep-1998
Jul-1999
May-2000
Mar-2001
Jan-2002
Nov-2002
Sep-2003
Jul-2004
May-2005
Mar-2006
Jan-2007
Nov-2007
Sep-2008
Jul-2009
May-2010
Mar-2011
Jan-2012
Nov-2012
Sep-2013
Real cost per metre drilled (2012 prices)
Box 18: Major new discoveries in Australia are falling
The number of ‘giant’ and ‘major’ discoveries in Australia is falling, as exploration expenditure rises (see
figure below for mineral discoveries, excluding iron ore, coal and petroleum). Australia’s share of the
western world’s giant discoveries has fallen from around 17% in the 1980s to around 6% in the 1990s. It is
estimated that as much as half the exploration spend by Australian miners is made outside the country. In
dollar terms, Australia’s share of global non-bulk mineral exploration, which excludes iron ore and
uranium, also dropped from around 19% in the early 1990s to the current level of around 9% (Productivity
Commission, 2013).
Reproduced from Productivity Commission, 2013
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
66
increased energy intensity of mining and processing lower grade ore and the decline in the discovery
of new major resources, increased energy intensity of mining production is likely to be a feature of the
Australian mining sector in the decades to come unless the industry finds new high quality resources
or ways to improve the energy productivity of the industry. When commodity prices were at an historic
high, the increased energy intensity of mining production was not a major concern. However, forecast
price levels for key commodities are trending down as discussed below, with gold at an all-time low.
Increased investment, and whilst commodity prices are falling
Changes in export prices explain approximately three-quarters of the fluctuations in the growth of
export values since 1990. Developments in export prices can therefore have a significant impact on
export earnings and economic activity in Australia (RBA, 2014a). Commodity export prices can be
volatile. The bulk commodity and base metal prices were at long term historical highs between 2006
and 2011, as illustrated in Figure 19 (RBA, 2014). Since then, prices have declined sharply, with gold
experiencing a 27% drop, the largest in 30 years (KordaMentha, 2013; PwC, 2014b).
Figure 19: RBA weighted commodity price index for base and bulk commodities26
Mineral processing requires large capital equipment investments and mining companies face the
challenge of achieving their targeted return on investment for these expenditures regardless of
external market pricings. As price takers, periods of high commodity prices made it desirable from the
perspective of value of a mining stakeholder to drive increased throughput in spite of the increased
cost of mining lower grade ore. During the ‘mining boom’, the sector made significant investments in
developing new mines and infrastructure, as well as expanding existing mines. Capital investments of
this nature are ‘lumpy’, with a lag between investment and production. In the short term, this lag
contributes to the decline in capital productivity of the industry as measured in official Australian
productivity statistics (see Figure 17).
26 Base metals: aluminium, lead, copper, zinc and nickel; Bulk commodities: iron ore, metallurgical coal and thermal coal. The
above series excludes alumina, gold and copper ore (copper is not included in the data series).
0
50
100
150
200
250
Jul‐1982
Oct‐1983
Jan‐1985
Apr‐1986
Jul‐1987
Oct‐1988
Jan‐1990
Apr‐1991
Jul‐1992
Oct‐1993
Jan‐1995
Apr‐1996
Jul‐1997
Oct‐1998
Jan‐2000
Apr‐2001
Jul‐2002
Oct‐2003
Jan‐2005
Apr‐2006
Jul‐2007
Oct‐2008
Jan‐2010
Apr‐2011
Jul‐2012
Oct‐2013
Index2012/13=100
Basemetalsprices–A$Index Bulkcommoditiesprices–A$Index
CONSULTATION DRAFT VERSION 1.3
2xEP Mining Sector Overview
67
As the five-year peak investment phase is drawing to a close, increased output is starting to come
online. Nearly half of the over $400 billion of resources, energy and related infrastructure projects
undertaken in Australia over the last decade are now operational. Approximately $220 billion27 of
projects is still under development (BREE, 2014b). Additional supply from new projects coming online
is likely to add to the downward pressure on commodity prices.
The September 2014 BREE Quarterly Review reported that project completions in just the past 12
months delivered more than 200 million tonnes of iron ore and 40 million tonnes of coal (BREE,
2014b). However, the increases in iron ore and coal output in particular, as illustrated in Figure 20
( BREE, 2014b), have been underway for the last decade.
Figure 20: Increase in Australian resources and export volumes
Index graph reproduced from BREE, 2014b
Commodity Between 2003/04 and 2008/09 Since 2008/09 to 2013/14
Iron Ore 66% 101%
Thermal coal 28% 43%
27 Note this includes energy (i.e. oil and gas).
