All right. Look, good morning, everyone. For those of you who've made the time to come in here in Sydney, welcome, and thank you, and for those online, hopefully, it's all coming through clearly, and we don't have any technical issues through the day. We are live streaming this session so we can include more of our stakeholders. First of all, I just wanted to recognize this big milestone. I've been in the company since I guess the beginning of the year, and been a lot of change, a lot to do and one of the big focuses for me was to go back and think about our strategy, refresh that, and to be here today to share that is a milestone.
I want to also, just before we get in too far, just acknowledge the country that we're meeting on today, certainly here in Sydney, and the Gadigal people, the Eora Nation. Pay my respects to their elders, past and present. And, of course, all of the traditional owners where we operate and explore across Australia, predominantly Western Australia and Northern Territory, and recognize and acknowledge their custodianship of that country as well. Today, I've got the entire executive leadership team with me. They all traveled across yesterday, so you'll see more of them in a minute. But everyone knows Kath Bozanic here in the front row. Brett's brand new, and you'll get to know him more in a minute.
Sam Retallack has been with the business the longest in this team and brings with her that connection with our culture, the history and the legacy and who IGO is and how we got to where we are today. That's a very important part of what drew me to IGO, and so grateful to have Sam here as part of the team. Marie's also just joined after a short break, leaving BHP. Cameron Wilson, some of you may know, he's worked in the industry for a long time across a number of different mining companies, and he stepped in very kindly, coming out of his local farm to help us in an acting role while we search for a new chief legal officer.
Cameron brings enormous experience, and so, again, I'm very grateful to have him on the team. Today, we released a large pack of material on the ASX, and, that's something I'm sure you've all picked up, and we'll go through some of those slides. In terms of the format and the approach for the day, look, I want to spend some time on the market context early on. For me, when we talk about lithium, and I'll talk about some other relevant battery materials, there's a lot of uncertainties, there's a lot of unknowns. I think taking the time to go through that market context slowly and what's informed our strategy, what's informed our thinking, is very important, so we're going to do a bit of work on that.
I'll then, of course, talk through our strategy and give you the headlines, the key messages, and the direction where we see our business going. As I said, this is a view out 10 years to 2035 , so it's not about the next couple of years alone. Then I'm going to bring the team up, and as you know, strategy, the first part is that deep thinking and the analysis and the work to determine where you want to head. The second 20% is the decisions and the hard choices. Roger Martin's someone who writes and provides a lot of guidance on strategy, and he talks about strategy as choice. Strategy is those hard decisions, and those are the pieces that we're working through.
But for me, the most important piece of strategy is, of course, that last 60%, and that's execution and the delivery. And we're going to touch on that, at a high level today. The team will talk through their relevant parts of that. You'll get a chance to interact with that. That's a place where I think, it'd be good to make it more interactive, so I'm very open if, once we get to that stage, to take some questions to clarify those points. What I would ask you to do is, as I go through the first two sections, to just hold your questions there, and we'll come back to them at the end. What I'm trying to avoid is that we get bogged down in market context and, you know, broader topics before we actually get through the whole story.
When I joined IGO late last year, one of the things that stood out for me and drew me to this business was our purpose, and that was something that we did test, and I'll talk more to it in a minute. But there was absolute conviction from the team around our role contributing to the energy transition, the opportunity that this presents for a mining company, a materials company, and the kind of growth opportunities, particularly in that, Battery Materials segment. The other, you know, part of the puzzle, I guess, is how we do mining, and that's another piece of who IGO is and, another key area of focus. And again, the team, as we worked through this, had absolute conviction around our purpose on that front.
And so that piece very quickly got confirmed, and then we stepped through the process of testing things beyond that. The quality of the core underlying assets was another standout for me when I joined, and I think that's just shone through as we've looked at a very difficult period in the commodity cycle for lithium and nickel, that both Nova and Greenbushes stand out as assets that generate great returns regardless. So the underlying strength of IGO carries through, but equally, how we operate as a mining company, the way we bring our values to life and, most importantly, our culture and how that plays out in the way that we make decisions. The strategy we've going to present today has taken us the best part of six months to develop.
I have dedicated internal teams focused on that, and I want to thank that team. I'm very grateful for the work they've done. We certainly did have some external input and advice and experts from the industry to support us through that, but this work was done internally, and I'm really proud and of the work that's done. Equally, I think the level of connection and understanding through the team, because it was built in-house, is very strong, and that positions us well for that next phase of execution. So this isn't just a nice set of slides that sits on the shelf and doesn't get followed through. For me, the, you know, the value that we deliver, and we're going to talk a lot about returns and discipline as we get into this, it doesn't change though.
Fundamentally, the ore bodies that we access drive inherent value. Secondly, and particularly in lithium, the technologies and the techniques for how we extract and process those minerals is very important, and that's an area that we'll talk more about, how we think we can bring some differentiation. Thirdly, building fit for purpose, low CapEx intensity assets is also important, and as you know, the lithium industry has emerged very quickly, and so decisions and thinking on that hasn't been tested or really challenged, and that's an area, again, I think needs deep thought, and lastly, the commercial aspects are important. Brett will talk more to this as we go, but the market's still very immature. It's still nascent, still developing, and the way that lithium materials and chemicals are valued is still maturing as part of that.
We think, again, that's an area that can be improved, and we can bring some value to that, particularly with our partner, Tianqi, who's got deep expertise in this industry. So first of all, on the market context, as I said, we spent a lot of time doing some analysis and thinking about the market, what drives it, and I guess first and foremost, started with the energy transition. And we went back to that and said, "You know, where is it we want to play? Where do we see the opportunity?" And we have conviction around that transition. As a subset within it, we believe that the materials therefore for energy storage or battery materials are very important in underpinning the EV transition.
While we're seeing differences in the markets around take-up and demand there, China's progressing very well, and I'll talk more to that in a minute. Other markets like Europe and the U.S. are still progressing, albeit slower, and there are some dislocations, and that's not unusual for a large-scale transition. But the opportunity that this transition presents, particularly around battery materials, in our view, is still very attractive. And so that played through. I guess the next piece to think about is which commodities in that segment, and we tested that. You can see very quickly we came back to the three big value pools. No surprise. Lithium, copper, and nickel are standouts in this segment, and there's some statistics there even for a typical battery.
But we did take the time to look at other commodities and think about whether, there's opportunity there that we need to realize, whether there's strengths that we have that would play well into those, commodities. And our conclusion is not to exclude them completely, but to focus heavily on the three big value pools where we think we can generate the most impact. Now, no big surprise, and it's not a major pivot from where we were, but there was a lot more thought that went into as we went through that. And I'll talk in a minute to those commodities, what it takes to be successful and to make a difference in those. They each have very different dynamics and characteristics. Talking a bit more about the EV market, this is a great chart.
Andy Leyland from SC Insights put this together, and I think it brings to life a very simple view of how we think this market might evolve. The blue phase, I think we're all familiar with. We saw that sort of the tail end of COVID, where there was a small segment of consumers who really wanted an EV, and they pursued it. There was more demand than supply, and the market bubbled along nicely. China was moving very quickly, and we had a shortage of raw materials and lots of price inflection. We're in the pink phase for most of the world right now, and this is the other side of that. You know, a place where capacity is now in excess of demand. There's more selective consumers looking at plug-in hybrids and different versions of EVs.
And so this is the beginning of that shift and that transition. The most important phase for me on this chart, though, is the yellow phase, and this is the place where EVs, on all major metrics, outstrip the ICEs, the internal combustion engine vehicles. And I think China's largely there. If we look at the product they're producing on the basis of cost, performance, features, support, they're producing a great product, and they're getting great take-up. The market's evolving very quickly. There's a lot of incentives and subsidies supporting the industry. Come to more of that in a minute. But once an economy or a geography reaches that phase, we're starting to see more predictable adoption.
For most of the world, they're not in that place, hence why we don't have that same level of confidence or ability to forecast the adoption. But that's not to say that people aren't going to move through into this next phase. This slide, I want to take some more time on, because I think it starts to bring all the pieces together, and you know, for many of you, you might say, "Look, there's nothing surprising here." I agree, and you can sit down and write these points down. What we've tried to do is characterize what we see in the Chinese market, how their industry's developed, and then if we look at the rest of the world, some of the drivers there, and how that's affecting industry competitiveness.
I'll come to the conclusion that what it means for our business in a minute, but let's just run around these circles first. Let me start with China and start with their level of supply security for hydrocarbons, for oil and gas. And we know that China doesn't have the same strength that, say, the U.S. does, and they've been considering and focusing on electrification for longer on that basis. They've also seen huge opportunity on the energy transition in Building Industry segments out, not just in EVs, but other segments, be that turbines, solar panels, and so on. Built a lot of capability. Their manufacturing capacity and their industry development there has been significant. I think that's well-covered. That's been linked with a very well-developed, integrated, and international raw material supply chain. That's been built out over more than two decades.
So you can start to see already these things all starting to fit together. The fourth block then is about capital intensity. So through speed and scale and repeatability, there are other factors, but those are, you know, certainly big ones. They're delivering processing and manufacturing facilities at very low CapEx intensity, and of course, that positions them, again, in a very competitive way. Beyond that, there has been a lot of subsidy and support from the government. They're recognizing their significant domestic market and the ability to encourage consumers, incentivize consumers, but equally supporting businesses and industry in terms of the development of these sectors. That's probably led to some excess capacity being built out. I think we all read about that and see that.
What that's done, though, of course, is drive more competitiveness, drives costs down, favored consumers, and encouraged more take-up. Beyond that, the talent and the capability development, the R&D, the scientific focus that China's put into these industries and segments has been significant, whether that's battery chemistry, EV development, the level of automation in their factories. Anyone who's been there has seen it, and it's really very impressive. All of that has been a focus, again, of developing their talent, their capability, and deploying and focusing that on these industry segments in a very intentional way. And lastly, all of the supporting infrastructure and components that they need to make this work. So whether that's charging stations or build-out of grid infrastructure, all of these elements, they've also coordinated to make sure that these things hang together.
That ties in again with their, their large population density, the mobility preferences, and the high-speed public transport they have between cities, all these things starting to fit together. So I, I've gone through it. It's a quick summary. I mean, you can obviously pull these things apart in a lot more depth, but at a high level, you can see a very virtuous circle there that continues to build strength, continues to build competitiveness, and we see that in the products and the cost base that they're working with. If we contrast that with the rest of the world, and of course, it's not homogeneous, it's not a single story, and so it's hard to draw this chart, but I'm trying to call out some of the observations that we see. Starting with supply security for energy. Well, take the U.S., for example.
Their position on hydrocarbons is a lot more stable and a lot more secure. And secondly, their vehicle OEM industry has been built out around ICEs for a long time. For more than 100 years, they've been producing vehicles. Very accomplished at producing ICEs, very established industries, and capability. And for them, EVs was, is well, was and is a new segment and a new area where they have to make very intentional investment decisions. The raw materials supply chains for that are also less developed and less mature. They don't have the same levels of integration, the same levels of connection and supply, and that's, again, well covered, and various countries are looking at how they build more security and more capacity there.
From a CapEx intensity point of view, again, we see big differences there, and that's driven by a number of factors, but clearly, the growth trajectory and the certainty with demand impacts that, because we see some dislocations in the way that capital is deployed. Changing policy and subsidy design is also challenging speed, and of course, tariff and market access restrictions can impact technology deployment, technology transfer. So there's a number of things here that can slow things down in terms of the development, and a really important one is consumer preferences look different when we look into the market. The vehicle size requirements, range requirements, and the broader public transport design doesn't offer up the same opportunities and is also affecting the rate of development for EVs.
And lastly, the critical components around charging stations, grid infrastructure, again, largely expecting private investment, is not moving as quickly, and of course, that does tie back into consumer preferences as well. I've tried to, you know, talk through, you know, what do we see in Europe? What do we see in the U.S.? It's not all homogeneous, as I've called out, but it's a very different story to what we see in China. The so what in all of that is, they're different worlds, very different sets of drivers, and we need to be building a business that's resilient for both, that can take advantage of both. We're not gonna sit here and try and forecast or predict how it plays out. I just don't think that's helpful or something that we can achieve usefully.
What we need to do is be thinking about how our business can be positioned to deliver great returns through the cycle in that context, where there is a lot of variation in the way these markets will develop. The other part of this, of course, that we need to contemplate is government policy and the geopolitics. I won't read through all of these points, but I guess the big takeaway for us is that we don't think that subsidies and tariffs are going to be sufficient to change industry economics. So it's a big point. There'll be differences of view on that. At the end of the day, we think that for the business that we're building and the business that we are, this comes back to the resource, it comes back to mining technology, it comes back to the basics of mining.
We think that's fundamental. Yes, we need to be low cost. Yes, we need to be lean. Yes, we need to be focused on great resources. The subsidies can help steer and shape direction, but we don't think that's gonna be fundamental. Equally, we think there will be ongoing improvements in technology, battery chemistries, and again, those things will play out, and we need to be aware and follow those, but it's still going to come back to the underlying economics of the resource and the mine that we're building. I want to spend a bit of time on each of the three major commodities and just share our views at a macro level and how that then plays into the beliefs that underpin our strategy. First of all, lithium is ubiquitous.
We know that, and it comes in many different forms, but it's also a commodity that we think will be core to energy storage for the future. While we certainly don't believe that it's the only one, we know there's others, and there'll be more to come. We think lithium will be a big plank in it, and so the market that's been built out around it, the capital that's been deployed, we think we can depend on, and we think there is a very attractive growth story there. A lot of R&D has gone into building this over more than 30 years. The industry we expect will scale three time s in the next decade or so, and that rate we don't know for sure, but what's more important is how that's supplied and how the industry steps up to meet that demand.
That translates roughly to 80 new projects, unfunded, each at 20,000 ton LCE, which is significant. And, while lithium might be quicker and easier to develop than copper, for example, there's still a lot to it. And I suspect that some of those supply-side challenges are underappreciated when we do the spreadsheet math of a supply curve and how that plays out. And right now, I mean, we can talk about the market dynamics later, but, you know, at the current prices, there's not a lot of incentive for anyone to be building any projects. And, these are the kind of dislocations that we're going to see, and I think that brings me to the last point on this slide around volatility. We believe that lithium is going to be highly volatile through that cycle.
There isn't another commodity that I can think of that's growing at multi or double-digit CAGR, compound growth rates. Whether it's 12% or 18% doesn't really matter. It's enormous growth, and the demand-supply imbalances will play out and create volatility, and so we need to recognize and embrace that. That will be a nature of the business that we're in for at least the next decade. I'll talk about how we think we can deal with that, but this shouldn't be a surprise, and if you're going to be in the business of lithium, we think that that's something that you really need to come to terms with, and you need to gear around.
The likelihood is that that will continue until that demand growth starts to taper off, which means we've got a lot more penetration and capacity built out around energy storage, both in EVs and stationary storage, and that's still at least a decade away. It's going to be a while before we get to that point. For copper, look, I won't spend long on this. I think this is, you know, well-covered, and there's nothing new here. It's a very important commodity for the energy transition. It's important for EVs. It's important for all the related infrastructure for EVs. It's attractive for us around diversification, and I'm going to talk more to that in a minute. But look, we also recognize just how hard it is to drive value here.
We think this is an attractive place for us to be, but we also are incredibly clear on how disciplined we're going to have to be, given the way this market, this part of the market's evolving, and on nickel, the third commodity of interest, and again, another story, another set of dynamics. These three are very different. For us, nickel is attractive. The growth story and demand is great, both in the industrial demand and vehicles. That's fantastic, but of course, the world has changed in the recent past. The supply story out of Indonesia is very strong. The businesses that have developed there have got very low costs, very strong options to continue to grow, and all of that creates a market which has got some level of cap on it, in our view.
And certainly to deliver attractive returns will be more difficult. So this really comes back to getting into a resource, if you're going to pursue nickel, that can deliver sustained long-term returns. I think Nova's a great analog or example. I wish we had a couple more. It's a wonderful asset. Unfortunately, it runs out, but we do know what good looks like in this space. So it's an area of interest, but we need to be very disciplined about our presence in this market. So bringing all that together back to our beliefs, and as I said to you at the start of the presentation, there's a lot of uncertainty and unknowns in this space. We recognize that. We've tried to distill what we think are facts that we can rely on, so real foundations.
Where we can't, that we're relying on beliefs that underpin our strategy, we've tried to articulate those in a clear way. I have a summary of some of the key ones here. Not all, but just some of the key points that really are foundations for our strategy, and most importantly, on lithium, you can see that's where the focus is. I think they're very obvious. They are, because we've spent a lot of time talking and looking at them. But let me go through them. First of all, we think there is a great window to create value, but we believe cost competitiveness is absolutely key. And that's maybe not something that's been as widely discussed as it could have been or should have been. To be successful in lithium, we really think you need to be highly cost competitive.
We start with a reference point in Greenbushes. It's obviously fantastic. Now, that geology is very unique, so I'm not saying that we've got another one up our sleeve, albeit everyone wishes they do, but we have a reference point of what good looks like, and we have, I guess through that, a good understanding of costs and the kind of performance that we need to be successful through the cycle. Secondly, and it's linked, lithium is highly ubiquitous in the world. It comes in all a number of different forms, and there is ample lithium to meet the market demand well into the future. So time is of the essence, getting to the right resource, the right cost positioning in a rapid manner, linked well with the market, is fundamental.
If you turn up too late, it's probably not gonna be that attractive. All that said, the supply side challenges are probably underappreciated. While I mentioned that lithium is no doubt easier to, or spodumene, in a mining context, is easier to access than copper might be, it's still not straightforward. There are still a number of challenges to work through. Equally, bringing the kind of standards that we want to, to a mining operation, means that you really have to think through the impacts carefully and make sure they're mitigated and thought through and designed out upfront, so this is gonna take some work.
The last point here, I've already said, but just to reinforce, we don't think that subsidies and tariffs are gonna be sufficient to change the industry economics, and so it comes back to Mining 101: get back to the basics and look at the resource, look at the technology used to extract it, and look at the standards to which you develop that mine. So that's the background behind, I guess, a bit of market context that's driven our thinking. And I'll drop into our strategy now at a high level, go through some of the key messages, and then, as I said, I'll bring the team up to talk in more depth to the delivery of that.
The first slide or first point to start on is our purpose, and for me, this was something that we tested, and we did talk this through with the whole team and reflected, and there's deep conviction around this purpose, and there's two parts to it for me, if I simplify it. One is the focus on that segment of the market around energy storage and battery materials. We believe strongly in it, in that space and the contribution towards the energy transition, and the second is how we turn up as a mining business. Being a business that is operating in a safe, ethical, responsible manner, thinking about the culture and the kind of way we run our business and run our operations is fundamental.
Those two pieces fit together very clearly, and that comes back to the thinking and the leadership that Peter Bradford brought to the business back, right back to 2018, and has evolved, and it really does, for us, resonate well. It's incredibly compelling for our people right through the business and something that we think gives us a great foundation to build on. Taking that purpose, I also wanted to sort of reflect on, well, how did we get there? If we think about the journey that IGO's been on, it hasn't been a straight line. And we're more or less now working into the third chapter. But if we go right back, you know, over 20 years, IGO started out as a gold business and was very successful at building some presence and momentum there. Peter took...
Moved into nickel, and Peter took the business through that transition from a nickel business into a much broader focus on battery materials with the transaction with Tianqi, and setting up the TLEA Joint Venture. But through this period, the business has built out and demonstrated some very strong operational capability, and I think Nova continues to shine and show that example. We've also developed a huge presence and capability in exploration. Brett will talk more to that, and how we're reshaping that, and how we see that adding value in the future. But again, that's a big part of the pedigree and the history. On M&A, look, I think some very good examples there, and obviously, we recognize that Western Areas didn't go well.
There are a lot of lessons that we've taken from that, embedded in our business, and I really hope you'll see that shine through in some of the messages today about how we think about our returns, the discipline, and the approach to finding value for our shareholders. The last point I wanted to draw out on this slide, though, that I think is the most important, is our culture, and we can talk about strategy, but what sits beneath that is culture, and it's been built out with a lot of focus, very intentionally. Sam will talk more to that shortly. Fundamentally, this is a source of strength for our business. It's what retains and engages our people. It's what brings our best out each day, and it's been under some pressure in the last 12 months, two years.
Of course, the challenge of Western Areas has created some uncertainty and dislocation there, putting Cosmos into care and maintenance, going through the changes with our corporate team and exploration. All of these things affect our culture, and so I'm not sort of shying away from that, that we've got a lot of work to do to restrengthen and reconfirm. But I'm also wanting to be clear that I've got huge conviction for what we've built and where we want to take that, and how fundamental it is for our future business. Coming to the strategy, and this sort of puts it all on one page, and I'm gonna break it apart in a couple of pieces in a minute. The purpose, which is fundamental, about where we go and what drives us.
Our portfolio and how we start to think about that, and then the themes or the underlying capabilities that will help us deliver and execute and drive value from that portfolio. Let me pull it apart and first spend some time on the portfolio. I've talked about the three commodities now in some depth. I think the point here is we can think about it through different stages or phases of the development of our business as well. Exploration, the ability to have the team starting to deliver defined resources that we can take through development and into operations is important. Our ability to produce those results from exploration is critical. Brett will talk more to that.
Equally, our ability to build out a mine and construct, both with the right technology and the right project execution, is key, and that's something that we see as part of our future. And, and in running a lean, you know, efficient and safe operation is also critical. In the lithium space, we've called out commercial. It's an area where, it's not to say we won't obviously be, you know, interested in selling the copper and nickel from our portfolio. But the point to make here on lithium is, this is still unique and immature, and we think that working with Tianqi through the TLEA Joint Venture, there's still a lot that can be done to drive more value from the products, the lithium that we sell into the market. And so that's an area that we're gonna put some focus in.
Big picture, if we played out, you know, ten years from now, we could see a portfolio that has presence across those commodities, across those stages of the value chain in our business. Obviously, some of them still in development and some of them generating cash through the cycle. I've got a brief comment there on downstream, and I guess I'm referring predominantly to lithium downstream there, and the message is carefully constructed. We recognize that this is an integrated industry, and maybe parallel with aluminum, for example, with bauxite, alumina, and aluminum production. You know, we need to be very thoughtful about how we integrate with our customers and how we integrate with the market, but we expect that the returns on downstream will be more challenging. It's a very competitive business.
I think the team in Tianqi is a fantastic example. The capability they built, the competitiveness in China is just preeminent. And so outside of that, the ability to generate the kind of returns that we wanna deliver through our business is difficult, so we need to be very thoughtful about that, hence, the message, carefully constructed exposure there. Equally, we wanna have that connection, and I'm sure Brett will talk more about that from a commercial point of view, how important that is. We're not just selling into a broad spot market. We do need to have that tight link and make sure we get full value through TLEA, but do that in a very thoughtful way. I talked about copper and nickel, and copper being particularly important for our business.
And we tested this conversation or this decision around diversification in some length. And the chart here, I wanna focus you on first that straight blue line, so GDP. And we know that copper broadly tracks GDP for a number of good reasons. It's a big value pool. It's gonna get bigger. Maybe it'll move a little bit because of some of the supply challenges. But it has a very different profile, very different set of drivers, and very different set of returns expectations than lithium does, which is highly volatile, and we've just shown you just part of the story so far. I'm sure we're gonna see more of that.
What I guess stands out for us is being in the business of lithium, which we believe in, and we think that we can contribute and drive a lot of value from, will be volatile. It will be a bumpy ride at times. For us to have resilience in our business, to be able to generate more stable cash flows, and most importantly, to be able to develop and to grow our business through the cycle, we think it's important to have that diversification, so that can help underpin our decisions and give us confidence to work through the cycle. And that's unique, I guess. Clear focus on lithium, but we think that will mix very well with copper. Nickel, to a lesser degree, and you can see that, you know, the dynamics there are a little different.
They may well flatten out given the current situation. But I guess the takeaway here around diversification is we've thought about that deeply, we tested it, and we believe strongly that this actually helps us build a stronger, more stable business and deal with the volatility that we expect to see in the lithium market. Underpinning that portfolio and what we need to build out, some of these capabilities we have a presence and we're improving and tuning. Some of these areas, we need to really do a lot more to shape it up. First and foremost, exploration and development. And as I said, we are going through a process of really transforming our exploration team and presence. We start with a fantastic foundation. Our ground position, the data that we have, the team and the capability we have is second to none, just fantastic.
But refocusing and rethinking how we operate and how we allocate those resources is very important. We're also refocusing our portfolio onto lithium and copper, predominantly, with a lesser focus on nickel. That's a piece that's very important to rethink and reshape. And as I said, the amount of investment, the envelope that we've applied there has also been adjusted, and that will ramp down over the next 12 months. The ability to develop a project, and it's not to say we'll get ahead of ourselves here, but having a resource to develop and draw through is very important. As we all know, that building out mining projects is not easy. It does take deep capability to do that. That's an area that we want to have a lot more in-house, a lot more internal capability to do that.
And that means both thinking about what it takes to build a low CapEx intensity, a lean operation that is fit for purpose for the nature of the market in lithium, and that may not be a 30-year mine life. I think we need to be very focused on what's required to be successful here, and we see enormous differences in CapEx intensity in the mines being built in lithium around the world. And I think there's a lot of lessons that we can take from that. So having more of that capability in-house, for me, is very important. That builds on that underlying exploration capability. Beyond that, our partnerships, and I'd, you know, start by calling out the partnership with Tianqi via TLEA. I mean, this for me, was another key foundation for why I joined IGO. I think that connection with Tianqi is so powerful.
It gives us so much opportunity, and it's very unique. They have got such a deep presence and capability in the world of lithium, and building on that strength and bringing our strengths as a mining company together with their strengths in that market, I think gives us a lot of opportunity. Beyond that, there are other partnerships that we really wanna build out, not just in exploration, but another key area I wanted to call out is the development around the process for extraction and processing of lithium. If you think about the flow sheets that have been deployed in mines in, say, the last six to eight years, they haven't really been stress tested or thought through in a deeper way because of the speed that everyone was pushing to get things online.
We've got some experience from Greenbushes that we can see what's worked and what some of the challenges are, albeit with some very high-grade resources. But the ability to step back and say: Is there a smarter way to get to the valuable material that we need for the downstream battery industry? Is something that is, for me, a great opportunity. We've got a very strong technical team, that's just spent a bunch of time on the nickel downstream project, and a huge amount of skills and capability there that we've transferred very quickly to lithium, and they've already started to make some great inroads. There's a bunch of academic work going on with various universities in this space that they've already had partnerships on.
Some of these things, IGO, and I don't think I've talked about it, but have had partnerships now for several years. And to make it, I guess, practical, the ability to take these fines that we get through our tailings streams and actually take more lithium out of it, could offer enormous opportunity. And so this is an area that we'll really accelerate and focus on. But through partnerships, if we can drive out a much lower-cost way of extracting, improving recoveries, extracting more lithium, and increasing the speed of our ability to bring that product to market, I think that will make a big difference. Commercial expertise is important. I've already talked about this a couple of times. For me, this is part of any new market that's evolving.
Brett brings background in other commodities in this space, and obviously, Tianqi's already got a lot of expertise. We'll work closely with them and think about how we can contribute to the evolution and development of this market, and make sure that we really are getting full value for the products that we're selling into it, and lastly, the Playbook. So what's this all about, and this speaks a bit to standing back and thinking about the strengths that IGO has. By taking the time to document who we are as a mining company, how we operate, and distilling that into a clear playbook, allows us to replicate that when we need to, in a very practical way. What I hope you will see is, you know, a very high caliber management team that we've got and the next layers down.
And for me, we're clear about where we wanna be, the kind of assets that we wanna be involved in. We've got a great management team, and we've got a playbook documented, or we're working through that to capture that, that says, "This is how we do mining. This is what you can expect from us in terms of our performance." All of these things, with the cash flows from Greenbushes, allows us to be very patient, very calm, and very thoughtful about how we grow this business. There is no rush. There is no sense of urgency. Because of that, it is all about finding high-quality resources, high-quality assets that will generate the returns that we expect, that fits with the business that we are today, Greenbushes and Nova. And so that Playbook, we'll share more in due course, and Marie will talk to that.
For me, that's something that's really important and something that will stand out in the future in our ability to replicate ourselves and grow our business. So bringing that back to sort of some of the objectives, and I'll talk more to the short term here. I think most of this will be familiar to you and to be expected, I guess. Firstly, you know, getting the very best out of our lithium business and that presence through the TLEA Joint Venture. What does that practically mean? Working with our partners to optimize Greenbushes. We're not gonna get into all of the detail on that today. That's something we'll work through with our partners. Naturally, as a mining company, we're gonna do everything we can to contribute our expertise, our input, our passion, to help with that.
But Talison, as the operator there, is already working hard on driving more value from those operations. And I've talked about the view on the lithium market, how we build out our commercial skills, and work again with TLEA on that, how we start to navigate. Kwinana is, again, something we've talked about at length on several occasions, and I think we've got a fantastic option there. There's still work to do as Train 1 ramps up. We need to work through that, and we need to find what the right economic pathway for that refinery is. Beyond that, I've talked about partnering to build out our lithium extraction and processing technologies and capability, which we're doing, and that work's already underway.
Nova, and we'll show you a nice slide that, you know, I guess makes this clear, but safe, stable, predictable operations that maximize cash flow. There's two years to go, and we just need to get the very best out of it. We've certainly stress-tested all of the surrounds, and there isn't any more resource available, and that's fine. So it's all about getting through that in the most efficient way possible. Beyond that, being very commercial and being very disciplined around our exploration and development work, particularly exploration. That's a transformation that's underway, and Brett will talk more in depth to that, but that's super important that we're directing our resources in a thoughtful way to, to drive value.
Building out our safety performance, which again, I'll come to, and lastly, the Playbook, which I've just spoke to. So those are, you know, some of the very near-term actions over the next year or two. And the point there is there's a lot of work in front of us right now with the existing portfolio, with the existing assets, with the existing business, to get ourselves set up. And we're clear about where we wanna grow and build, but we do need to make sure this work's done, and we'll talk at length on those points. Lastly, before I bring the team up on capital allocation, this is a framework you have seen before. It's not new. It's not necessarily particularly special or different. It is about its application, and I think you just saw with our dividend-...
Decision that we will apply this with discipline. We're not going to retain cash. We're not going to spend time worrying about what may or may not come next month or next quarter or next year or the year after. This is about just being really focused on capital allocation. Clearly, right now, the best capital we can apply is in Greenbushes, and we continue to focus on that. And CGP3, I think, is a great example of the kind of decisions that should be taken. We'll continue to do that and use this as a tool to keep our focus as we look forward and grow the business. So with that, I want to bring the team up, and we'll get into a bit more detail.
So I'm just going to say a couple more words and then turn it over to the team to take you through more of the work in delivering it. This is an area or section where I'm hoping we can make it a bit more dynamic, take questions on the materials in play. Let's come back to the broader market context and the broader strategic decisions. We've got a good chunk of time for Q&A on that. But in this section, feel free to jump in. There's a roving mic, so if you put your hand up in the room, we'll get that to you, and if there's anything online, the team will call that out. First of all, just looking back at the last eight months or so, you know, the work to prepare our business has been moving at pace.
There's a lot that's been done, and it helps set ourselves up for our future. While the strategy was being prepared, there were a lot of things that were just no-brainers. Some hard decisions that we had to take, and I think, you know, Cosmos was an example, as I started in the business. Very tough situation. Kath had worked awfully hard to try and find an economic pathway, and ultimately, we just had to call it and say that wasn't to be. Safety performance is a big one, and there has been some improvement. We'll talk more about our focus there. Exploration got a very clear message about the need to reset and transform there, and that work's underway.
The focus on the JV and building out the pathway to optimize and to drive more value from Greenbushes is ongoing. Equally, the decisions on Kwinana. Our corporate team, we've reshaped and, you know, it's very difficult for people in our business to leave. There's a strong connection with IGO, but that was an important part of resetting and saying: What is the team that we need for today, not for tomorrow? And making sure we're carrying costs that are tailored and sit well with the kind of operations and footprint that we have at the moment. And, obviously, the last point is very important, and that's probably my handoff foremost is the executive team that's built out. So I'm really pleased to have that behind us. One more step, and Cameron's. We almost won't want to let him go.
He brings so much background, but he was very clear. He said, "Look, I'll give you some time, but there is a hard stop," so we're in the process of recruiting there, and we'll build that out in due course. The last thing I wanted to talk about before I hand over to Sam is on safety, and look, it's been a story of improvement. I want to be encouraging and supportive, but for me, and where I've come from, we've still got a long way to go. We're a long way short of the kind of performance and standards that I expect. I think the formula is clear. It's not new or different. It's something that we're working on.
We've made some headway, but there is still plenty more to do, and I think that does tie with the kind of quality of business that we are. The level of productivity, operating excellence, the way that culture comes to life has to be tied and linked to safety, and for me, there's plenty more to do there. So with that, I'm going to turn over to Sam, and she'll talk through a couple more elements around our business.
I think I'm going to stand up because I don't trust myself to sit here with a piece of paper and glasses and a mic, so just one second, so before I start, I would just, I'll probably just go back to a couple of points on safety. You know, one of the reasons why we have these parts of the presentation up front in terms of the contribution that we're making is because, you know, safety, sustainability, and culture are just inextricably entwined, so you know, we have them at the front because they are the things that, you know, the people in our business are the way in which this refocused and refreshed strategy is going to come to life.
So as Ivan said, we actually have made improvements through the course of this last 12 or 18 months. And, you know, we acknowledge the fact that TRIFR has come down, but one of the things that we're really very focused on 12or the safety programs of work in our business is, you know, TRIFR is very much a backward-looking measure. And so what we know will make a difference is the kinds of things in the business that get our leaders out, that develop their leadership skills, develop their ability to actually lead safety across the entire business, and also for our people to call it out as well. So we've spent the last 12 or 18 months embedding the processes and the programs and the kind of culture in our safety programs that we know is going to make a difference.
We can see it has started to make a difference, but certainly, there's a lot to do in terms of working with our partners and ensuring that that program or that progress continues in the next 12 or 18 months, and we need to do better. One of the things I'm also going to call out, too, is the fact that, you know, quite often, when we look at these kinds of statistics, it's very much a focus on physical safety. And you will well know that in the last, you know, certainly 12 months, two years, probably over the course of three years, the focus on psychosocial safety and psychosocial hazards in the workplace has increased immeasurably. And that's been something that has been front and center for our culture work over a number of years.
But certainly, in terms of going back through our business and making sure that we are very conscious of the kinds of levers that we need to pull to ensure that our business is psychosocially safe for our people, has been a focus for us. All right, so sustainability. One of the things that's really interesting about this is, you know, we've got a slide on sustainability in this deck, and you, and you will obviously be able to read that. But it's, it's something that is very much an integrated part of our business. We implemented or we imagined and implemented a integrated sustainability model some years ago now, and that was really a nod to the fact that there are many parts of the work that you do in a business that make it a sustainable business.
That integrated approach has been something certainly that is very aligned with how our culture works and the way our people contribute to sustainability across the entire business. We think that it has, in the last few years, made a significant and positive difference for our stakeholders. We're also very focused and this is where that kind of real intertwining comes with safety and culture. The way in which we work and the sustainability of our business very much also drives how, you know, a safe and inclusive and caring environment for our people. One of the ways that we've done that is that we have very much been focused on being conscious about the culture that we have created.
And we've also been conscious about the programs that we have run through the business that have made a difference in terms of those sustainability components on this wheel. One of the large parts of that is, and this has been something that we will continue and certainly refocus with our Refresh Strategy, is managing our climate and nature-related risks. So, you know, when we first started our culture and our sustainability journey many years ago, there's certainly the way in which society and the market looks at some of these parts of businesses was not the same.
We are very pleased to know that, in some ways, some of the thinking that we've done around culture and how sustainability is integrated through our business, has started to obviously be caught up within the market. And then finally, one of the other things that we have been very proud of in the last three years is - and we're about to commence our third, is the work that we have done with our Reconciliation Action Plan. One of the really pleasing things for us, at IGO is that that plan wasn't just a plan, generated by somebody sitting in an office in South Perth. We had an incredible participation rate with the people in our business.
You know, in terms of actually including them in working groups, including them as part of the teams of people that imagined the kinds of activities that we could do that would support that Reconciliation Action Plan. They've been very, very involved, and I see no difference. When I look forward and I think of the way in which we embark on our second RAP, I'm sure that that will still be the same. So finally, Ivan mentioned it a number of times. We've talked about codifying some of these things in our Playbook. But fundamentally, the thing that drives IGO and will continue to drive and embed our new and refreshed strategy is our organizational culture. So that has been strong and has been really very much built around our purpose.
And our purpose was created, many years ago, now, or a number of years ago, by many of the people that are still working in the business. And there are parts of our purpose, that they would be able to identify as words that they generated in the focus groups and the co-creation programs that we did with them. Why is that important? Well, that's important because going forward, that kind of connection and the way in which we look at that will ensure that the people and the employees and also the communities that we work with will maintain and have that same focus.
The commitment to our purpose, and indeed, also the values that we have within the organization that were co-created has really, over the years, provided both a personal and a professional motivation point or a focal point for our people, and one of the parts of the Playbook and one of the parts of embedding this strategy will be very much now connecting our people to all of those elements so that they are actually pulling together to, to, deliver what we have talking about today. I also note that our people were very much early adopters of the Battery Materials theme, and they have supported that pivot, and that on, on that strategic focus, and we know that the way forward from this point is, is reconnecting to that, that to them.
As Ivan mentioned, you know, it has been a tough time over the last two or three or four months, and going through organizational change programs is undoubtedly difficult for both the people that leave the organization and also the people that stay within the organization. We will go back to what we know, though, with this. Certainly, in terms of creating a culture that delivers this strategy, it's all about, it's very much about conscious culturing, is what I have always called it. Where are we at? Where do we wanna be? What delivers this strategy? Then how do we get there?
We will go through that process in the next six or 12 or 18 months, very, very deliberately, so that we are able to create the environment, the culture, and the inclusivity that we want to. Looking forward, we know, we know that this culture and our IGO people have really been incredibly resilient because of their connections. And they have used that resilience up in spades through challenging times. And we know, though, that part of that has ensured that the continuity of those teams to deliver the strategy going forward will be there. So we're very positive, and we have a group of people that are very positive, too.
We are absolutely crystal clear on how we move forward with improving our safety, you know, continuing to build our culture and building a sustainable business around these key elements. And we know that our refreshed strategy will really be something that allows our people to shine again.
Thank you, Sam. You can talk to the team, too. No? Look, we just put this in as and you can see that the leadership team-
I could.
Sam has been with the business over 10 years and brings a lot of history with seeing the business evolve and change, and being part of that intentional shift around both the purpose and the culture. I, as I said, I think that's critical for that connection, and that path, and Sam's helping us with this next phase as we sort of write the next chapter. Kath joined, coming off the board a few years back now, has been through, you know, a bumpy time with Western Areas and Cosmos. Contributed a huge amount, and helped bring a lot of her broad experience, coming out of Deloitte as an auditor and in other sectors of industry, to help us mature our governance, risk management, and financial processes, and so on.
And then, three newer members joining me. I guess Marie, on my right here, coming from BHP with a focus on our development lithium business, Chief Development Officer for lithium. Marie brings a strong operating pedigree, a lot of background across different commodities, and is already making a very big difference in only your first, what, week five? So four, four. So very new. And Brett, who's joined as Chief Growth and Commercial Officer, has a focus on three parts of his portfolio: exploration, lots to do there, business development, and commercial. And I've talked about commercial and how important that's gonna be looking forward. And Cameron, who stepped in, as I said, has a huge pedigree in the mining sector and a lot of experience and wisdom helping us as we navigate through this period.
I'm gonna turn over to Marie now to talk a little bit about our lithium business. Obviously, the Joint Venture with Tianqi and Greenbushes and Kwinana.
Good morning, everyone. Delighted to talk to you about this focus area that will be core to me in the short term. And naturally, our existing partnership with Tianqi and with Albemarle, which is a huge competitive advantage for IGO that few of our peers have. We see the partnership in two ways: an opportunity to share risk, but also to leverage knowledge and capabilities to maximize the value from existing operations, but equally exploit future growth, organic and inorganic. IGO prides itself of its history as a good partner to really bring value to the table and provide value for all parties, and our TLEA partnership, as Ivan mentioned previously, is core to our future strategy.
As we look to Greenbushes, Greenbushes is the world's largest, lowest cost, and the best really hard rock lithium mine, and it certainly is a competitive advantage for IGO. There is very strong alignment on the importance of Greenbushes to generate strong cash flow through the cycle, and also build expertise in lithium hard rock mining. In FY 2024, Greenbushes delivered exceptional performance and an EBITDA margin averaging 85%, despite the fluctuations in commodity prices. Moving forward, we also have a clear pathway to unlocking about 2 million ton per annum of installed capacity through the commissioning of CGP3 throughout 2025. Moving on to the opportunity we have here.
It's important to point out we have a high level of alignment with Tianqi through our partnership and through our TLEA Joint Venture, but we also have a high level of alignment between TLEA and Albemarle through the Windfield framework, and that alignment is really to maximize the value out of Greenbushes and what it can offer. In FY 2024, as I mentioned, Greenbushes has delivered strong EBITDA margin through the cycle, around 85%, but it was really a year of two halves, with the first half averaging closer to 90% EBITDA margin and the second half closer to 70%. So we do see opportunities to partner to improve productivity, reduce costs to really enhance margins, and we'll leverage our partnership with Tianqi and Albemarle to influence that productivity agenda through the board and through the management committees.
With regards to Kwinana, there have been challenges during the ramp-up of Train 1, and TLEA are progressively solving the technical issues, and the October shutdown is kind of the next milestone expected to deliver another step change in the performance for Kwinana. We're optimistic on multiple fronts. The first one is TLEA is bringing extensive experience and expertise to the ramp-up from the experience they have in China. Second, we've seen positive momentum in value uplift quarter on quarter, as you can see on the chart. And lastly, Kwinana is already delivering now high-quality, battery-grade lithium hydroxide, so we're very optimistic about unlocking the returns at Kwinana. The Train 2 study is continuing, as Ivan mentioned, and we'll review the project economics with Tianqi, with our partner, when it's finalized.
With regards to our nickel business, our short-term focus is naturally on maximizing the value out of nickel operation out of Nova through safe and stable operations for the remainder of the life of the asset. Nova is an exceptional asset, so remain a first quartile of the cost curve and will maximize cash flow, I guess, until the end of life, through reducing cost, but also through accelerating tonnes produced, tonnes forward. Nova will also be the totem for the development of the IGO Playbook that Ivan spoke about. When it comes to our sites at Forrestania and Cosmos, they have been transitioned or are in the process of transitioning into care and maintenance. We have a study underway at Cosmos to understand the future options that are for this asset.
So we'll hand over to Brett t o talk about our exploration portfolio. Thank you.
Thanks, Marie.
Thanks, Marie. I think it's important that we acknowledge that IGO's had a long-term commitment to exploration, and that long-term commitment continues. We see the energy transition as needing a lot more lithium, copper and nickel, and exploration itself is gonna play a key role in finding those new materials for that transition to be successful. I think when I came into the business, I was really keen to see what the business had built around exploration through this long-term investment that it had over several decades. I saw four things. Firstly, tenure. We've got great real estate in great locations. A highly prospective tenement package across Australia and the US, that's really well aligned to our strategic focus on lithium, copper and nickel. We've also got great people. Deep technical expertise and wisdom within geoscience, geotechnical disciplines, but also exploration, geology, tenement management and program management.
I think this is a real competitive advantage for IGO, and the skill set that sits within our people are second to none, and thirdly, around relationships, and this sits in two parts for me. Firstly, we have a number of joint ventures that are across our exploration ground. Those joint ventures bring with them a lot of history, a lot of data, and a lot of knowledge about the ground that we're working, and they're incredibly important for how we actually structure our exploration programs going forward. But more importantly, I think it's the broader stakeholder group to include our traditional owner subsets. Our understanding of how to work with those groups will lead to access. Without access, we can't discover. Without discovery, there's no value. So it's really, really important. The next part is tools.
We've got a lot of proprietary tools within the subset that's been built over the years, a lot of technology, but also, datasets and data that we've bought from third parties, like the De Beers database, which is important for us in how we actually find value before we step on ground. This is all really core elements to a good exploration business. I think what we're focused on now is making that good business great. And to do that, we're refocusing around how we allocate capital, how we allocate resources, and how we do that in a with a commercial edge that has a value focus. And that's really, I think, the what we're going to do over the next few years to deliver value to shareholders from exploration.
This is just a map of the tenements that we were talking about here, the real estate I was talking about earlier.
I think, look, this is a map that many of you will have seen in your report and previous quarterly updates. It's easy to skip through, but those little blotches on the map of Australia are very significant land packages that have taken years to position and to build up. The two examples in the Northern Territory, for example, 1,714 took years to put together and to get access to, and it's unexplored ground. It's brand new. No one's touched it. They offer great prospectivity around copper and nickel, potentially other commodities as well. I think the standout here is, you don't get to this position overnight. It takes quite a lot of time and investment and work to get here.
What Brett is bringing is then a shift in that commercial focus to be very, very, targeted and, very aggressive in how we move through this to surface those resources that will fit well with our strategy and help us grow our business looking forward. Just get through this commercial, don't you?
Yeah, the next part I wanted to talk to you about was really commercial, and is, we're focusing here in lithium. Ivan has talked extensively about how new this is. I think it's important to focus on that. If we, if we look at how market has found consensus over many of the key elements of value, there's a broad range around that consensus.
So understanding deeply how those views are formed, the assumptions that sit behind them, but equally having your own view about that and seeing the signposts in the market for how those assumptions may change, are going to allow us to take a position and look for value from commercial in the lithium space. The other part is actually, it's a really complex and complicated value chain from material within the ground that goes into all the way into a battery chemical in a cell. Stepping through that value chain, the product changes, the end user and the customer changes as we move through there, too.
So understanding how those customers and end users actually value the product will help us to understand how to better position both our commercial relationships, how to structure them for value, but also how to think about product development. And also where we explore and what mines we're looking for across that process as well, the characteristics of those. And what really supercharges all this is our relationship with Tianqi. That's really quite unique. They are across the entire value chain. They're leaders in the space in converting that material into battery chemicals, and they have unique access and insights into China. If we're able to underpin our commercial build with that knowledge and understanding in partnership with them, I think we'll be able to make really big inroads into creating value from a commercial function within lithium.
Thanks, Brett. So, Kath?
Hi, everybody. It's great to be here. This has been a long journey, and it's been an enjoyable one. Ivan touched on our Capital Allocation framework, and we've had this in place for a year and a bit, or maybe a couple of years now, and what we've shown in the last couple of years since it's been in place, that we've used it with discipline through our returns to shareholders. We have a relentless focus on generating value and returns by disciplined and effective capital allocation and decision making, strong governance and operational excellence.
And you'll see you know, a reshaping of our business over the last few months in exploration and in corporate, which is talking to that operational excellence, and also building a business that supports our current business. We've got a strong balance sheet. We've got in excess of AUD 400 million in cash, and we've got about AUD 720 million of undrawn facilities. We have high cash generating core assets in Nova and Greenbushes, and this underpins our ability to be able to deliver on our strategy. We're also really clear on the expectations for returns on projects.
And Ivan's touched on how great Greenbushes is and how great Nova is, and they're really our benchmark for how we're gonna judge any decisions of whether it's in development, exploration, or inorganic. We're not in a hurry. We can afford to be patient because of the quality of those assets. We'll be highly focused on managing risks and protecting our balance sheet, principally through the effective allocation of the capital and partnering with others to share risk, which has also been touched on earlier in the presentation. We strongly believe that our well-developed exploration and development capacity, and the soon to be developed IGO Playbook, will only bring opportunities to us and bring our partners to share that risk and share those opportunities. M&A is always an option, and particularly in the market as it stands today.
But as I've said, we're not in a rush, and we're gonna be completely focused on risk-weighted returns that are better or equal to what we generate organically, or in special situations where we believe we can bring additional value and we have a distinct advantage. Our posture on M&A is that we believe it will be harder to find the right assets than to actually get the funding for those assets. And time is not a driving factor, and we are solely focused on value. So there's another couple of slides that I've got here, which are fairly self-explanatory, and this one gives you a bit of a summary of FY 2024's results. But our tier one assets in Greenbushes and Nova have driven solid performance. We've got a history of consistently driving, delivering EBITDA and underlying free cash flow.
And I'll just call out a couple of numbers. Our underlying free cash flow there is AUD 713 million. And as I said, we've got a very strong balance sheet. Although we've got strong liquidity, we see no reason to hold excessive amounts of cash, and this has been demonstrated through the dividends we've paid in the last couple of years. This slide actually shows that dividend history and capital return history. We've actually given back to shareholders in excess of AUD 1 billion in the last five years. And if I look at the last two years, where we've had the new Capital Allocation framework, that's accounted for 46% of our underlying free cash flow. Obviously, we're gonna keep on applying this with discipline. We're also gonna keep focused on value, and everything's gonna be looked at through a values lens.
We've learned a whole heap of lessons through the Western Areas transactions, which have been implemented and continue to be a big focus for the company.
Thank you, Kath. Okay. Look, I haven't seen any questions yet. We're open anytime, and we're sort of getting to the tail end now. A couple of charts to go, and then we can open up some Q&A. I'm sure there's lots on your mind. Priorities. Look, I won't spend long here. I think it falls out from the conversation so far. Lithium, there is a lot to do right now, right in front of us through TLEA, working on the existing assets, particularly Greenbushes, obviously working out the pathway for Kwinana and building out our capability around commercial. We've talked a lot about that. The emphasis for exploration around lithium, that sense of urgency. I talked about the window, and I talked about time being of the essence, is very important.
So redirecting resources and getting laser-focused on that's important. We're also clear on, you know, already, what do we think makes a great resource to develop? It's not just any lithium, and I think that hopefully is already a takeaway you've had from this conversation, that not all lithium wins in this market, and we can see that right now. We've got that insight, we've got a point of view, and we'll apply that with some real discipline. Copper, look, we'll keep looking. Everyone else is as well. It's really, really challenging, and so our emphasis is on back on exploration and early stage development. That's where there's the most potential for an uplift in value, and it's a hard road. So we know that.
I think we've been open about it, very transparent, but we can see why it would be such a great complement with the lithium business from a diversification point of view, and how the two would work hand in hand if we think about our portfolio 10 years from now. And nickel, look, it's again a great commodity. There's a lot of opportunity there, but the challenges are harder. For us, the focus is on Nova and both running that well, maximizing cash, running a safe, stable operation, but then also utilizing Nova as a foundation to build out the Playbook, to capture all of the good practices, all of the operating excellence, all of the thinking about how we run a great mine, so we can roll that forward.
So to summarize, look, you know, we've covered quite a bit of ground here. Our focus on battery materials stands. I talked, you know, when I first started in the role, that we would refresh our strategy, and we looked at it, and we did consider, you know, do we need to move more fundamentally? And the view from the business, from the team and our analysis, has reconfirmed our commitment around battery materials. We think that lithium is a standout there. There's lots of opportunity if you're positioned well in the next decade or so, and we start with a great foundation, with the interest in Greenbushes. Beyond that, copper and nickel present good opportunities. We've got a very clear view of where we think value can be generated and how.
We realize that's hard, and you've heard about the kind of capabilities that we need to work on, on exploration. The deep thinking around how you extract and process, particularly lithium, in a more efficient manner, in a lower CapEx intensity manner, because that's gonna be key to be competitive in this market, and equally, how you drive the commercial capability to get full value for the product that we put back into the market. So there's. It's not to say it's just wait and see. There is a lot of internal work that we're doing in parallel to make sure that we're positioned to drive full value and success in these markets. Discipline, Kath brought that to life, and you know, you couldn't ask for a better CFO.
She's absolutely fantastic at the clarity and the focus and the discipline in the way that she protects our balance sheet and how she's bringing the team together around that, and we're very well positioned to execute. As she called out, as the team have pointed to, we can be patient. We've got fantastic cash-generating assets with Greenbushes and Nova in the background. We've got a fantastic management team. We'll build out the Playbook, and we can look forward with the insights that we have into the market and our view on how these commodities will grow and change in the next decade, and position our business to grow and to build out into the future with a portfolio that continues to deliver the kind of returns that you've come to expect.
For me, that patience and that calmness and the ability to just do this in a very thoughtful manner is so important. I won't go through this, but I think, you know, this speaks to the kind of value proposition that IGO brings. There's a lot to it. These are things that I go back to my decision to join, and they shine through. Yes, the business has been through a lot, and clearly, Western Areas we've talked about was not our greatest hour. It's behind us. We can't change that history, but we can learn from it. We can show how we've adapted and evolved.
Equally, you're seeing a very different management team on the stage, and the kind of backgrounds and experience they bring to bear, and the focus and clarity for how we look into these commodities and the kind of assets and business that we want to build looking forward. So with that, we can call it time. Cameron was saying, "What should I cover?", and we said we could, you know, cover all the cautionary statements. But more importantly, Cameron will cover a lot of the hard questions, which I'm sure you're gonna have as we get into it. With that, let's open up for some Q&A. We've got a decent chunk of time. We could even start with someone online, if there is anything. Yeah, you got a couple. Rich?
Thank you. Your first question comes from the phone line from Lyndon Fagan with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Thanks very much. Look, I was just hoping for a bit more meat on the bone when it comes to the Greenbushes outlook. Maybe this wasn't the forum for that, but is there anything you can say about CGP4? I don't think it seems to get enough mention. And I know I asked this last time, but just the long-term sustaining CapEx outlook, it's been really lumpy. Is there anything further that you can maybe add on that? I do have a follow-up as well. Thanks.
Okay. Lyndon, yeah, thank you. Maybe, Marie, do you want to comment first and.
I s that working yet? Look, there's been some thinking about CGP4, but ultimately, the focus for now is really maximizing what we have from the existing assets and commissioning and ramp-up of CGP3 in 2025 to unlock the installed capacity that we have at Greenbushes. That's the thinking. I don't know if you want to comment on what the CapEx is.
No, yeah, Lyndon, let me talk more broadly to your question. Look, I, I'm sure there'd be others in the audience who would also like a deep dive on Greenbushes, and, you know, this wasn't the time or place for that. We're focused very much on, on our strategy, looking at where we're taking directionally IGO. Clearly, it's a very important part of, our business, and, through the Joint Venture, the interest in it is something we're highly focused on. And, you know, as we work with our partners there via TLEA, with Tianqi and, of course, with Albemarle, we'll share more in due course as that work continues. I, I think Marie brought to life our strong focus and a very aligned focus on value there and on driving optimization and improvement.
As you know, there's a new CEO for Talison turning up in a couple of weeks' time. Deep pedigree, he's, I think, well known in the industry, and we know what he will, you know, I think with a lot of excitement bring to that business, and so we'll share more in due course. I realize that's probably frustrating if you wanted that deep dive, but from a strategy point of view, I guess what we wanted to do was talk about where that sits, how we look at it, how we'll focus on it, but put that in a broader context at this point in time. Lyndon, did you have a follow up?
Okay. Thanks, Ivan. That's. Yeah, just a quick one, more directly on the strategy. So obviously, IGO likes copper along with most miners. There's no sort of specific mention of an IRR hurdle rate or sort of assessment criteria. I mean, I guess, how do you avoid competing against a very hot space and overpaying? What sort of financial metrics have you got that you can speak to, to sort of instill that discipline , g iven the experience of Western Areas.
Kath, do you want to comment first, maybe?
I'm hoping this is working. Look, Lyndon, we've got a clear framework that sits behind each commodity, that talks to what it looks like for us, and what those hurdle rates would be. We also have given an indication that everything's gonna be measured against Greenbushes and Nova. It's not our intent to go into those specific hurdle rates. Needless to say that, from a copper perspective, Ivan did cover, you know, from our perspective, is we don't want to compete in the market. Everybody's competing at the moment. We're looking more at early-stage development, exploration, and those sorts of things from a discovery perspective, because that's where the real value in copper can be generated, rather than going into a bidding and auction with every man and his dog who wants to get in there.
Thanks, Kath. Yeah.
Right. Thanks.
Maybe we'll take one in the room, Rob?
Yep.
We might just go to one on the webcast first.
Okay, sorry.
The next question is from the webcast and asks: Cost competitiveness in lithium is easier to identify upstream. How is IGO thinking about this when it comes to the downstream? Cost competitiveness in both CapEx and OpEx, how does Kwinana achieve cost competitiveness? Can you differentiate in downstream processing?
Yeah, look, we did talk about the fact that naturally there is – we believe there's more margins through the upstream mining. We'll be very carefully thinking about the downstream processing. From the perspective of Kwinana, I guess it's a different value proposition, given the partnership with Tianqi and the amount of capital invested prior to IGO. There is excellent capability that Tianqi is bringing to be able to fully ramp up Kwinana to its full capacity. As trying to develop and the study, we'll look through the project economics, the market situation, the Capital Allocation framework that Kath spoke about, and we'll carefully you know look through the cost competitiveness both from a CapEx and an OpEx perspective.
As Ivan mentioned, it is a very sophisticated part of the supply chain and certainly one where China is very competitive, so we'll be very thoughtful about how we look through the lens of downstream processing.
Maybe I can just add a couple of remarks. The point, I think is well made, that in the upstream part of lithium, it's easier to identify the levers or the drivers for cost competitiveness.
But I don't see too much evidence of very differentiated approaches there yet, and that is an area that we're pursuing with some real focus and vigor. Marie's team, as I said, redirected onto that quite quickly. When you think about the level of recoveries, so there's variation, there's variation in the way that different businesses even count recoveries, so we're not even comparing apples and apples when we talk about these numbers. But what goes to tailings, how we're extracting it, how we're even thinking about the product that we produce and positioning that, there's a lot of opportunity, a lot of discussion that needs to go on in the flow sheet and the way that that's positioned with customers.
And of course, again, working with Tianqi, we can do that in a very practical way, as we look forward and make investments in the market. So I think there's still more to do there. And on refineries, as Marie called out, you know, China's processing, typically, they're converting the best refineries at $3,500 per ton. And there's a big range with the rest of the world, you know, for those who are operating. It's hard. So if you look at the drivers there, there's no structural advantage that we see. It's not like aluminum, where you're talking about energy source being a major differentiator. This comes down to having a very well-run asset, very well-maintained, running at capacity with a steady feed.
Very thoughtful, management of their waste products, which is an issue, and the logistics around the refinery. Remembering that the upgrade from spodumene, it's very low concentration products, so there's an awful lot of waste that's being handled there. Again, starting to rethink how that's managed through the value chain is another piece of work that we're interested in. So, it's a great question. There's a lot to do. I think the takeaway for us and our perspective is, we definitely think there's more value in the upstream. We think the downstream will be tough, but we're very fortunate to be partnered with one of the preeminent players in that space, and that gives us a lot of extra benefit and insight. So one in the room, Rob?
So, just focusing on, I guess, what's been emphasized-
Just hang on two secs so they can pick up on the mic.
Just thinking about what's been emphasized in the pack, you've called out the lithium value chain. You've got lithium sulfate there. You've obviously had your problems at Kwinana. Is there, I guess, a future where you go to lithium sulfate exports, and how does that align with producing a 6% product that's got a value and use on the open market? And how do you extract the best value out of that?
I mean, they're fantastic questions. Brett, please jump in if you like, but it speaks almost to the last point I was making, Rob. You're spot on. These are questions that, in my observation, the industry hasn't dealt with holistically and hasn't stepped back and say, "As this industry scales three times, where and how do you deploy capital to optimize the value for, for the businesses involved?" And obviously, you know, stability of their value chain. It would appear that there's some opportunity there, but I think it's way too early to start calling that. We need to do the homework, and we have got a fantastic team that works for Marie, technical team, deep, deep expertise in this sort of space.
That's their world right now, and they're buried in it, and they have been for several months, which is fantastic. They gave us an update earlier this week and, you know... And there's also a lot of academic work happening in this space, so it's not a case of us being, you know, an island there. Others are thinking about it, but this hasn't been a mainstream conversation yet. My view is that we need to get some more facts on the table, and then we can stand back and say: How does that affect our capital decisions and the way that these businesses are designed? I don't know if you want to comment more commercially, Brett.
Yeah. No, I think the point on value in use is well taken. And from what I can see, there's limited time being spent in the industry about value in use through the entire value chain. That's sort of where we need to focus initially to help with the technical team, but also working with customers and getting customers' voice through that to understand actually where do they see value, how do they extract value, and how do we match the products to that, so that both sides of the equation can share in it.
And maybe while I've got the mic, just a quick one. On the exploration side of the business, I don't know what percentage of Australia you've got under tenure, but it's a fair slab. Would you, y ou know, the fail fast method, the, you know, heavy skew to nickel is obviously legacy, and if you look at the nickel market, it's, you know, pretty unattractive. If you think about failing fast and regenerating that exploration portfolio and focusing on copper, which you've highlighted, how quickly can we expect to see that being turned around, and is it self-funding?
Yeah, it's a good question. I think, around exploration, I was told around 2% of Australia. So the issue for me is not so much about, the opportunity there, it's about the prioritization. And what we're working on is actually repointing those teams to focus on the metals that we really want, and lithium is actually part of that as well. The ground that we've currently got under exploration, no one's really looked for pegmatite, in there, too. So the opportunity around lithium and to bring that to the market when we think the window is there, is actually quite unique for us, I think. And repointing the team towards, lithium first, copper second, is the work that I'm undertaking right now. We've just restructured the team, and we just put that structure in place.
Now, we're building the prioritization processes, the rigor around Gate to Gate, and also the focus on the commodity. That's starting to happen now. We should expect to see that play out through the portfolio over the course of the year. And that will also help us to bring the exploration expenditure down within a window that we think is more sustainable for the long term. And thinking about the portfolio itself, opportunities to bring things into the portfolio, but also in that rigorous approach, Gate to Gate, to take things out of the portfolio that might not fit with our view of strategy, but would fit with someone else, for value is clearly there, too.
And I think, Brett, already the team has dropped a bunch of tenements just in the last couple of months, so they're moving on it. That's new ground to turn this over. I think so far we've just been building, but we need to get much more agile at getting in, getting out, and making sure that we're focused on using the data and the capability we've got to drive value. All in the room, yes.
Yeah, I might carry on. Matt Frydman from MST. Could I just ask a couple of, I guess, specifics diving into the strategy you've presented itself? Firstly, on geographies and jurisdictions, obviously, the portfolio, as it stands, is basically entirely Australia. Does that change, you know, as you look out to 2035 , how do we think about what's on the table and what's off the table? And obviously, you talked about sort of capital intensity in other jurisdictions, that would kind of suggest that it's pretty tough to do business in Australia. So how does that play out?
That's right, Matt. So, you know, mining starts with the ore body, and you've got to go where the ore body is. We've talked at length internally about that and with the board, and clearly, any decision to move outside of Western Australia would be a very important and carefully made decision. But the board has been open to that, and naturally, we will assess the risks on merit on a particular case with all the rigor that you'd expect, because it is hard, and you can easily end up making a mistake if you do move offshore without due consideration. But that's where there could be value, and so we're certainly not. I don't wanna leave anyone with the impression that we're WA-focused, and that's our whole world. We will consider geographies beyond that, but with a great deal of care and focus.
The other point then, I guess, around CapEx intensity is important to take into account. I mean, yes, some geographies bring characteristics or things that help support that, e.g., labor costs and productivity and, you know, in terms of you know, how you might bring a resource into production. Equally, time frames to permit, approve, and to bring them online is another factor. So these are all considerations that we have looked at and will continue to. I wouldn't say that Australia then is necessarily just you know, a challenge geography. There's different characteristics. What drives me and our business in the first sense, though, needs to be the standards to which we all work.
So how we think about the impacts that we create, the sustainability of our operations and the kind of culture of the business that we would build is paramount, and we have to think about what that would look like in another geography as well. Albeit, I'm not saying it'll be completely homogeneous, but, that's a world that, you know, several of us have worked in, you know, international locations through our career, and we've had that experience, and we can bring that to bear now as we look forward. But with, I just wanna reinforce, with a great deal of care and focus.
Are there any sort of specific geographies that we should strike off in terms of our thinking, that you think would be really hard to meet those hurdles? Or basically anything's open at the right, you know, with the right ore body, with the right characteristics?
Yeah. I won't name names, but I think you guys can probably make a pretty clear judgment about what's not gonna hit the mark from a risk point of view. And you know, I think it's about you know, understanding the cost curve, understanding the costs of these commodities and what brings them to life. If we believe that we couldn't be successful in geographies where we could play with that, then we'd have a problem. We don't think that's the case. That said, you know, take lithium, for example. Greenbushes is so unique. Now, will someone find another example analog of that from a geological point of view? Probably, but they haven't yet, and everyone has been working hard on it. So, that's where there's some unknowns, I guess, when you sort of think about other geographies out there.
Yeah. Got it. Thanks, Ivan. And then secondly, if we could maybe dive into the commercial, I guess, pillar a little bit more. I was, I guess, a little bit surprised, or maybe I'm just not fully understanding that, around, w hat exactly is it that you're hoping to have a sort of influence in terms of what products are you hoping to be able to market, to, I guess, fully express that as a strategic pillar? Or am I sort of thinking too near term, and this is really more of a future aspiration around future operations that you hope you can, you know, bring some sort of commercial expertise to bear?
Because as I said, at the moment, you've really got no products that you've got a sort of unilateral ability to go and sort of market and commercialize.
Spot on. But yeah, from our perspective, we've got this opportunity. We can prepare ourselves for when that comes in the future, but it, we can also inform ourselves about how we explore, what we look at to bring into the portfolio, both from the exploration pipeline as well, but also making assessments about inorganic growth, using that commercial understanding, where the market will place, how it will place, what our customers of the future may think about that product. These are things that we can build, as well as just having a good understanding of where the market's gonna be. Ivan talked about the opportunity within a window, but also the volatility that could be there, so understanding how that volatility may play out and what, how that may affect our equity value over time as well.
I think the other point, you know, the other side of value in use is cost, and it's the cost to process. So Tianqi, obviously, as our partner, takes, consumes the production from Greenbushes and processes it, translates that into valuable products for their customers. As we work together, as we develop deeper insights into value and use, the extent to which we can then optimize our business is very important because that drives cost out, which means there's more margin through the business, accordingly. And I just think there's still too many unknowns here to be precise about where and how that surfaces. But I wanna, I guess, wanted to call this out, and I think the work Brett's doing with his team to think through this, to work with Tianqi, to try and surface those insights is very important.
Hi, I'm Michael Orphanides from Tribeca. Just a quick question on comparing projects. When you have two unbelievable projects like Greenbushes and Nova, how does anything else stack up? Like, the last thing you want is to be cursed with choosing. Another peer of yours had the same dilemma, and they never actually did anything until right to the end, and we've seen the outcome now.
Yeah. Look, I mean, that is a challenge. It's. I guess I can't predict the future, right? We're clear about what value looks like, we've been clear on our strategy, and we'll go and pursue that with a lot of vigor. I've also talked about the capabilities, or the teams talked through the capabilities that we wanna build out in our business that helps us position for success. But, you know, I don't think it's helpful to come and say, "Well, let's dilute that up front." I just don't, you know, I don't think that's where we wanna begin. I'm sure that no IGO shareholders had preempted or preconceived the deal with Tianqi. I mean, it's an amazing deal, one of the best in quite a long time.
And okay, no one could see that coming. It was unique and different. Agree. Well, who's to say what's next? It is also why we want to have that emphasis on exploration, because the uplift in value there and rapid development of a project can bring a lot of value as well. So it's not a case of just having, you know, one pathway. And, then it's about patience, and, discipline, and great care and understanding where, what value looks like. Is there one more online, or we stay in the room? Yep.
Thanks, Ivan. Tim Hoff from Canaccord. Just looking at Kwinana a little bit more, obviously, it's been an asset that's been hard to get up and get into production at, at economic levels. It's not generating return. It's drawing on cash from the TLEA. So I guess there's two questions here. I guess the very obvious one is, should it be closed? I think, just on that economic basis, will it ever be competitive? But also, number two, are there offtake considerations that are drawing on there? Do you have offtake commitments where you have to deliver the tons, and that's driving the ship at the moment?
Yeah. So let me pick up the last part of that question first, 'cause I think that's great. So there's nothing there that's, we've got our hand forced, where we've got to take or pay or some sort of contractual commitment that, that, holds us and binds us. For me, this is about, the value of the installed asset and the capital that we've got. Clearly, a challenge to ramp up. Tianqi is bringing deep expertise to help work through that, and there's a number of things, playing out as we speak, as the team prepares for that next shutdown. And I remain patient and calm to support the team and let them work through that, so we have more information and more real facts and data to assess.
In parallel, we have obviously built out a much deeper understanding of this market, and we're seeing that when the tide comes down, what does it really look like? What is competitive? What does an efficient refinery look like? What are the costs? I think those insights are super important. Remember, it's only nine months since we were in a very different world in lithium, with different prices and different focus, where people were writing business cases. In fact, I won't mention specifics, but I saw a PEA pop up online, and they'd actually indicated an intended processing cost, I think, of AUD 13,000 a ton, and they'd put a AUD 30,000 a ton sort of price expectation in there for their business case. I don't relate to those numbers. You know, I think we can see much lower incentives in the industry.
And all of that's helpful to come together then to make those clear economic decisions about what and how we do next and how we allocate the capital. Of course, all our funds and the returns and dividends flowing out of Greenbushes are attractive, and we don't wanna allocate them in a way that's not helpful in the long term, but I think it's too early to be making those decisions, given all of the fantastic work that's happening in the team.
Excellent. Thank you. Perhaps just one quick one on the... I guess it'll be the early stage project. That perhaps suggests that you might take a build over buy mentality. That was just more of a comment, quick question, response.
Yeah. Look, it's an and, not an or. I don't think we wanna be binary here, and we talked about a 10-year view for the business. So in that time frame, I think it's reasonable to expect that both could be in play. But having the internal capability that we have in exploration and leveraging that's key. We realize we need to transform and shift gears there, which we're doing. Having the capability to develop a project, and some of the team here have been through that, that work is hard. A lot of mining companies struggle, and so thinking about that upfront, being well prepared for it, and being clear about how you're gonna build a project and how you bring it to market quickly, is super important. Not everyone can do that effectively.
I think that's a key capability IGO needs to bring to the market, so that is something we'll build out, and that gives us some optionality.
Jon Bishop from Jarden here. You've sort of called out the value of your partnership with Tianqi and TLEA and the expertise, both technically and commercially, that that brings to the Joint Venture. I guess one of the criticisms of IGO or a pushback from the market has been that Chinese Joint Venture partnership, in particular, and your ability to influence within TLEA and certainly within Greenbushes. How do you think about demonstrating that to the market and demonstrating that you do have a voice?
Okay. Maybe, I mean, Cameron and Brett, you're both close to that. Maybe share some of your reflections, and Cameron's brand new, just joined recently and has been through the agreements and has a fresh set of eyes on it, so.
Yeah, I think with the Joint Venture agreement, there's plenty of scope. It is, you know, effectively the vehicle for developing our lithium business. There's plenty of scope within that to work, you know, with Tianqi. And I think that's the real challenge, and we've got to build that over time. But there's certainly those mechanisms there to do that, and Ascendant is progressing with that from a commercial perspective. So I think the flexibility is there, and the alignment is there from what I've seen as well, which I think is really the practical point.
Brett?
Yeah, I think, well, in terms of the Joint Venture, it's, it is what it is. We work through the committees as they are. For me, the, probably the more important part, being new, is to build the relationships with the key counterparts on the other side of the Joint Venture board that I sit on. And how do we actually, you know- reach a common understanding of what we're trying to achieve through the Joint Venture itself. It's very clear that we want to grow in lithium with Tianqi, and this Joint Venture is our vehicle. So, the relationships as well as the contractual underpinning are almost as important at this point, as we build them together.
Can I just sort of take that a little bit further? My observation of Greenbushes, obviously, an exceptional asset, but it's been pretty sleepy. There's a lot of value that seems to be there with what appears to be fairly little or modest capital inputs. Again, how do you actually influence that outcome? I mean, pragmatically, I can't see why the Joint Venture partners wouldn't want a better operating asset, but it's all well and good for you guys to say that. How do you actually demonstrate that is happening?
Yeah. So, Jon, it's a good question, and I think what we can say for sure is there's complete alignment on that, that it's a very important asset. It generates fantastic returns, and they can be a lot better. And there's been some, I think, really thoughtful analysis put into the market recently on Greenbushes from a distance, you know, using publicly available information, setting out a whole bunch of opportunities, which for me, seeing, you know, looking in, makes a lot of sense. I think there's huge upside, and I think the JV partners, collectively through TLEA and Albemarle, are pursuing those things. You know, I guess what I'm hearing from you, John, is, well, can you tell me what the work plan is for the next 12 months?
What we can offer is we're working with those JV partners, and we will share that progress. You know, I guess the first milestone is as Rob onboards and starts to set that out, and we can give you more clarity in due course, how he sees that progress and the priorities and the way that he pursues it. From a macro point of view, you've got an amazing resource there. That resource can and has been expanded, and no doubt can be further expanded. The reserves, again, how that's thought about can be dealt with, and I think it's quite clear that underground as an option has been discussed and considered. That's all a matter of public record.
The ability to utilize the infrastructure more efficiently. This is the same in any good mining business. The more you can process, the more you can generate better throughput and recoveries from your existing infrastructure, drives huge upside in value and, you know, an area of focus, then of course, there's cost and productivity, so the levers are the same. They are the same for any mining business. I would suggest that Greenbushes offers all three of those upside areas of value, and I think that there's strong alignment to pursue that. As we progress through that work, and as we can share that as a partnership with the other JV partners, we'll bring that and share that with you.
Can I just squeeze one more in on the same theme? The other pushback, as I say, in the same thing, is Foreign Entity of Concern. How is that influencing or causing any tension within that Joint Venture for future initiatives together?
I don't know if anyone else wants to comment, Cam? No, they'll leave it with me. Look, certainly the indications are that Greenbushes would be designated as a foreign entity of concern, given Tianqi's ownership. Albemarle was recently, I think, in their last quarterly, you know, mentioned that. That sits with our understanding as well. How that plays out, for me, is still open to some discussion and some input. The DOE, who provides the direction and the administration of those decisions, has put out more guidance a few months back, which I think everyone's been through, but it still isn't crystal clear exactly how that all works. There's obviously a lot of other things going on in the U.S. as they work through that.
You know, for me, it's something that we're working with our partners to understand, but I can't give you any definitive direction as to what that really means for the business at this point.
Bless you.
Maybe one online. Yep.
Thank you. Your next question asks: Thanks for the strategy update and insightful market context. It appears the presentation is more skewed to the EV thematic as opposed to the broader energy transition. Has IGO undertaken research into what other critical minerals may be of interest for the broader energy transition as opposed to just EVs? For example, vanadium, zinc, and sodium.
So we certainly did. I won't flick back to the slide, but we certainly considered demand. The energy transition, of course, requires a lot of materials and minerals to support that huge physical shift in the world, and there's a long list. I mean, you could go right back to iron ore and steel and aluminum, you know, a lot of foundations. But if you narrow down to some of the critical minerals, let's call them, that are in play, we did go through those and look at where we felt there was value and the best opportunities, and we narrowed in again on battery materials or energy storage as an area of opportunity, and that's because of the significant growth in that market and the upside, particularly lithium and, of course, copper, that's looking forward.
So without going through the list of others, we did consider them, we assessed them, and it's a mix of both the market potential, but also where our skills and capabilities are. You know, if I call out one in particular, say, some of the rare earths, you know, that requires deep technical processing capability that's not for everyone, and we wanna play to our strengths. You know, we get back to where IGO's come from, what our capabilities are, and where we see ourselves driving the best returns and best value, and we've identified or flagged the three priority value pools or commodities. We're not excluding others. If we see a window or something opening, we'll certainly consider that, and I think the person who's asked the question, it's quite right to say there's more to come there.
But, in terms of the mainstream focus for the next decade, we've got those three in front of mind. One more online.
Thank you. Your next question asks: In terms of copper, given the timeframe to discover, permit, develop new projects is probably beyond your 10-year horizon, to achieve your targeted diversification strategy, doesn't this mean you are almost forced to consider M&A? Further, given the relative scarcity of Australian copper assets, would this suggest you need to think outside of Australia, and would that fit within the strategy?
Yeah. So back to the earlier question on geography, as we've said, we clearly recognize that we may need to consider going further afield from Australia. So that completely agree with the observation. Timeframes on development of copper, agree, and, you know, of course, the whole world is facing that challenge. And this balance of how we identify, manage, and deal with impacts that mining operations create, but equally bring the critical minerals to the market that it needs for the energy transition. So that tension's there. We need to also do our part there, which is a bit about how we bring rapid development, thoughtful management of those impacts, and the kind of partnership or trust that's required to bring a project through the pipeline.
It's impossible to say how long that is, 'cause it all depends on where it is and, you know, the particular circumstances and so on. But I wouldn't read through and say, "Well, that means that the only pathway is to do an inorganic asset or operating asset." I think we need to stand back and look at the opportunities. We'll continue to pursue our exploration pathways and equally look at any other early-stage development options that might come up. There's one more in the room? Yeah. Kate?
Hi, Kate McCutcheon at Citi. Thank you, Ivan, for the update. Can you just remind me where you've been sitting on corporate costs, what they should look like going forward now that the business is changing? And then the same question, but just remind me where you've been at for exploration, and then how you think about that- moving forward as well.
Kath can jump in. I mean, quickly on exploration, we sort of guided it will be sub-60% for the year. And that'll trend down 50%-60% in the following year, and then we'll continue to push that down. But it does take time to wind that out. On corporate, we haven't guided, but Kath, do you wanna maybe just share a few thoughts there?
Kate, unfortunately, we haven't guided, and we don't intend to guide on that at the moment, but you'll get start to see the look-through of that in our quarterlies. The reality is we've just done the reshaping, and we're continuing a focus on how we can manage our costs in an effective way. And part of that comes down to prioritization and how everything aligns with strategy. So finishing the strategy, putting it into a business plan, working out what those priorities are are going to drive where we actually do those programs of work. And therefore, it's a little bit premature to give a long-term guidance, not that we normally would anyhow. But hopefully you'll get a bit more transparency as the next couple of quarters occur.
Okay, thank you. And then just trying to reconcile your comment. Did I hear you correctly, that you're not gonna sit on cash? You've obviously got the undrawn facility, but then in the same line, you're talking about wanting to diversify to an early-stage project. Have you thought about then how you would intend to look at a funding mix? Should I read through into those comments around wanting to keep cash versus the facility that you've got, or is it too premature to?
If you look at that Capital Allocation Framework, it does actually show you where we're gonna get the money from or plan to get the money from, to use. And there's no point on sitting on cash if you're not developing something and all the rest of it. And we're gonna be really disciplined with how we allocate our capital back to shareholders, and we've been very clear on here how we would do that.
Obviously, if the right opportunity comes through discovery, development, or inorganically, we'll have a mix in there, and we've got the opportunity to go and look at the right sort of debt for the right sort of project, and what that actually looks like, or equity. What that actually looks like is highly dependent on the nature of that growth and that opportunity. So it's... I really can't answer more thoroughly than that, the question. Sorry.
That's helpful. No, that's helpful. Thank you, Kath.
There's one down the, o h, yep.
Thank you. Mitch Ryan from Jefferies. Just with regards to delivering on this strategy, I know it's out to 2035, but can you talk to how management LTIs and STIs have been structured to see you delivering to this plan?
Yeah, okay. Well, and we've just gone through that process with the board. Sam, maybe you wanna comment on the initial change, and then I'll talk more to where we would like to take them in the next step.
Sorry. There's a couple of parts to that. So clearly, this strategy has just been finished. Our LTI has always been focused around a three-year delivery period with a one-year hold. We will go through a process this year of having a look at how the new strategy and the new timeframe work with that. We're just in the process of, or have been working through in the last couple of months, the STI measures and how we structure that for this year. So you will see that come out through the course of the year. But, you know, for this particular three-year run, we think that that three-year timeframe and measures that actually deliver in that period of time would be appropriate until we reorganize.
But to be specific, so TSR, both relative and absolute, is the majority of it and a small amount on resource definition, but not. You know, that's organic, not inorganic. So if we're expanding our resource. And I think that was 15%, is around the resource, 85% being TSR. Pretty clear. The board and my view as well is that ROCE, ROIC, one of those kind of return on capital measures is really important. Right now, where we are, it doesn't make a lot of sense. As soon as we can get to that, I'd really like to see that in place, and TSR is, of course, you know, a great platform to draw on. So that's directionally where we are now, but you know, where we want to head is to get to that. We took feedback.
I think, the board, had a subset of the REM committee, did go and talk with a number of shareholders and get feedback and input and direction on that. And, that's been applied, and we'll continue to do that and make sure we're sounding to keep that aligned with shareholder expectations.
Part of the discipline in terms of how we look internally about those measures is that we will start using those much more internally so that you actually start driving that differently.
There's a couple down the front.
Thanks, Ivan. Thanks, Matt Chalmers from Bank of America. So just a broader question in terms of the value of IGO as an operator. You know, with if any further external M&A in the lithium business will need to be done by, via the JV, which you're a junior partner. And then if you look at the nickel business, I'm not expecting any further M&A there. But so that leaves copper. You know, just if and your preference for early-stage exploration and early-stage development projects, you know, in about five or six years' time, given where Nova's heading towards the end of mine life, you know, IGO could find itself in a position where you're not actually operating any assets.
How important is actually being an operator in the upstream to you, and how do you think about that going forward in terms of your five- to 10-year horizon?
Yeah, it's a great question, Matt. We talked and thought about that a lot. I think the first point to take is that we, and I hope we've really, you know, landed the message, that there isn't a sense of urgency or drive or, you know, some deadline that we're trying to hit around this. And this notion of being an operator or demonstrating operating credentials, again, isn't something that we're hanging on. We are gonna capture very clearly how we think about running a great mining business, take the essence of Nova and our broader business and capture it in the Playbook. And you'll see through the quality of the management team, and the team that reports through to the team on the stage here, the kind of people that can explore, develop, build and operate a great mining business.
You know, if we're five, six years down the track and we're not operating, then of course that will dilute. Equally, the ability to retain people that far out will get more difficult, but that's a long time as well, so I guess I'm trying to. I'm not gonna get to solving problems that haven't emerged yet. There is a scenario, of course. It's quite possible that we don't find the right asset, we don't find the right opportunity, or we don't surface the right resource through exploration, and that's where we end up, and Greenbushes continues to provide great returns on itself, and that's okay. What we've got is a clear aspiration about the portfolio that we want to have.
We think we'll have the capability to execute on that, and then it's about being very disciplined to get to that point.
Thanks. Kaan Peker from RBC. Two questions. Yeah, sorry, two questions on nickel. Probably less of a commodity focus, but the first one obviously is called out pulling forward volumes from Nova. Maybe if you can give a bit more detail around that. And secondly, on Cosmos, there was talk around studies. What conceptually, what studies are being progressed? And I'll follow up with the second one. Thanks.
Well, maybe let me cover Nova first, and then Marie can pick up on more on Cosmos, and Kat's been close to that as well. Look, the challenge with Nova is there isn't a lot of optionality in the stope sequence, so it is about mining productivity ultimately, and supporting the team. And I think this is a great challenge for them, you know, to say: "Hey, how do you move that tail and pull it forward into the next two financial years?" Very clear goal. It's about mine scheduling, it's about mine productivity, drilling rates, you know, et cetera. I won't go into all the specifics, but that I think is a wonderful opportunity for the team to challenge themselves with, and that's what we're working through at the moment: how do we schedule that?
We put out, obviously, this year's guidance based on the known schedule and the plan, and as we see a lift in productivities and changes there, we can adjust that if we need to. But that's obviously. It's not material in value uplift, but it is the right thing to do with that asset in terms of how we operate. On Cosmos?
Yeah, we're naturally looking for what are the options for the future of Cosmos, and that's through a couple of lens. The first lens is really looking at, how cost competitive or what would it take to be really cost competitive in the, in the nickel, market, and can we make this true and make a decision from that, perspective? The second lens we're looking through exploration and the work that Brett's team is doing to understand what resources we can capitalize from around the Cosmos area. And there is a number of, targets that we're looking into and that, we'll continue, drilling over the next few months.
I think maybe the additional point on the existing Cosmos project, as we study it, you know, I think the current view is unless we have a different mining technique to apply there, it's gonna be difficult to make that economic. And so we're, you know, clear-eyed about it. That's... It's disappointing, but it is behind us. We're not gonna continue to chase something that won't pay off. If we can see a pathway there, and we can see a resource in a form that allows us to apply a different technique, then it's probably gonna make sense. If it doesn't, then it won't. And we're not gonna continue, you know, keeping that mine dewatered at AUD 12-15 million a year if we don't see that path. That's just a waste.
Makes sense. And the second one, for Marie, actually. Given your background at BHP and Rio, predominantly in iron ore ops, what drew you to the role of CEO of lithium?
Look, I've had a great experience, largely in operational roles and amazing opportunities at Rio Tinto and BHP. And I think what I saw in IGO is really being less capped in the ability to make a difference and really got attracted to the same purpose, I guess, that Ivan spoke about. And really tapping into my personal purpose as well, to be able to make a difference for the future, the energy transition that the world is undertaking. And being able to be involved actually in mining critical minerals for the future of the energy transition, lithium being a big part of it. You know, when you look at the value pool, was very attractive for me.
Thanks.
We got any more online? Yeah.
Thank you. Your next question asks: Commercial capability has been called out as a key capability for IGO to leverage. Can you please expand on this point, in particular, WRT formation of JVs in nickel and copper? How important a lever will this be? Will this be focused on exploration, development, or producing assets? Identifying assets you covet is the easy part, creating the opportunity to be a partner and how to identify partners that have similar priorities from a distance seem to be more difficult.
Yeah, okay. I think maybe picking up on the part about partnerships at the end there. I think that's certainly something that we've identified as what we want to look at, and the question really, really draws out what's key to that, to my mind, in forming those partnerships. Is first stepping back and saying, "What are we trying to generate from it?" And then secondly, who across the landscape can match up well with what we're looking to do, and they can bring complementary skill sets to what we're trying to achieve as well, and generate long-term value? In terms of what we're trying to do in commercial, it's across lots of different things. I mean, we have a number of joint ventures in our exploration portfolio now.
They can be managed, you know, in better ways in some cases. And we can also form joint ventures with all that knowledge and history about what we've learned from those exploration joint ventures through time, so the new ones that we build will make improvements on that. And then the other part is really just around, you know, what we see in the market space in terms of being able to build out our understanding of lithium, the lithium market, how it plays, how the product goes through the value chain, and what that might mean for us to set up for the future.
Thank you. Your next question asks: Ivan commented at the start, that government subsidies would not change the structure of the lithium industry. Can he please elaborate on that? Is he saying the subsidies are not enough to influence strategy? Is he saying China will dominate lithium regardless?
Just jumping back to that slide for everyone here in the room. And so it comes out in a couple of places. Look, you know, I don't think our message is China will dominate. We don't know. I mean, they have developed a fantastic industry, huge capability, and a lot of depth. They've invested very heavily to do that in capital, in research and development, in positioning themselves with that very integrated virtuous circle that we talked through. For the West or for the rest of the world to compete, there's a lot to catch up on. The Resources Minister, Madeleine King, at the Mining Minerals Week Breakfast yesterday, talked about this, and she was very open about the strength of China and how competitive they've been and how focused they've been on building that.
You don't turn up and compete with that like for like in a short space of time. So the last point here is relevant. Western OEMs must continue looking beyond just subsidies and tariffs for how they build some distinctive advantage, and I'm sure they are. Whether that's through technology, we know that automation is a factor here. There's a lot going on. The takeaway from us is twofold. One, we just don't think that subsidies, incentives, tariffs are going to, in the space we're talking about playing upstream in lithium and copper mining, are going to drive substantive shifts in economics that should affect our strategy or our business case. That's the key takeaway.
It's not to say that they won't have some contribution, and they won't help support that work, and of course, different countries are looking to build more supply security. That's a, you know, a clear intent, and we'll see how that plays out. The second key point is, look, we want to build a business that's resilient, returns-focused, and can operate through this in different geographies without waiting or worrying about what the subsidies or incentives are. It's linked with the first point, but understanding what competitiveness is in lithium, what it means to be low cost, to have a lean business that can run through the cycle.
Greenbushes is an exception, I agree, but if you look beyond that, what it is that you need to do to be successful, and, you know, that's where our energy is being focused.
Thank you. Your next question asks, "In terms of, in terms of copper, do you take a view of future copper price? And would you consider existing massive scale but low-grade copper, gold, porphyry resources that might require capital-intensive mass mining and processing?
That's a very broad question. Look, first point on the price assumptions used to assess a business case, we use consensus, and we have done for some time. I think that's a small part of the problem. I think the challenge is, of course, as you look forward, if you're moving into something that's inorganic, is the premiums or the, you know, the expectation for that asset. So, adjusting your price assumption to try and make it all work is just not a great plan, and we know that from the past. The broader question around the type of resource, look, there are different ways that copper comes to bear.
We have a small example of that in Nova right now that comes through as a copper stream, you know, nine, ten thousand tons a year and has done and helps make Nova what it is. I think we're sort of not sitting here saying we've got a singular focus on a particular type of geology. Our exploration team do look across the board, porphyries, sedimentary basins, and so on. They'll continue to do that. We have a great geological understanding through our exploration team about the options and the different economics of those, and we'll continue to look for something that, again, just meets the hurdle requirements or the kind of returns that we're pursuing. And maybe the last point, I guess, I'd sort of read through the question.
You know, some of these big projects will take enormous amounts of time and capital, and of course, that's where partnerships become really important, and that's something that we've talked about as part of our strategy. We're very clear on the value of that. And the positioning in copper might be in a very modest minority partner. That's okay. You know, we don't have to be at the table in a 100% asset to have exposure to copper.
Thank you. Your next question is a follow-up from Lyndon Fagan with JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Thanks very much for the opportunity for a follow-up. Look, in the last 12 months, Greenbushes, although it is the best hard rock asset, has behaved a bit like a marginal mine withdrawing exports. You clearly haven't seen that behavior with the latest downturn. Ivan, I'm wondering whether you can share any discussions around the strategy going forward around offtake in response to lower prices. Are we going to see production come off or shipments come off in order to support the market again? Or is that, are we done with that sort of behavior? I've got one more follow-up, too.
Yeah. Okay, Lyndon. Look, I think we sort of covered this ground previously on some of the calls, that the offtake and the nominations for product from Greenbushes comes from Tianqi and Albemarle via our JV. They're the only consumers of that product, and there isn't a third-party sales channel at this stage. They make those decisions based on their business needs, their downstream needs, and their customer requirements, and we work through that. The decision that was taken earlier this year by Tianqi was in a very specific context, and they worked through that.
We discussed it at length, and they then came back not that long afterwards and actually drew down the buildup of inventory that accrued during that period, and we've been back to full production and normal rates. I can't give you any indication about what happens two quarters from now, because the market's not known, and obviously, Tianqi will take those decisions case by case. But you know, I don't think you can take the decision and try and draw parallels or draw some sort of thread from it, because it was in a very specific context.
No, no worries. Appreciate the discussion on that. The other one's just on going to Net Zero at Greenbushes on roughly a 10-year view. Can you talk about the capital involved to do that and some of the scope involved as well? Thanks.
Look, I can't. I mean, I think that, Lyndon, that's something we could pick up, and we'll talk through with the JV partners about that work. It's not something that we've, you know, we've got detail to share at the strategy session today.
No worries. Okay, thanks.
One more online? We're done. Okay, anything more in the room? Looks like we've all finished. We're out for questions, which is great. We just passed the two-hour mark, which is great. Thanks for everyone's attention, patience, and your interest. Some excellent questions and focus, both online and here in the room. Hopefully, for those online, this has all come through clearly. It's always hard when we're trying to do these mixed sessions, but it's been a great opportunity for us to sort of share the story and also for you to meet the broader executive team and hear about the role that they're gonna play as we start to bring the strategies to life. I think the place I want to finish is around execution.
You know, strategies and PowerPoint and all of the materials that go with it are only as good as the disciplined execution of those. We're very clear on that. That work has started, and we will share more quarter on quarter as we progress. We'll start to bring more of that to life as we can in numbers and details, and naturally seek your feedback as we go.
The broader business has gone through a lot of change in the past six months or so, and Sam, I think, called out the importance of us consolidating, resetting, and getting back to the culture and the confidence that we had as IGO, and that's gonna be an area that we're all focused on, 'cause we know that underpins the strategy and the execution and the value that we're gonna deliver for shareholders. But with that, let's close off there. Thanks, everyone, for your time and your questions, and we look forward to tracking the progress in the quarters to come.