Search Documents

By D. Suarez

The work of engineers responsible for the design and performance of mine facilities is often challenged by economic and practical constraints in the field. Problems have developed in implementing design criteria dictated by persons or agencies not familiar with the dynamic nature of mine engineering. Regional and site-specific conditions frequently require changes to standard designs, or the use of a completely innovative approach, which is not provided for in the regulations. The implementation of engineering design, therefore, usually requires a hard-sell approach to management and regulatory agencies that allows for a happy-medium to all parties concerned. Flexibility on the part of the regulatory agencies is needed to solve operational and environmental problems with sound engineering. Typical hydrologic issues which will be discussed fall in the following general categories: ? Design criteria for sizing water control structures (i.e., culverts, diversion and sedimentation ponds, ditches, etc.) ? Implementation (construction and operation) difficulties ? Regulatory compliance ? Reclamation planning with hydrologic considerations ? Protection of groundwater resources

Jan 1, 1986

By Edwin B. Wilson

The purpose of the panel's examination of coal mining research and development is to explore how the various groups that make up this research community might work together more efficiently and be more productive. The community, as defined here, includes federal and state governments, coal producers, manufacturers, unions, universities, and industry sponsored research organizations. The framework chosen for these discussions consists of brief presentations by the panel members on their views of the proper role and function of the group they represent. The panel members were also asked to highlight the economic, technical and institutional constraints that affect the performance of research and development and the use of the results. Following these presentations, a number of prepared questions will be discussed by the panel, and audience participation is invited. These questions were given several weeks ago to the panel members for their study. Before proceeding with the panel member reports, a brief review of the importance of R&D to the coal mining industry would be helpful to setting the stage for a constructive dialogue. It is appropriate to begin this review by mentioning that there is complete agreement among the research community that the major goals are: Improve health and safety Protect the environment Increase capital and labor productivity Increase resource recovery Since the basic functions of the academic, industrial and government sectors are different, we should expect that the research and development objectives and priorities, roles and responsibilities under each major goal will be different for each research group. The differences do not represent problem areas. However, problems will arise if the objectives are not properly interfaced at the appropriate time. The consequences of railing to understand the need for integrated programs will be the classic result, best described by the phrase --"a technical success but a commercial failure."

Jan 1, 1978

By Scott G. Britton

Mine exploitation is a broad subject whose focus is the technical skills or efforts needed for the extraction of mineral from a known ore body. Mine exploitation can be considered the very core of the mining engineering discipline. It begins at the conclusion of the exploration and development stages of mining and ends when the ore body is exhausted and the mine (or mines)closes and is reclaimed. Section 8 on mine exploitation is comprised of seven chapters: (1) classification of mining methods, (2) mine surveying and mapping, 3) systems engineering, (4) computer methods, (5) labor relations and training, (6) management and administration, and (7) mine closure, sealing, and abandonment. Each chapter focuses its efforts towards providing detailed and useful information for the engineer on basic mine exploitation principles. The information can be applied to a broad range of mining problems without regard to mineral type or mining method.

Jan 1, 2008

By Trevor R. Ellis

Minerals appraisers/valuers often find great difficulty in attempting to employ the sales comparison approach to the market value appraisal of development and operating stage mineral properties. An important factor generally overlooked is a comparison of net operating income (NOI) margins on a per-unit-of-production basis between mineral properties, whether these be demonstrated or forecast margins. NOI margins can vary greatly between mines or quarries that are producing similar products. Ultimately, the expected NOI margin determines what a buyer is willing to pay for an income-producing property. Here, common criticisms of the sales comparison approach by mineral appraisers are introduced. These are counterbalanced by raising some issues in the way the inputs for the income approach are usually derived by minerals appraisers and by review of some conspicuous examples of the much-too-common misuse or abuse of the income approach in market value mineral appraisals. Example transaction analyses and sales comparison analyses are used to demonstrate the author?s methodology for adjusting units of resource in his transaction adjustment tables. The examples are used as the basis for a discussion of ways to employ adjustments for operating economics and many other factors, while warning against the potential for double counting. The conclusions include a recommendation that minerals appraisers attempt to apply at least two of the three valuation approaches when appraising the market or fair value of development and operating stage mineral properties, the two being the sales comparison and income approaches.

Jan 1, 2011

"How Wall Street Darling Molycorp Undermined the U.S. Economy, Degraded our National Security and Distorted the Global Economic Balance and How These Falsehoods Continue to be Promoted Even Today INTRODUCTION & SUMMARY In 2007 the Molycorp Mountain Pass rare earth mine was resurrected from its desert-grave in California by its then-owner Chevron Mining. Responding to elevated rare earth prices Chevron began processing on-site rare earth concentrates left over from past mining operations that were terminated in 1998i. Chinese demand had sparked what was being described as a commodities super-cycleii. Commodity prices were on the move. Wall Street smelled opportunity. In 2008 Goldman Sachs, Pegasus Partners, Resource Capital Funds, Traxys North America LLC and Carint Group LLC acquired the mining assets from Chevron. In an environment of ever-declining ethical standards and regulatory consequences the private capital group and their investment bankers would bring Molycorp to market. Molycorp, with its high powered investment banking team of Morgan Stanley and J.P. Morganiii, easily dominated the contest. Molycorp promoted itself, largely based on its past operating history and proven reserves, as the best company to challenge China’s monopoly control over the production of rare earths: a group of elements critical to most advanced technologies and U.S. defense systemsiv. Most of Wall Street’s hottest investment sectors were dependent on these materials: alternative energy, green technologies, computing, personal communications, advanced electronics and defense systems. By late 2010 there were dozens of prospective rare earth start-up ‘mining companies’ seeking capital. Eventually the number of prospective rare earth mining companies seeking capital exceeded 400, despite the reality that supply requirements of this market were disproportionally small when compared to other natural resource sectorsv. In the world of finance ‘smart money’ picks the winners. Consequently just twovi projects attracted nearly all of the capital (Molycorp and Lynas). Wall street picked Molycorpvii. This paper will primarily focus on Molycorp. By early 2010 the words “Molycorp” and “Rare Earths” electrified many people in the mining industry, most non-Chinese manufacturing technology companies, U.S. & allied defense contractors, technocrats in the U.S. national security community and eager investors across most of the world’s stock markets. It was the hottest story of the yearviii. The financial, technology and defense press coverage verged on euphoric: heaping fuel on fuel until the highly combustible Molycorp-pyre cast a long shadow over all of its rivalsix. When the IPO match was lit the spectacular flaming pyre sucked all of the oxygen out of the rare earth spacex. Molycorp was ranked the most lucrative IPO of 2010, resulting in record breaking profits to its private investors and massive returns for its early stock holding investors."

Jan 1, 2017

With the dawning of a new century came the beginning of a new era in the coal industry. Instead of the traditional practice of only buying and selling produced coal in the United States, a coal futures market was established. The New York Mercantile Exchange began trading coal futures in July 2001. But, even in this new era, many of the old is-sues that have beset the coal industry still remain, as was evident in2001. Coal production increased to are cord level during 2001, according to preliminary data from the US Energy Information Administration(EIA). Production in 2001 rose by4% to 1.01 Gt (1.12 billion st), compared with 2000 (Table 1). This barely surpassed the previous record level of 1 Gt (1.11 billion st)set in 1998. Coal consumption remained unchanged. The additional production was used to replenish the depleted stockpiles that had resulted after two years of declining coal production and increasing coal consumption.

Jan 1, 2002

By H. Lyn Bourne

This is the seventh annual tabulation of royalty information. It is also the first year in which some data have been deleted to make room for new data. The concept of royalties evolved from a time when the government owned all of the land, including mines, to the situation where free miners won the right to claim minerals but paid a portion of their production to the royal treasury. Today, a mineral royalty is a payment to the owner of the mineral rights for the privilege of producing the mineral commodity. However, some people incorrectly believe that the selling price and the royalty are the same thing. The contract between the owner (lessor) and the mining company (lessee) is the mineral lease. Some clauses that are common to mineral leases include: identification of property, granting clause, reservations, definitions, royalty rate, taxes and title, indemnity, termination, inspection, assignability, successors, and reclamation. There often are variations in royalty rates for a given commodity that reflect differences in location, quality, market conditions or public versus private ownership. History In the time of ancient Rome, the government owned the mining properties by virtue of conquest. It would lease the mines to favored citizens who would pay rent to the State. Various conditions of sovereign ownership of both land and mineral rights continued in Europe until the Renaissance. As the laws evolved for land ownership by private citizens, the concept that minerals belonged to the State (King, Crown, sovereign) continued until about the 15th century. Free miners challenged the notion of sovereign ownership and won the right to discover and claim minerals. But a portion of their production had to be paid to the sovereign - a royalty. So, the original concept of a mineral royalty was a tax on production that was due to the Crown or Church. The term mineral royalty, as it is known today, is a payment to the owner of the mineral rights (formerly the royal owner) for the privilege of mining and producing the mineral commodity. The owner of the mineral rights, the lessor, and the mine operator, the lessee, enter into an agreement to mine the property. The agreement is the lease. While this concept is common, there are some who do not understand that the royalty is a portion of production paid to the owner as agreed on in the lease document. This author has seen reports where the selling price of a commodity has been quoted as the royalty. ("They get 70 cents a ton royalty at their pit and the guy down the road only has a 65 cent royalty.") These reports have been authored by people not familiar with the mining industry. Lease clauses In addition to the amount to be paid the lessor, there are several other items to be addressed in the lease agreement. The following list may not be all inclusive, but briefly describes most of the common clauses any good mining lease should contain. Identification: This opening clause names the owner (lessor) and the operator (lessee), the address of each, and gives the legal description of the property. Granting clause: This part of the lease gives the time period or duration of the agreement and information about renewal periods. It also has language about the exclusive right of the lessee to mine the property. Reservations: If the owner wants to exclude any portion of the property or set some specific conditions about the operation, there needs to be a clause that describes these reservations. Definitions: This section should address some of the technical terms that the lessor may find confusing - short tons versus cubic yards, dollars versus percentage of average selling price, any escalator indices such as consumer price index or producer price index, and material mined versus material sold. Royalty: This section spells out what the royalty rate will be, how often it will be paid, if there is an annual minimum, the pay dates, and how the records will be kept. This section also describes the conditions under which the lessee is exempt from the annual minimum - natural disasters, strikes, governmental actions, or other causes referred to as force majeure. Taxes and title: The lease needs to identify who is responsible for the property taxes, severance taxes (if applicable), and other taxes that relate to the mining activity - taxes on equipment, improvements, or stockpiles. This is a good place in the lease for the owner to certify his ownership of the property and its mineral rights and also certify that no other leases are in effect. The lessees may want language that allows them to pay mortgages or other debts on the property to keep their lease in effect. Indemnity: This portion of the lease identifies that the lessee assumes the risks for lessee's mining operation. Lessor should expect indemnification by the lessee through standard insur¬ance policies - workers compensation, liability and property damage. Termination: Both the lessor and lessee want language that will allow them to terminate the lease. This section of the lease describes the conditions under which one of the parties may terminate the lease (failure of the

Jan 1, 1989

By D. R. Wilburn

This summary of international mineral exploration activities for the year 2009 draws upon information from industry sources, published literature and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) specialists. The summary provides data on industry exploration budgets by region and mineral commodity, identifies significant mineral discoveries and areas of mineral exploration, discusses government programs affecting the mineral exploration industry and presents analyses of exploration activities by the mineral industry based upon these data. Two types of information are reported and analyzed in this annual review of international exploration for the year 2009: 1) budgetary statistics expressed in U.S. nominal dollars provided by Metals Economics Group (MEG) of Halifax, Nova Scotia, and 2) information on regional and site-specific exploration activities that took place in 2009 and were compiled by the USGS. The MEG information summarizes planned company budgets for worldwide exploration activities in 2009, primarily for base metals (copper, lead, nickel and zinc), diamond and precious metals (gold, platinum-group metals and silver). Information on uranium exploration was included in the MEG overview for the first time in 2007, although this information was not included in the USGS analysis prior to 2008. The MEG survey methodology was changed in 1999 to include companies with exploration budgets greater than $100,000, as well as those companies included in prior studies whose anticipated budgets were above $2.9 million. MEG estimates that its post-1999 surveys cover at least 90 percent of world nonferrous nonfuel mineral exploration budgets. The 2009 survey is reported by MEG to cover an estimated 95 percent. Companies who chose not to participate in the MEG study, private companies that do not publish data and government-funded exploration activities make up the majority of the remaining 5 percent. MEG included 86 more companies in its 2009 survey than it did in 2008.

May 1, 2010

By Tim O’Neil

Nearly 4,800 mining professionals and exhibitors occupying 580 booths attended the 2000 SME Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Feb. 28-March 1, in Salt Lake City, UT. The technical program included80 sessions and four specialty symposia: bulk material handling, control 2000, minor elements 2000 and plant operaters. Meeting highlights included the keynote session. Executive shared their perspectives on pivotal issues and approaches to address the challenges of the new millennium. SME has begun planning for its 2001 Annual Meeting, Feb. 26-28, in Denver, CO. The meeting carries the theme “2001 — A Mining Odyssey.” A call for papers has been issued and exhibit space is 80% reserved. For information, visit SME’s website, www.sme-net.org. Or write Box 625002, Littleton, CO 80162-5002,ph 800 763 3132 or 303 973 9550, fax 303 979 3461, or email meetings@smenet.org.

Jan 1, 2000

By Landy A. Stinnett

Coal mines in the United States are the most productive in the world in terms of efficient labor employment. This is because of an abundance of workable coal beds, large infusions of capital, improved management practices and continuing competitive pressures. The standard unit of measurement for labor productivity is expressed as tons/manshift, although for underground mines, operators often refer to tons per machineshift. Articles written concerning labor productivity generally focus on measurement techniques, safety considerations, application of technology and training. This article will illustrate by example the impact of labor efficiency (or inefficiency) on the ultimate selling price of coal, f.o.b. mine site. During the past several years, the coal industry has seen significant improvement in labor use. Figure 1 shows the trends in productivity for all active mines in the United States from 1985 through 1994. Productivity in 1985 was 20.1 t/manshift (22.1 st/ manshift). This factor has increased almost linearly throughout that period to 37.5 t/manshift (41.2 st/manshift). This is a 7.2% annual compound growth rate.

Jan 1, 1995

By M. C. Williams, T. P. Meloy

With the increasing power of computers to simulate and control processes in the mineral industry, predicting the potential use of computers in the minerals field is not a hazardous enterprise, but predicting the timing of their use is. Like the railroad industry, technology invades the mineral industry, rather than being an industry like electronics that creates technology. Because of this invasive nature of computer technology in the minerals field, this paper predicts what will be possible to do effectively and economically with computers in the mineral industry. Moreover, this paper explores the problems of using the emerging computer technology in the mineral industry. For example, if not now, it soon will be possible to control the output of a mineral processing circuit - high grade, high flow or a mixture of it - to meet the daily market conditions and to sell each day that daily "mill" output as "mill" futures on the commodity market. Finally, suggestions are made which may be done to prepare the industry for the computer revolution in the mineral industry.

Jan 1, 1993

By R. L. Wiegel, G. R. Oswald

The processors of Florida phosphate rock face constraints similar to those of other mineral operations--leaner ore, more complex treatment schemes and a product which sells for a penny a pound. IMC Fertilizer is a dominant producer in this market with its current operation of five processing plants. An emphasis by their management in maintaining and improving plant performance has continued unabated for some 15 years. This has resulted in a commitment to the importance of routine automatic sampling of product and in process streams, the generation of reliable assay and size distribution data, the accurate measurement of process flows, and the computerized "rendering" of this information into weekly and monthly material balances which provide consistent measures of process performance. In addition, there has been a parallel program to monitor and improve the performance of flotation reagents and to evaluate process modifications or changes in equipment. This paper will describe the evaluation techniques that have evolved over this period and indicate how the historical data base is used to identify plant problems early and help in their solution.

Jan 1, 1991

By R. J. Sweigard, R. V. Ramani

The effects of postmining land use planning are addressed in this paper. These effects may include savings in reclamation costs and increased value of reclaimed land. However, this may result in greater planning costs and possible delays in production. Therefore, an economic analysis was undertaken in an effort to determine the importance of each potential result and to quantify the overall economic impact of postmining land use planning. A discounted cash flow analysis was performed using a surface mine cost model to analyze the sensitivity of selling price to changes in various postmining land use planning parameters. As a result of this analysis, it was determined that the profitability of a project is most sensitive to delays in production, particularly if the delay occurs after major investments have been made. Many methods have been proposed for evaluating postmining land use alternatives (Sweigard and Ramani, 1981). Both quantitative methods, such as benefit-cost analysis (Brock and Brooks, 1968), and nonquantitative methods have been proposed. The application of one specific analytical method is pursued in this paper.

Jan 1, 1988

By Ted T. Biddle

The world energy crisis has created a greatly expanded exploration program for energy fuels. The demand for materials required for drilling operations such as barite, which is the primary component of drilling fluids, has increased proportionally. As in the case of many other minerals, existing high grade barite mines are no longer capable of producing the required tonnage. Consequently, exploration and development of lower grade ore bodies has been increased. The need to produce a high quality product at maximum recovery rates, along with the ever changing economics affecting both selling price and production costs has triggered accelerated research programs toward more sophisticated and efficient beneficiation methods. Taking into account the specific gravity differential between barite (4.5) and the normal gangue minerals such as silica and calcite (2.7), gravity concentration methods are the prime consideration with flotation as a scavenging process. Greater emphasis on particle size liberation, size reduction and concentration is also indicated. In order to accomplish these objectives, it has been necessary to revert back to the old adage, "Recover your minerals as soon as they are free."

Jan 1, 1980

By d&apos, I. J. Agati

The stockpiling and reclaiming of bulk materials can be a challenging task for engineers seeking the optimum solution for plant needs, reliability, and at lowest unit cost. The objective of this paper will be to expose advantages, disadvantages and limitations of many storage and reclaiming systems to the responsible engineer and management. The paper will emphasize the practical aspect of stockpiling and reclaiming methods. Many valuable and interesting papers are available dealing with the theoretical viewpoint and application of a particular manufacturer's machine. Several of these are mentioned in the bibliography. As many practical parameters as possible will be given. After twenty years in the field of designing and selling bulk materials handling systems, the needs of the user and the plant are recognized and reasonably understood. This paper cannot give solutions to all problems In this vast field but will stress practical applications and examples of various installations. The evolution of advancements in materials handling is based upon not only technological innovations, but learning from many experiences of others and utilizing them as stepping stones to improved installations.

Jan 1, 1969

Let’s start off with your assessment of the mining industry. Today, the status of the mining industry is stronger than it has been over the previous few years. While mining continues to be a major part of the world’s economic foundation, the industry is gaining strength due to rebounding metals and minerals prices. And now, with these rising prices and the changes the industry instituted during the years when mining-related commodities were selling at low prices, our stronger, more productive and internationally competitive industry should flourish. Mining remains an essential business and the industry is far ahead of the game when it comes to the trend of globalization as a key to sustained growth. Also, the industry continues to realize increased productivity through technological innovations. And an increasing number of countries are moving towards capitalism, which opens doors for exploration and mining within their borders. After looking at all of these factors, I believe that the mining industry will only continue to gain momentum in the future.

Jan 1, 2004

By Steve Kral

It seems that mining has been in the doldrums for awhile. Except for gold, metals prices remain depressed. And economic conditions in the United States and around the globe have put governments in a financial bind. This affects new building and infra-structure repairs, which, in turn, have a major impact the building materials industry. Add to that the severe environmental and regulatory restrictions placed on the mining industry in developing new mines and expanding existing ones. It’s enough to make a mining engineer/geologist/metallurgist go sell real estate. So why do those employed in the mining industry stay in the business and remain optimistic? Many of them will say that they have been through down cycles before and know that an upswing is in the offing. They also know that society will always need the commodities they produce. And they love the challenge. The challenge in mining’s case is producing commodities as cheaply as possible, in an environmentally sound manner and improving the quality of life in the communities where they work.

Jan 1, 2003

By M. C. Azar, W. B. Mason, G. L. Anderson

Eminent domain overview Eminent domain is the power of the Government or a municipality to take property for public use without the consent or acceptance of the owner. Typically, the agency taking the prop¬erty will make an offer, hoping the owner will immediately accept and allow work to begin. If a mutual resolution regard¬ing its value cannot be reached, how¬ever, the municipality will institute a condemnation action in court seeking possion of the property. This is when the problems begin. The power of the Government to take the subject property is limited by Federal and state constitu¬tional requirements to pay "just com¬pensation" for the property. The exact nature of an owner's prop¬erty has been the subject of much debate and discussion. It is generally under¬stood, though, that property is consid¬ered to be "every kind of right or inter¬est, capable of being enjoyed and recog¬nized as such, upon which it is practi¬cable to place a money value" (US vs. 53 114 Acres of Land). A taking, for condemnation purposes, is considered to occur whenever there is a substantial interference with the free use and enjoyment of the property. Rarely is the necessity for the taking ever challenged and more rarely is the taking ever successfully challenged. When a taking occurs, it is not only the fee owner who is entitled to compen¬sation. Every person holding an interest in the subject property will be recog¬nized. Thus, all persons who at the time of taking have a compensable interest in the property will be made parties to the case (Swanson vs. US). Minerals, like all other interests in land, are recognized as property rights, giving the owner the power to dispose of them as he or she sees fit. Thus, the only remaining considera¬tion is only "just compensation." Ex¬actly what "just compensation" is has been difficult to define. Generally, it is that amount of money that will "put the person in as good a position as the per¬son would have been in had the taking not occurred." The owner must not be forced to sacrifice or suffer by receiving less than full and fair value for the prop¬erty. Every element that effects the value of the land and that would influence a purchaser must be evaluated. Courts have employed a variety of techniques to determine just compensa¬tion but have generally relied on market value as the standard for measuring compensation to the owner. The deter¬mination of market value is based on sales, income, costs, and use. These factors have been employed in various ways but can be summed up as: -The highest estimated monetary price the property will bring if exposed for sale in the open market with a reason¬able amount of time allowed to find a purchaser who is buying with knowl¬edge of all the uses and purposes to which it is adapted and for which it is capable of being used. • The amount the property would bring if it were offered for sale by one who desired, but was not obliged, to sell, and was bought by one who was willing, but not obliged to buy. • What the property would bring in the hands of a prudent seller, at liberty to fix the time and conditions of sale. • What the property would sell for in negotiations resulting in sale between an owner willing, but not obliged to sell, and a buyer willing, but not obliged to buy. • What the property would be rea¬sonably worth on the market for a cash price, allowing a reasonable time to affect a sale. (Michigan Standard Jury Instructions). Special consideration regarding mar¬ket value is given when the taking is only partial, rather than complete. An example of this partial taking is when a state highway cuts across the northern half of a parcel of property, leaving the rest behind for the owner. A variety of problems can be immediately seen. In a partial taking, the owner is permitted to recover not only for the property taken, but also for any loss in the value of the remaining property. The measure of compensation for partial taking purposes is generally the difference between the market value of the entire parcel before the taking, and the market value of what is left of the parcel after the taking (Michigan Stan¬dard Jury Instructions). Determining the partial taking value for mineral bear¬ing lands is the difficult issue.

Jan 1, 1989

By James R. Evans

Orange County, adjacent to the populous and industrialized Los Angeles area, is the fastest growing county in California and is second only to Los Angeles County in total population (figure 1). In addition to an equable climate and a burgeoning economy, there is room in Orange County for growth and expansion. Growth over the past decade has resulted in rapid development of industrial tracts, housing areas, and shopping and commercial centers, mostly in former agricultural areas. The value of new building in 1972 was a record amount-over I billion dollars (figure 2). Problems relating to the proper direction of growth are the concern of both government and the private sector. The intelligent and efficient use of areas to be developed requires planning for the conservation and protection of the County's natural beauty and for the orderly development of natural resources. The availability of sand and gravel, which is used in many phases of construction, will be a major controlling factor in the future of the County.

Jan 1, 1974

By Arne Paus-Jenssen

The potash industry in Saskatchewan has recently been the focus of much new legislation at the provincial level and, along with other mining industries in Canada, also subject to changes in tax legislation at the federal level. As a result, the industry presently operates under (a) provincial production controls, a prorationing scheme; (b) a new provincial reserve tax on potash only and; (c) a new federal income tax applicable to all mineral industries. The prorating scheme dates back to 1970 and emerged as public policy because of the excess supply situation faced by the international potash industry towards the end of the sixties. This caused special problems for new mines in Saskatchewan and the provincial government decided to intervene. The new tax legislation at provincial and federal levels, both introduced within the last four years, reflects a belief that insufficient revenues accrue to the public sector from natural resources. All mining industries in Canada, including the potash industry, have had their tax positions completely reversed during these four years. Traditionally the mining sector in Canada has been a recipient of substantial tax incentives and has enjoyed low tax rates. This has changed and the mining sector is now one of the most heavily taxed sectors in the economy. In addition, the mining sector has moved from a situation where its rapid development was favoured by governments to a situation where this is no longer the case.

Jan 1, 1976