Donner Metals Ltd. (TSX-V: DON) is a Canadian development and exploration company focused on base and precious metal projects in Québec. Donner’s flagship project is a partnership with Xstrata Canada Corporation in the Matagami Mining Camp covering both the current development of a new mine and on-going exploration activities. The project is located in the Abitibi region of central Québec and it is supported by Xstrata’s existing mine infrastructure, a highly experienced workforce and an operating 2,950 tonne per day mill. As well, the area is serviced by highway, power, airport, railway and town site infrastructure.
WARNING: Information contained in Donner Metals Ltd. (the “Company”) press releases, web site information and corporate displays, among others, may contain forward looking information and future oriented financial information as noted and described in specific detail below. The use of forward-looking information and forward-oriented financial information related to future performance of the Company carries risks typically associated with mining ventures as well as risks related to the Company’s ability to fund its share of financial obligations related to such activities. Such risks are discussed below.
The Company’s core project is the Matagami Project located in central Québec. Donner shares a participating interest with Xstrata Canada Corporation (“Xstrata”) in five separate joint ventures in this location.
By accessing this website and other Company information, you agree to be bound by the following terms and conditions:
Under no circumstances should any material in the Company’s press releases, web site information and corporate displays, among others, be construed as an offering of securities or of investment advice. The materials contained in the Company’s press releases, web site information and corporate displays, among others, constitute information only regarding Donner Metals Ltd. The reader should consult with his/her professional investment advisor regarding investments in securities. Junior public mining and exploration companies should be viewed as speculative investments. Such companies by nature carry a high level of risk. Anyone who cannot accept a risk of total and sudden loss of their capital should not own such securities. Speculators should also be aware that these stocks are subject to swings in price (both positive and negative) and liquidity that are not always related to the fundamentals of the underlying business.
Certain statements and/or graphics in the Company’s press releases, web site information and corporate displays, among others, constitute “forward-looking information” Forward-looking information is information that includes implied future performance and/or forecast information including information relating to, or associated with, exploration and or development of mineral properties. These statements or graphical information involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different (either positively or negatively) from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements.
Forward-looking statements are identified by wording such as “scheduled (future sense)” “intend(s)”, “plan(s)” “expect(s)”, “believe(s)” “will” “estimate(s)”, “forecast”, “anticipate(s)”, “expect(s)”, , “may”, “should”, “goal”, “target”, “aim”, “may”, “would”, “could” or “should” or, in each case, the negative thereof, other variations thereon, comparable terminology or wording/graphical information that implies anticipated future results or deliverables.
You are cautioned not to place any undue reliance on any forward-looking statement.
Forward-looking statements or information related to Exploration.
Relating to exploration, the identification of exploration targets and any implied future investigation of such targets on the basis of specific geological, geochemical and geophysical evidence or trends are future-looking and subject to a variety of possible outcomes which may or may not include the discovery, or extension, or termination of mineralization. Further, areas around known mineralized intersections or surface showings may be marked by wording such as “open”, “untested”, “possible extension” or “exploration potential” or by symbols such as “?”. Such wording or symbols should not be construed as a certainty that mineralization continues or that the character of mineralization (e.g. grade or thickness) will remain consistent from a known and measured data point. The key risks related to exploration in general are that chances of identifying economical reserves are extremely small.
Forward-looking statements or information related to Matagami Infrastructure
The geological prospectivity of areas which surround, or are adjacent to, deposits from which current production is occurring does not imply that future discoveries will be made, nor does it imply that, should a discovery be may, it will be economically produced. Current production from Xstrata Canada Corporation’s wholly-owned Perseverance mine and future statements relating to use of existing infrastructure and future benefits of existing infrastructure are forward-looking with respect to the impact on new discoveries. The record of past production in terms of metal and/or produced resources does not provide any increased likelihood that new discoveries will be made or that new discoveries can be economically developed. Historical estimates (non NI 43-101 compliant), related to undeveloped deposits, do not provide any increased probability that new discoveries will be made or that new discoveries can be economically developed. Therefore, there is no certainty that new discoveries will be commercially viable based on existing infrastructure and comparison with current operations, past production or historical resources.
Forward-looking statements or information related to mineral resources
The Company has published measured, indicated and inferred mineral resources and proven and probable mining reserves for the Bracemac-McLeod Deposit that conform to National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects (“NI 43-101”). Under the definition of “Mineral Resource” (CIM Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves), a resources is “a concentration or occurrence of diamonds, natural solid inorganic material, or natural solid fossilized organic material including base and precious metals, coal, and industrial minerals in or on the Earth’s crust in such form and quantity and of such a grade or quality that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction.” The later part of this definition implies a forward-looking statement.
Statements relating to “mineral resources” (measured, indicated and inferred) for Bracemac-McLeod involve estimates and assumptions that the mineral resources described exists in the quantities, continuity, grade and thickness predicted between known data points. The designation of mineral resources as “inferred mineral resource”, “indicated mineral resource” and “measured mineral resource” follow the definitions under the Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum – Definition Standards on Mineral Resources and Mineral Reserves as referenced under NI 43-101 Historical resources, where noted, are qualified following guidelines under NI 43-101.
The likelihood of exploring for, discovering or developing a deposit on the Matagami Project is subject to many risks. External risks associated with mineral projects are fluctuations in metal prices, adverse government policy changes, and adverse developments in the financial markets generally. The impact of any one risk, uncertainty or factor on a particular forward-looking statement is not determinable with certainty as these factors are interdependent.
The Matagami Joint Ventures
Donner is a partner with Xstrata Canada Corporation in five joint ventures on the Matagami Project where mine development and exploration activities are conducted.
Bracemac-McLeod Feasibility Study: The feasibility study on the Bracemac-McLeod deposit, authored by Genivar Limited Partnership (“Genivar”) and Xstrata Canada Corporation – Xstrata Zinc Canada Division (‘Xstrata Zinc’), contains forward-oriented financial information and project timing assumptions. Details and risks related to the use of such information are discussed below.
Information contained in the Company’s press releases, web site information, corporate displays, and postings on “SEDAR”, among others contain forward-looking information and future-oriented financial information regarding results and financial projections contained in the feasibility study on the Bracemac-McLeod deposit. This study was produced by Genivar and Xstrata Zinc. The Perseverance Mine (wholly-owned by Xstrata) The Matagami mill complex is operated by Xstrata Zinc. Xstrata Zinc and its predecessors (Falconbridge Limited, Noranda Inc, among others) have been operating at Matagami since 1963.
The forward-looking information and forward-orientated financial information are:
Forecast mining resources and reserves are determined by standards governed under NI 43-101 and the experience of Xstrata Zinc as operators of the project. Measured and indicated resources and proven and probable mining reserves were prepared by Xstrata Zinc mining group. The proven and probable reserves calculated in the feasibility study includes two levels of confidence (measured and indicated based on density of drill hole intercepts). For the Upper Bracemac, Bracemac and Bracemac Key Tuffite zones, as well as the upper half of the McLeod zone, spacing of drill intercepts is approximately 25 metres, whereas the spacing of drill hole intercepts in the lower portion of the McLeod zone is at approximately 50 metres. The reader is cautioned that geometry of the mineralized zone and the distribution of grade within the zone may cause both the volume and grade of the mining reserve to vary (either positively or negatively) from the calculation under the feasibility study.Cut-off grade for mining reserves was established by natural cut-off (mineralized versus unmineralized rock) and on a net smelter return (NSR) basis. The use of an NSR cut-off is forward looking as it relies on future looking metal prices, mill recoveries and smelting and treatment charges. These are discussed below.Inferred resources for the McLeod Deep Zone and the West McLeod zone are reported in the feasibility study but are not a component of the financial analysis. The reader is cautioned that inferred resources have the lowest level of confidence under NI 43-101 and future upgrading of the resource or incorporation of these resources in future mine planning have not been considered under the feasibility study. There is no certainty that these resources will be mined due to proximity to underground infrastructure planned under the Bracemac-McLeod feasibility study.
Resources and reserves can be affected by obtaining grades different from expected grades, obtaining lower quantities of mineralization, encountering deposit geometries that vary from expectations and encountering higher than expected mine dilution rates.
Forecast capital costs under the feasibility study have been estimated by Genivar with the assistance of Xstrata Zinc. Cost estimates are based on expected capital charges and pricing with support from Xstrata’s recent experience with the development of their wholly owned Perseverance deposit which was developed between 2006 and 2008. Realized capital costs for the Bracemac-McLeod project can vary (either positively or negatively) on the actual realized costs of equipment and materials purchased, development advancement rate, and overall efficiency of the development process. Ground conditions in particular can profoundly impact capital costs.
Forecast operating costs are provided by Genivar and estimated on the basis of Xstrata Zinc’s experience with current mine and mill operations at Matagami. Variables which may affect operating costs (either positively or negatively) are mine and mill efficiencies, metallurgical variations as well as mine production rates, rates of mill throughput and transportation charges.
Forecast metal prices over the current 4 year life of mine for Bracemac-McLeod are based on industry consensus price based on published forecasts (Brook Hunt, Bloomberg and CRU); these forecasts do not necessarily reflect Xstrata Zinc’s vision of long-term commodity prices. Metal prices can have a profound effect (either positively or negatively) on the financial characteristics of the Bracemac-McLeod deposit as described under the base case analysis in the feasibility study. Constant metal prices are forecast over the life of mine, however these are expected to vary over the planned production period. Metal prices are not in the control of mine operations and are subject to changes in worldwide supply and demand.
Forecast mill recoveries are based on results of tests conducted at Xstrata’s Process Control Group in Sudbury, Canada. Parameters that may affect mill recoveries (either positively or negatively) are changes to expected mineralogical characterizes of ore from Bracemac-McLeod and mill efficiencies.
Forecast treatment charges are based on industry consensus of anticipated treatment and refining charges (“TC/RC’s”) over the life of mine (Brook Hunt, Bloomberg and CRU); theses forecasts do not necessarily reflect Xstrata Zinc’s vision of long-term treatment and refining charges. TC/RC’s can vary on the basis of realized TC/TR contract charges over the life of mine which are negotiated on an annual basis.
Forecast exchange rates are forecast over the current 4 year life of mine for Bracemac-McLeod on industry consensus rates and on published forecasts (Brook Hunt, Bloomberg and CRU). Exchange rates are not in the control of the mine and will fluctuate on the basis of forces external to those controlled under the mine operation; theses forecasts do not necessarily reflect Xstrata Zinc’s vision of long-term foreign exchange rates.
Forecast mine production rates are determined by Genivar based on the resource estimate and block model provided by Xstrata. Ground conditions, geometry of sulphide mineralization and changes in development patterns can impact mine production rates.
Forecast impacts of permitting on the development and mining of Bracemac-McLeod are determined by Genivar with input by Xstrata Zinc. Permitting requirements are not expected to change over the life of mine based on current regulations. However, changes in environmental and other laws and regulations, may impact construction and mining which could affect capital and operating costs. Adverse government policy changes with respect to mineral exploration and exploitation, including changes to taxes or royalties will negatively impact the project.
Note: Fluctuations in prices and unfavorable currency exchange rates constitute uncontrollable parameters.
The feasibility study on Bracemac-McLeod contains forecasts that can impact (either positively or negatively) the financial characteristics of the Bracemac-McLeod deposit as assessed under the feasibility study in terms of expected mine life, projected cash flows , projected internal rate of return, and realized value in relation to calculated Net Present Value.
Forward-looking statements or information related to Donner’s ability to finance its share of costs under the Matagami Joint Ventures pursuant to the Matagami Lake Joint Venture Agreement with Xstrata Canada Corporation (Xstrata)
The Company is currently operating under the Matagami Lake Option and Joint Venture Agreement (MLOJVA) relating to its participating interest in five joint ventures with Xstrata. Donner is required to fund its share of the joint venture expenditures. The funding requirements are subject to many risks such as:
Substantial expenditures are required to explore for mineral reserves;
The junior resource market, where the Company raises funds, is extremely volatile and there is no guarantee that the Company will be able to raise funds as it requires them;
Although the Company has taken steps to verify title to the mineral properties it has an interest in, there is no guarantee that the property will not be subject to title disputes or undetected defects; and
The Company is subject to the laws and regulations relating to environmental matters, including provisions relating to reclamation, discharge of hazardous material and other matters. The Company conducts its exploration activities in compliance with applicable environmental protection legislation and is not aware of any existing environmental problems related to its properties that may cause material liability to the Company.
In specific relation to participation by Donner Metals in the construction of the Bracemac-McLeod mine or other capital intensive programs, Donner’s ability to finance its share of the project can be impacted by negative changes to forecast assumptions under the feasibility study and by adverse developments in the financial markets generally that may result in Donner’s inability to fund/finance exploration, mine construction, development and operations.
Although the Company believes that the expectations expressed in such forward-looking information and future-oriented financial information are based on reasonable assumptions available to management at the time the assumptions were made, such statements or information do not guarantee future performance success and no assurances can be given as to future results, levels of activity and achievements. New risk factors may arise from time to time and it is not possible for management to predict all of those risk factors or the extent to which any factor or combination of factors may impact realized results. Actual results or developments may differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements/information and may require achievement of a number of operational, technical, economic, financial and legal objectives. The forward-looking information and future-oriented financial information published by the Company are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. Given these risks and uncertainties, investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as a prediction of actual results.
Cautionary note to U.S. investors – This web site contains information about adjacent properties, specifically in relation to the Perseverance Deposit (owned 100% by Xstrata Zinc), on which we have no right to explore or mine. We advise U.S. investors that the SEC’s mining guidelines strictly prohibit information of this type in documents filed with the SEC. U.S. investors are cautioned that mineral deposits on other properties are not necessarily indicative of mineral deposits on our properties. In addition, we advise that the Company is not an SEC registrant.
We disclose additional information regarding resource estimates and feasibility studies in accordance with NI 43-101. These disclosures can be found on our website and on SEDAR.
– See more at: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/portfolio/donner-metals-company-snapshot#sthash.EJptEXr2.dpuf
Mapped: The 10 Largest Gold Mines in the World, by Production
Gold mining companies produced over 3,500 tonnes of gold in 2021. Where in the world are the largest gold mines?
The 10 Largest Gold Mines in the World, by Production
Gold mining is a global business, with hundreds of mining companies digging for the precious metal in dozens of countries.
But where exactly are the largest gold mines in the world?
The above infographic uses data compiled from S&P Global Market Intelligence and company reports to map the top 10 gold-producing mines in 2021.
Editor’s Note: The article uses publicly available global production data from the World Gold Council to calculate the production share of each mine. The percentages slightly differ from those calculated by S&P.
The Top Gold Mines in 2021
The 10 largest gold mines are located across nine different countries in North America, Oceania, Africa, and Asia.
Together, they accounted for around 13 million ounces or 12% of global gold production in 2021.
|Rank||Mine||Location||Production (ounces)||% of global production|
|#1||Nevada Gold Mines||🇺🇸 U.S.||3,311,000||2.9%|
|#5||Pueblo Viejo||🇩🇴 Dominican Republic||814,000||0.7%|
|#6||Kibali||🇨🇩 Democratic Republic of the Congo||812,000||0.7%|
|#8||Lihir||🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea||737,082||0.6%|
|#9||Canadian Malartic||🇨🇦 Canada||714,784||0.6%|
Share of global gold production is based on 3,561 tonnes (114.5 million troy ounces) of 2021 production as per the World Gold Council.
In 2019, the world’s two largest gold miners—Barrick Gold and Newmont Corporation—announced a historic joint venture combining their operations in Nevada. The resulting joint corporation, Nevada Gold Mines, is now the world’s largest gold mining complex with six mines churning out over 3.3 million ounces annually.
Uzbekistan’s state-owned Muruntau mine, one of the world’s deepest open-pit operations, produced just under 3 million ounces, making it the second-largest gold mine. Muruntau represents over 80% of Uzbekistan’s overall gold production.
Only two other mines—Grasberg and Olimpiada—produced more than 1 million ounces of gold in 2021. Grasberg is not only the third-largest gold mine but also one of the largest copper mines in the world. Olimpiada, owned by Russian gold mining giant Polyus, holds around 26 million ounces of gold reserves.
Polyus was also recently crowned the biggest miner in terms of gold reserves globally, holding over 104 million ounces of proven and probable gold between all deposits.
How Profitable is Gold Mining?
The price of gold is up by around 50% since 2016, and it’s hovering near the all-time high of $2,000/oz.
That’s good news for gold miners, who achieved record-high profit margins in 2020. For every ounce of gold produced in 2020, gold miners pocketed $828 on average, significantly higher than the previous high of $666/oz set in 2011.
With inflation rates hitting decade-highs in several countries, gold mining could be a sector to watch, especially given gold’s status as a traditional inflation hedge.
The 50 Minerals Critical to U.S. Security
This graphic lists all minerals that are deemed critical to both the economic and national security of the United States.
The 50 Minerals Critical to U.S. Security
The U.S. aims to cut its greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2030 as part of its commitment to tackling climate change, but might be lacking the critical minerals needed to achieve its goals.
The American green economy will rely on renewable sources of energy like wind and solar, along with the electrification of transportation. However, local production of the raw materials necessary to produce these technologies, including solar panels, wind turbines, and electric vehicles, is lacking. Understandably, this has raised concerns in Washington.
In this graphic, based on data from the U.S. Geological Survey, we list all of the minerals that the government has deemed critical to both the economic and national security of the United States.
What are Critical Minerals?
A critical mineral is defined as a non-fuel material considered vital for the economic well-being of the world’s major and emerging economies, whose supply may be at risk. This can be due to geological scarcity, geopolitical issues, trade policy, or other factors.
In 2018, the U.S. Department of the Interior released a list of 35 critical minerals. The new list, released in February 2022, contains 15 more commodities.
Much of the increase in the new list is the result of splitting the rare earth elements and platinum group elements into individual entries rather than including them as “mineral groups.” In addition, the 2022 list of critical minerals adds nickel and zinc to the list while removing helium, potash, rhenium, and strontium.
|Mineral||Example Uses||Net Import Reliance|
|Beryllium||Alloying agent in aerospace, defense industries||11%|
|Aluminum||Power lines, construction, electronics||13%|
|Zirconium||High-temparature ceramics production||25%|
|Germanium||Fiber optics, night vision applications||50%|
|Nickel||Stainless steel, rechargeable batteries||50%|
|Tin||Coatings, alloys for steel||75%|
|Cobalt||Rechargeable batteries, superalloys||76%|
|Antimony||Lead-acid batteries, flame retardants||81%|
|Zinc||Metallurgy to produce galvanized steel||83%|
|Titanium||White pigment, metal alloys||88%|
|Bismuth||Medical, atomic research||94%|
|Tellurium||Solar cells, thermoelectric devices||95%|
|Vanadium||Alloying agent for iron and steel||96%|
|Arsenic||Semi-conductors, lumber preservatives, pesticides||100%|
|Cerium||Catalytic converters, ceramics, glass, metallurgy||100%|
|Dysprosium||Data storage devices, lasers||100%|
|Erbium||Fiber optics, optical amplifiers, lasers||100%|
|Europium||Phosphors, nuclear control rods||100%|
|Fluorspar||Manufacture of aluminum, cement, steel, gasoline||100%|
|Gadolinium||Medical imaging, steelmaking||100%|
|Gallium||Integrated circuits, LEDs||100%|
|Holmium||Permanent magnets, nuclear control rods||100%|
|Indium||Liquid crystal display screens||100%|
|Lanthanum||Catalysts, ceramics, glass, polishing compounds||100%|
|Lutetium||Scintillators for medical imaging, cancer therapies||100%|
|Neodymium||Rubber catalysts, medical, industrial lasers||100%|
|Praseodymium||Permanent magnets, batteries, aerospace alloys||100%|
|Rubidium||Research, development in electronics||100%|
|Samarium||Cancer treatment, absorber in nuclear reactors||100%|
|Scandium||Alloys, ceramics, fuel cells||100%|
|Tantalum||Electronic components, superalloys||100%|
|Terbium||Permanent magnets, fiber optics, lasers||100%|
|Thulium||Metal alloys, lasers||100%|
|Ytterbium||Catalysts, scintillometers, lasers, metallurgy||100%|
|Yttrium||Ceramic, catalysts, lasers, metallurgy, phosphors||100%|
|Iridium||Coating of anodes for electrochemical processes||No data available|
|Rhodium||Catalytic converters, electrical components||No data available|
|Ruthenium||Electrical contacts, chip resistors in computers||No data available|
|Hafnium||Nuclear control rods, alloys||Net exporter|
The challenge for the U.S. is that the local production of these raw materials is extremely limited.
For instance, in 2021 there was only one operating nickel mine in the country, the Eagle mine in Michigan. The facility ships its concentrates abroad for refining and is scheduled to close in 2025. Likewise, the country only hosted one lithium mine, the Silver Peak Mine in Nevada.
At the same time, most of the country’s supply of critical minerals depends on countries that have historically competed with America.
China’s Dominance in Minerals
Perhaps unsurprisingly, China is the single largest supply source of mineral commodities for the United States.
Cesium, a critical metal used in a wide range of manufacturing, is one example. There are only three pegmatite mines in the world that can produce cesium, and all were controlled by Chinese companies in 2021.
Furthermore, China refines nearly 90% of the world’s rare earths. Despite the name, these elements are abundant on the Earth’s crust and make up the majority of listed critical minerals. They are essential for a variety of products like EVs, advanced ceramics, computers, smartphones, wind turbines, monitors, and fiber optics.
After China, the next largest source of mineral commodities to the United States has been Canada, which provided the United States with 16 different elements in 2021.
The Rising Demand for Critical Minerals
As the world’s clean energy transitions gather pace, demand for critical minerals is expected to grow quickly.
According to the International Energy Association, the rise of low-carbon power generation is projected to triple mineral demand from this sector by 2040.
The shift to a sustainable economy is important, and consequently, securing the critical minerals necessary for it is just as vital.
Demographics3 weeks ago
Ranked: The 20 Countries With the Fastest Declining Populations
Misc1 week ago
Visualizing Which Countries Drink the Most Beer
Energy2 weeks ago
Visualizing the World’s Largest Oil Producers
Personal Finance2 weeks ago
Mapped: The Salary You Need to Buy a Home in 50 U.S. Cities
Energy1 week ago
Which Countries Produce the Most Natural Gas?
Agriculture3 weeks ago
Timeline: The Domestication of Animals
Business2 weeks ago
Ranked: The World’s Largest Container Shipping Companies
Energy4 weeks ago
Visualized: Battery Vs. Hydrogen Fuel Cell