Disclaimer Page 2
Page 3
Share Price (13 July 2012 ) $ 0.085 Shares On Issue m 160.1 Market Capitalisation $m 13.6 Cash (30 June 2012) $m 4.7 Convertible Note $m 5.0 Enterprise Value $m 13.9 (For further details, please see Appendices) Page 4
Target Dates 2014 2013 2012 Page 5
Page 7
Source: CM Group Page 8
Source: Alufer Page 10
Page 11
Page 13
Page 14
Transhipment is an obvious solution for Cape Alumina s projects Western Cape York has shallow water, sheltered seas; and no infrastructure. A small port and barge loading facility will be located in the Skardon / Ducie Rivers. The product is then loaded and exported to market. Low environmental foot print, with minimal onshore buildings, stockpiles and reduced dust emissions is a key benefit of the proposed transhipping system. Cape alumina will develop its transhipping operations from the ground up, with no existing infrastructure available. Page 15
Cape Alumina is proposing to employ selfunloading barges, a stable of CSL s business. Shallow draught barges will tranship Cape Alumina s product 15 to 20 nautical miles offshore to a mooring in the Gulf to load Panamax and Cape size ships Page 16
1 1. Excluding the Pisolite and Bauxite Hills project areas, the total resource potential is conceptual in nature and there has been insufficient work completed to define a mineral resource across all of Cape Alumina s exploration tenements at this stage. Estimated tonnage range is 300 400 Mt and the estimated beneficiated grade range is 47-54 per cent Al 2 O 3 and 8-12 per cent SiO 2 assuming average 65 per cent recovery. Page 17
Page 18
The Skardon River loading location is approximately 7-10 kms from the proposed beneficiation plant where export product will be stockpiled and loaded on to barges through a newly constructed barge loading terminal facility. Other options were considered for the barge loading facility. Open coast Ducie River across from Pisolite Hill proposed barge loading facility. Barge loader Bontang Coal Terminal Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
The studies examined the influence of barging on; overall cost of operations and its impact on project viability, the likely marine transport options and resulting costs They were evaluated using GHD s logistics cost model for the transfer of bauxite from the barge loading facility to the export vessels, and on to market. The supply chain includes a number of steps that are typical for dry commodity logistics systems. The supply chain includes: Transfer of product from the barge terminal stockpile to barges. Transport of product from the barge terminal to the ship loading point, and empty return ; Transfer of product from the barge to the receiving export vessel. Page 23
For the purposes of the GHD pre-feasibility study three barge types have been considered with a range of sizes (1500 to 4000 dwt). These barge types are defined as: Dumb Barge: no means of propulsion and is reliant on a tug boat Self-propelled: Fitted with a means of mechanical propulsion (no tug boat required) Self-unloading barges: Self-unloading conveying system Barge sailing distance and travel time is dependent on the marine environment, and the export vessel specifications. This is due to draught requirements and achievable water depths in the area. Page 24
Five transfer and transhipment options have been identified Option 1: Self-geared vessels: utilises Handy and Handymax class vessels that are self-geared with grab cranes to undertake direct transfer of product between the barge and the vessel. Option 2: Barge crane: the use of a barge crane operating with larger grabs. This type of operation allows the system to load all ship classes, including Panamax and Cape size vessels Option 3: Transfer platform: utilises Self Unloading Barges, capable of discharging at an average load rate of 3000 tph and 4000 tph. Option 4: Silo vessel: uses a converted Capesize vessel which is to be fitted with grab cranes to load ships of the same size or smaller, and to unload barges. Option 5: Transhipment vessel: utilises a converted Capesize vessel fitted with four grab cranes and a travelling ship loader. Each of the ship loading options has different performance characteristics that influence the type of barging operation and the overall system capacity. Page 25
2.5MTPA Barge Operations (Utilisation and $/tonne) The lowest cost option for the Skardon River location was the use of self-geared vessels; however, the level of system utilisation identified a high level of operational risk that may result in failing to meet the target export volume, and potential demurrage impact due to vessel delays. In addition, when the cost of export shipping is considered, the impact of small vessels resulted in a high cost option when delivered to the customer. Page 26
2.5 MTPA Export Shipment + Barge Operations (Utilisation, USD/tonne) At an export volume of 2.5MTPA from the Skardon River location, the lowest cost to risk option was provided through the charter of a barge crane (750 tph), with 4,000 dwt or above dumb barges and tugs. Page 27
5MTPA Barge Operations (Utilisation and $/tonne) At an export volume of 5MTPA from the Skardon River location, the lowest cost to risk option was provided through the use of self -unloading barges (of maximum achievable size) and tugs utilising a high speed transhipment platform. Page 28
5MTPA Barge Operations + Export Shipping (Utilisation, USD/tonnes) Where possible, large vessel classes should be used in order to achieve the high load rates during barge transhipment to minimise vessel time, and maximise economies of scale through large payloads to minimise the sea-freight cost to the customer, as this will be likely to affect the achievable contract price. Page 29
Self-Unloading Barge and transfer platform The GHD study concluded that self-unloading barges appear the optimal operation. Self-unloading barges similar to those used at Arrium s operations in South Australia are proposed for Cape Alumina s projects. 4,000 tonne barges were considered for Bauxite Hills 10,000 tonne barges were considered for Pisolite Hills Source: http://cslaustralia/transhipment_gallery.html Page 30
Further investigations required Optimisation of transhipment operations Scale 2, 3, 5, >5? Link projects capture synergies Investigate alternatives that could deliver lower costs capital & operating Investigate options for funding outsourcing transhipment; or owner / operator Investigate options for early start up Facilitate lower initial production levels charter / short term contract Facilitate delivery time for long term barges Investigate the purchase of second hand equipment INVESTIGATIONS WILL FEED INTO THE BANKABLE FEASIBILITY STUDIES Page 31
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Option 1: Self-geared vessels Source: http://adaro.com/annualreport2010/pages/en/04_management/3002.html Option 2: Barge crane Source: http://demagcranes-ag.de/files/content/sites/global/files/bilder/presse/bildarchiv/hafentechnologie/bild10g.jpg; http://lda.fr/img/310_dona-felicia.jpg Page 37
Option 3: Transfer platform Source: http://cslaustralia/transhipment_gallery.html Option 4: Silo vessel Source: http://cnco.com.hk/fleet/bulk-carriers; http://swireshipping.com/images/stories/article/fleet/bulkcarriers /MV_ERAWAN.pdf Page 38
Options 5: Transhipment vessel Source: http://seabulk.com/goa.html Page 39
Pisolite Hills - Barge Facilities The function of the barge loading terminal is to load beneficiated bauxite onto self unloading barges of approximately 10,000 DWT. Production levels of 3, 5, 7 and 10 Mtpa have been considered. The size of ship that the marine operation must be capable of handling is a Panamax vessel up to 75,000 DWT with an option to facilitate loading of Cape size vessels of 160,000DWT. The facility would be designed to operate on a 24 hours per day, 7 days per week basis and would only be shut down for scheduled maintenance, emergency breakdowns and cyclones. The limiting conditions for transhipping at sea would be winds gusting to 20 m/s. The following port capacities have been assumed: 3 Mtpa 5.0 Mtpa 7.0 Mtpa Maximum load out rate t/h 2,500 2,500 2,500 Average load out rate t/h 1,250 1,385 1,385 Ship capacity (average) t 75,000 160,000 160,000 No. of vessels per year 40 33 47 Page 40
Cape Alumina Limited