Hello, and welcome to Antofagasta's 2024 half-year results call. We will start today's session with a short introduction from Antofagasta, to be followed by a question and answer session. If you have a question, we ask that you please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your Zoom screen. If you have joined us via telephone, please press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute. Once your name has been announced, you may unmute and ask a question. Please stay muted when not asking a question. You may also type a written question anytime in the Q&A box at the bottom of your screen. I will now hand you over to Rosario Orchard, Director of Antofagasta's London office, to introduce today's speakers.
Good morning, good afternoon, everybody. Welcome to our half-year call for 2024. I'm here today with our Chief Executive, Iván Arriagada, our CFO, Mauricio Ortiz, and our Vice President of Sustainability, Alejandra Vial. In terms of process today, Ivan will start with a short introduction, and then we'll move straight into Q&A, and we'll aim to wrap up in one hour. Ivan, over to you.
Thank you, Rosario, and welcome, everybody to the call, and for taking the time to discuss Antofagasta's half-year results. I know you will have seen the details that we published this morning, but I would like to highlight, as a way of introduction, a few key points. Firstly, I would say that we have delivered another positive set of financial results. Revenue is up 2%, EBITDA is up 5%, and, most importantly, cash flow is up 15%.
We think copper plays a vital role in the transition to clean energy, and with the supply of demand expected to lag pricing demand over the next decade, we have made this year investments, which we will continue to undertake as we go through this investment phase, and which should allow us essentially to increase production by close to 35%, or get closer to 900,000 tons per year of production. I would also highlight that our projects are advancing well. They remain on track, and CapEx is unchanged. These are brownfield expansions, and we know that brownfield expansions carry certain benefits, from the point of view of lower execution risk, lower time to production, and typically lower construction costs.
With respect to production, we remain on track to meet our guidance, although, as we previously had announced, we expect production to be at the lower end of the range that we had initially shared with you. And you will also note that today we have announced an interim dividend, which represents 35% of earnings, which is in line with our policy. So having said that, as introductory remarks, we will now open up the session for questions and answers, and therefore, I welcome the first question.
Ladies and gentlemen, we will now begin our Q&A session. If you have a question, we ask that you please use the raise hand function at the bottom of your Zoom screen. Once your name has been announced, you can ask a question. If you want to withdraw your question, please lower your hand using the raise hand function in the Zoom app. If you have called in on a phone, please press star nine to raise your hand and star six to unmute and mute. You may also submit written questions in the Q&A chat function at the bottom of your webinar screen. The first question is from Jason Fairclough at Bank of America. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Okay. Funciona? Buenos días. Thanks, folks. Good to see everybody. Look, two questions from me. First, I just wanted to ask a fairly simple one about water. You know, we've been impacted by water the last couple of years. Now you're ramping up the desalination plant. Where are we with water today? Is your business being impacted at all by water, or is this completely fixed? So that's the first question. Second question, I did just want to compliment you on the bubble chart on page 21. I feel like it's 2006 again, so that's great, and it's really great to see the growth potential in the business.
I guess my question, Iván, is: When do you start talking, even, you know, hypothetically, about some of these longer-dated growth options, and what might be involved in bringing those online?
Yeah. Thank you, Jason. So, let me start by water. I think we had displayed a water strategy for Los Pelambres, which includes the commissioning and ramp up of the existing desalination plant, which is actually now fully running at operational capacity. So we're able, basically, to produce at an instantaneous level 400 liters per second. And, therefore, from that point of view, we're basically independent of the water that accumulates because of rain, and I think that's the first step in our water strategy.
We're also undertaking now the expansion to the desalination plant, which will essentially take our water facility to 800 liters per second when that is finished, towards the end of 2026, and that will mean that we will then release the extraction of continental water, and at that stage, almost 90%-95% of the water that we use be either recirculated water or seawater. That's essentially the plan, and at this stage, with the water plant running at design, and I must say that the ramp has been quite successful, and we're very pleased with where we are. We're independent of rain water in Pelambres.
So water has not been a limiting or restrictive factor in the course of this first half, as it was, as you pointed out, for the last few years. Now, with respect to the growth pipeline, I think you know, we're pleased to see that we've got some opportunities that we're working on, and our strategy is essentially based on us being able to develop in firstly, our brownfield projects, both the Centinela second concentrator and the Pelambres you know, infrastructure replacement that we're undertaking now. And I think that will essentially allow us to get closer to the nine hundred thousand tons. And our strategy is very much focused on that.
Now, beyond that, what we show in the chart is the extension of the mine life at Los Pelambres, and I think this is extremely important because it essentially allows us to monetize a very significant resource base that today is limited because of the permit that we have for tailings. So that will essentially allow Los Pelambres to extend its mine life beyond twenty thirty-five, and continue operating at current or expanded rates. And therefore, you know, the value impact, you know, for us, is quite significant. Now, when are we gonna be talking more about that project? I think we expect to file the environmental impact assessment to be able to extend the mine life on twenty thirty-five towards the end of this year. So actually, we've been working on this project for quite some time.
We're ready with the permit for it to be filed, and we expect that permit will probably take between two and three years to be granted. And after that, then we would be able to start planning for what that extension might mean in terms of construction work and other sort of ancillary activities. So it's quite, you know, imminent, and it's quite close. Now, with respect to the other projects that you would see there, I think we've got some which are in exploration phases, like Cachorro and Encierro. We've talked about them in the past. We've actually included around a billion tons of mineral resource when you add those two in our declaration.
Actually, what we're moving now in the case of Cachorro is to finish a scoping study, and we're now doing actually a more exploration, reconnaissance exploration, and we're doing a pre-feasibility, starting a pre-feasibility. So I think that's something that you'll also hear more about. The other one that we have there is, you know, the potential to extend the life at Zaldívar, which I would like to mention, and I think that is dependent, obviously, on us being able to get the permit extension now in May. We've got a long-term plan there, which will have us mining until 2050 if that is successful.
So we've got several projects which we control, that we can essentially develop to be able to continue to grow our production or sustain our production levels, and I think that's good. And we continue to do exploration. We believe that exploration is important, and we have activities now mostly in Peru and in Chile, and we continue to think that that will you know provide further opportunities into our pipeline.
And sorry, Ivan, just to be clear, things like Cachorro, Zaldívar, primary sulfides, that is not in the near-term growth plan, right? So near-term growth of 30-35%, that's independent of those new projects.
Right.
Okay.
Correct.
Thank you very much.
Yeah. Thanks, Jason.
The next question is from Ioannis Masoulas at Morgan Stanley. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question. Ioannis, please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Great. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can hear you.
Perfect. Perfect. Hello, thank you very much for the presentation. Few questions from my side. The first one on the guidance for 2024, which requires a large step-up in H2 of as much as 25% versus the second quarter production run rate. Can you provide some color on how you get there, as recoveries at the Centinela concentrates are only expected to improve from Q4 this year, and Los Pelambres might see a slow destocking of material, given the pipeline capacity bottleneck? The second question is on the Los Pelambres Phase 2 expansion. You indicated a preliminary CapEx figure of $2 billion. I think previously you were talking something closer to $1 billion. What explains the increase, and how much of the $2 billion relates to the increased desalination footprint?
And lastly, if I may, there is a comment or on the financial results around a new declaration of severe drought conditions at the Los Pelambres, impacting the water redistribution agreement that you have in place. How does that impact your operations into the second half of the year, if at all? And I'll stop here. Thank you.
Thanks, Ioannis. Okay, for those questions. So on guidance for 2024, yeah, they do include, as you've mentioned, a step up in production in half two, which is explained essentially by expected higher grade at Centinela. So that's an important drive of the increase in production. During the first half, we did go through a zone of, I would say, very low grade at Centinela and lower grade at Pelambres, and we expect to see that reverse in the second half.
And also in the second half, we do expect to see draw down from the inventory, and even though we've indicated that may take two or three quarters, which would essentially put some of that into next year, we think, you know, that will also help to achieve our guidance number for this year. And therefore, those are the factors which are at play. So essentially higher grade at Centinela, destocking of material that we produced, and that is essentially accumulated at Pelambres. With respect to your second question regarding the Los Pelambres Phase 2, I would say that the...
Yeah, we had provided an estimate of capital expenditure for this project back in 2014, so that's 10 years ago. So this is an updated figure. And I would like, first of all, to point out that the scope of this project involves essentially extending the life of Pelambres beyond 2035. So capital expenditure for this phase is situated around the 2030s, not earlier than that. And we are undertaking several studies with options being looked at, and what the $2 billion involved is essentially extending the mine life for another 15 years until 2050, and increasing the milling capacity, so therefore adding another ball mill, and this is an option, you know, in being studied today.
And also, an increase in the water footprint. Now, desalination water supply footprint, and that is important because what we expect, according to the studies that we've made, is that when we extend the mine life, and we're, you know, well into that extension in, in beyond 2035, you know, things like the rate of evaporation of water at the tailings. And also the fact that we have another, you know, or extra milling capacity, will require some extra water to what we've planned in this phase without the Pelambres extension. So what's involved in the $2 billion is all that optionality.
The option to eventually increase milling capacity, and also the initial water footprint requirements, which are likely to be backended in the life extension of Los Pelambres, because, as I say, they take account of the added capacity, but also the higher evaporation rates as the tailings footprint increases. That's basically what's in it, and obviously, because the prior number was provided in two thousand and fourteen, there's inflation element. This has been ten years since that was provided. There's both an inflation element, and second, also the options, which are the development options, which are included in the scope of the $2 billion, are slightly different, as we've also included some expansion to the water footprint. Mm-hmm. And going on to your third question about the Water Redistribution Agreement.
So we have essentially an agreement with the water authority and the, you know, the community, whereby, you know, we have a mechanism operating, which is called the Water Redistribution Agreement. And because there is drought, that requires a special decree, which is now in place, that has been granted, and therefore, there are some administrative permits of, I would say, a second level of order of, of relevance, which need to be in place, and those are being sorted out now.
So, because we have in the short term the combination of the water availability through the desalination plant, we expect that any sort of restriction associated to this Water Redistribution Agreement being put in place because of these administrative conditions is short-lived, and therefore will not have any impact on water availability for us in the second half.
Very clear. Thank you very much. Thank you.
The next question is from Daniel Major at UBS. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hello, can you hear me okay?
Yeah.
Great, thanks. So a couple of questions. First one, just clarifying on from Ioannis's question around the project pipeline to some degree. Page twenty-one, you've got the Centinela Phase Two, and then the Los Pelambres growth enablers, and then the Los Pelambres expansion, Phase Two. Can you just clarify which ones of those projects are needed to get to the ambition of nine hundred? Do you need the Los Pelambres Phase Two, or is it just the first two at the front end of the bubble charts?
It's the front end, so what we need, basically, or are contemplating there, is the current expansion of Pelambres, which has now been completed, plus the replacement of the sort of infrastructure, which is being built now through the project that we, or the projects that we have in construction, both the replacement of the concentrate pipeline and the expansion of the water system, so that's in construction now, and in the case of Centinela, the second concentrator, so what's behind the nine hundred thousand is completing those phases of growth at Pelambres, not the life extension, and in the case of Centinela, doing the second concentrator. And also, it assumes the continuity in the operation of Zaldívar.
Okay, thanks. So the $2 billion you referenced, and discussed in the previous question, a sort of long-dated CapEx is not, you know, needed to be deployed to get to the nine hundred. That's-
Right.
Yeah. Okay, thanks,
As I said, the two billion, it's involved really in the sort of extension of the mine life of Pelambres, which is beyond twenty thirty-five. Now, obviously, we would need to do some work around the twenty thirties, but it's associated to that project, which is outside the sort of nine hundred thousand number.
Very clear, thanks. And then the second question is on the cost guidance that you provided an update with the production release last month. Because I think when you set the guidance earlier in the year, it was with quite conservative FX and gold price assumptions, yet it was still increased somewhat. I understand the volume aspect, because you expect to be to the low end of guidance, but can you give us some commentary on the inflationary impacts? You know, clearly, if you're using spot parameters now, there's some underlying inflation still in there, so any sort of moving parts there? And if you can, at this stage, any indication on how the trajectory of unit costs should look into 2025?
Yeah, so, I'll pass it on to Mauricio, but maybe just a couple of things. One is, yeah, we do expect the second half costs to come down as a result of higher production. So there's a, you know, fixed cost dilution associated to the higher production figure. And the fact that we've guided to one seventy is associated to the fact that we expect to be in the lower range. So production is a very significant element in play here. What we've seen in terms of local inflation, and just to give some color to that, is that local inflation is running slightly higher than, you know, we had sort of anticipated or the macro consensus was at the time.
Expectations is that it's probably going to end up close to 4%, and we had assumed a rate of around 3%. So that's also a factor in costs. But Mauricio, you may want to expand further on this point.
Maybe just to start in building on what you just said on local inflation. That is something that we have seen offset by the weaker Chilean peso, and that is also an important factor in our projection of $1.70 going forward. Along with the higher production in the second half, weaker Chilean peso than what we forecast at the beginning of the year, and a stronger gold price. I believe with these three elements, we can build and be confident in $1.70 as a full year guidance in terms of net cash cost.
Okay, and can you, at this stage, give us any directional, sort of view on costs into 2025, unit costs?
Well, you know, Dan, that we just provide guidance later in the year regarding our figures for next year. But I will say that with Pelambres running at full capacity, its additional milling capacity and the desal plant, leaving out of the equation any water restriction, and with Centinela entering in a higher grade phases, we have positive drivers for next year.
Very clear. Thank you. I'll go back in the queue.
This question is from Efrem Ravi at Citigroup. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hi, can you hear me?
Yes, we can hear you well.
Hi, thanks. Just two questions. Firstly, I was trying to reconcile the year-on-year cost move of you know those about $0.45 per pound, a lower or higher cost due to throughput. And then you know the efficiency improvement, the competitiveness program, which had a $34 million dollar improvement. I just want to know, of the competitiveness program, the throughput above design capacity, how much of that is structural, and how much of that is generally that your throughput levels are going to be higher versus a very low base from last year?
And secondly, just a quick sort of update, if you can give on what your initial discussions with Buenaventura, now that you've got seats on the board, is in terms of cooperation prospects, and should we expect anything big, you know, in the next one or two years from that?
Okay, so on the throughput, I think essentially what you see there when you compare year on year, yeah, it's moving Pelambres to essentially run at design capacity, because there's been no limitation on the water availability in the first half, and there was some of that in the prior half in 2023, yeah. Having said that, the good news is that we have recovered that, and secondly, that our plants are running well. I mean, if you look at Centinela, we had lower throughput because the ore was harder, but in fact, you know, it's been running with a good runtime. When the ore has been as it was in 2023, we were hitting rates above one hundred and five thousand tonnes a day.
In the case of Pelambres, we now have another milling line, and therefore we're able to get as high as 210,000 tonnes a day, and those plants are running very, very well. We're happy with where throughput is, and we think that will provide some extra upside as we look into the future, you know, production. But when you look at the bars, as you were pointing out, it's mostly comparing that performance against a lower performance than design because of the water limitations in the prior year. Now, with respect to Buenaventura, so we've, as we've discussed before, I think this has been Peru is a jurisdiction that we like.
We've got an exploration team there, and the move to acquire, you know, close to 19 or 20% of Buenaventura's ownership has been, you know, in line with that strategy, in line on that plan. We saw this as an opportunity from a valuation point of view. If you look at the portfolio, you know, it includes a share in Cerro Verde and other assets, which are mostly producing gold, which is, you know, good news today because of the gold price, but which have the potential to convert to copper. Since then, essentially, we've got two seats in the board. We are working, you know, I would say, very cooperatively with other board members and the management at Buenaventura to understand the portfolio and the potential, the plans that they have, and therefore are in that phase.
So, you know, very pleased where things are heading and going in terms of, you know, the level of collaboration that we're seeing. And I'm sure that will lead to some, you know, a better understanding of what the opportunities in the portfolio of Buenaventura might be to continue to develop that. But at this stage, you know, we're glad with where we are collaborating and understanding the potential.
Thank you. I'll go back to the queue.
The next question is from Marina Calero at RBC Capital Markets. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hi, good afternoon. Can you hear me?
Yes, we can hear you well, Marina.
Perfect. I have two questions. The first one is on your cost savings program. It looks like you have already achieved 65% of your target year to date. Do you see potential to exceed that target? And then the second one on your phase two expansion of Los Pelambres. Will that $2 billion investment meet your internal hurdle rates at current copper prices? Thank you.
Yeah. So I will start with the second, and then I'll let Mauricio pick up the one on cost. I mean, I think it's probably, you know, the one of the best investments that we may have at hand, because it essentially allows us to extend the mine life at the Pelambres, against the case of stopping production in 2035. So, you know, we essentially get the full benefit of being able to continue producing from an ore body, which is phenomenal and which is, you know, world-class.
So we think that the phase two Pelambres is a very key project in the sense that it will drive significant value increase to the group, as I say, because otherwise, you know, we're faced with stopping production at Pelambres in 2035, which would be the sort of mine life today based on the permit availability. So this is a very key project, you know, for the company and for the group. It will allow us to monetize those very significant existing reserves that we have at Pelambres beyond the current permits. And the investments involved, as I said before, some of them are optional.
We've included in the $2 billion the option to expand the milling capacity, so that will only be undertaking if we think, you know, at that stage, it's a good opportunity for the company to increase throughput, and therefore production, and in the case of the increased water footprint, that's essentially during the life of the extended Pelambres, so that will happen between 2035 and 2050, and therefore progressively, and it essentially allows operations, you know, to continue throughout that extended period.
So we think it's you know these are expected to be very high return and high yield investments for the company and provide a great opportunity to be able to monetize the rich base of resources that we have at Pelambres, which are amongst you know the best in the world. So having said that, I'll pass on to Mauricio to address your question on the cost saving programs and what we have achieved and the potential for that.
Thank you, and first of all, Marina, let me say a few words about the competitiveness program, which is main target is to look for a structural improvement and savings. So the basis of this program are combining innovation and operational excellence. So as Ivan described, we are, for example, running beyond our design capacity some of the facilities. I would like to expand a bit, for example, what we are doing in Antucoya. In Antucoya, the design capacity was in the space of 30 million tons per year, and now we are running in the space of 32 million tons per year. So that is part of the thing that we are doing. Particularly this year, we fronted loaded the program.
That's explain why we are slightly ahead of 50% of the total figure. I will expect that in the second half we are gonna keep running Antucoya, for example, beyond design capacity and keep collecting the savings associated to lower unit consumption. For example, the ones that we obtain with explosive and optimizing diesel consumption on our operations. But the bulk of the savings from the second half will come from an initiative that we call productivity improvements related to our contractor workforce. So, to wrap up, I will expect that we're very well placed to achieve our $200 million saving target for this year on the basis of structural savings and improvement.
And we are focusing, finishing this year and entering the next one, in optimize the time and tools and the productivity of our contractors at the mine sites.
That's very clear. Thank you.
The next question is from Ioannis Masoulas at Morgan Stanley. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hello, can you hear me okay?
Yes, we can, Ioannis.
Excellent.
Yes.
Thank you. Thanks for taking the follow-ups. Just a couple from my side. The first, going back to Centinela concentrates, so you experienced the high levels of clay and fines in ore processed, which impacted the recoveries, and what I was hoping to clarify is whether this is an one-off in nature, or whether it could be a recurring theme in the coming years for this operation, and in other words, is the historical average recovery of 85% a good guide for the years to come, or shall we bake in something a bit lower? Then the second question on depreciation, which saw a fairly big step-up of 27% year over year. You clearly articulated the reasons on the results today. What shall we expect for the full year?
Because that's gonna be relevant for PPS and dividend expectations. Thank you.
Yeah. Okay, so on the first one, yeah, as you've pointed out, and we did sort of highlight that in the production report, yes, we have extracted ore and are mining in a zone that's got more clay and fine content than, you know, the average for that zone or face of the pit that we would expect, and therefore, that has impacted recoveries. I think, you know, we had initially an impact which has now been moderated. You know, as you know, time has passed, and we continue to feed this ore, we're able to optimize the plant. So we're probably in levels of recovery today, which are hitting, you know, the sort of close to 80% again.
Now, going forward, I would say that we, you know, we're essentially expecting that in some areas we may well find this type of clay and fine, but that we're able to essentially update and recalibrate our geometallurgical model in a way that we will be able to blend that ore, and therefore, have a minimum impact or no impact on our recoveries. So I would say that assuming recoveries in the range of sort of the 85%, as has been in the past, would be appropriate on the basis, as I say, that anticipating this condition or this attribute, we're able to blend the ore, so it doesn't have the same impact in the performance of the plant. And with respect to depreciation, I'll pass it on to Mauricio.
Thank you, and well, hi, Ioannis. As you know, depreciation is function of our asset base, yeah, of our operational asset base. And in comparison with the first half of last year, we have a different asset base as we already ramp up, and we have fully operational the desalination plant and the additional milling capacity at Los Pelambres. So that explain basically the additional depreciation in comparison with the first half of last year.
Tackling your question regarding how we can expect for the full year, I will expect that, having this new facilities fully operational during the first half, especially the desalination plant, and most of the first half with the additional milling capacity depreciated, we are gonna have roughly a flat depreciation in the second half in comparison with the first half.
That's great. Thank you so much. Thanks again.
Thank you.
A reminder, if you would like to ask a question, please use the Raise Hand feature. Once you've been invited to ask your question, please unmute and ask your question. I will now hand over to Rob Simmons for the written questions. Rob, please go ahead.
... Thank you kindly. We have two written questions so far. The first one is from Wood Mackenzie, and the question is relating to the water sale at Centinela that we announced earlier in the year. Question is as follows: How will this deal affect your cash costs, and what are the terms for the transfer stage of the deal? We assume Antofagasta will have to buy back water infrastructure at some point in the future. Thank you.
Okay. So I will on the cost side and cash flow pass it on to Mauricio, but this we think this is an important transaction as part of the funding for the Centinela second concentrator because in line with what we had planned, this essentially allows us to release cash from and recycle capital that can help us to or assist in the financing plan for the expansion. I think it's been a transaction that has been successfully completed according to what we had planned, and in terms which are creative for the company.
Now, the scheme involves essentially something similar to a lease arrangement, and therefore, there is a provision for buyback at the end of the contract period, as has been implied in the question. And also, we have several provisions in the contract that allow us to, you know, de-risk the water supply, both in terms of how we monitor maintenance and the potential rights that we have also to action what is required for the pipeline to operate in a reliable way.
We are happy with where things are heading with the consortium, and they are tasked not only to run the existing system, which is now being transferred to them, and we are in the period of transitioning that with a joint operation for a short period of time, but also they've been tasked with expanding the system. The structure, the purpose, the strategic intent behind this transaction has been accomplished, and I'll ask Mauricio to be more specific about the cost and cash flow impacts. Mauricio?
Thank you. As you said, this is a transaction that involves the existing infrastructure, which is basically a cash inflow of $600 million, and also offload some CapEx related to the Centinela second concentrator project in the space of $380 million. That is the cash inflow. In terms of the competitiveness of the water supply, I would say that we have reached a good agreement with the acquiring consortium. We will maintain a competitive unit price for water supply in the space of $4 per cubic meter.
That is a competitive amount in the northern area of Chile, and that will translate essentially as in term of net cash cost in the space of $0.03-$0.05 per pound, so for a company that will be operating fully on seawater, and once we have the second concentrator operating, aiming and moving toward the first quartile, the increase is reasonable related to secure the water supply for Centinela requirements for its expansion and existing operations.
Thank you, Mauricio. Rob, we're back to you with the second question.
Very good, thank you. We have the second question, which relates to our investments and how these might affect our debt going forward. Thank you.
So, okay. So I assume, so is it general? Yeah, so we. Well, I think we've laid out clearly what our investments plan are and how they're centered around the expansion of the second concentrator at Centinela and the sort of replacement and expansion infrastructure at Pelambres. And we think that we have and a plan accordingly, that we have the balance sheet to be able to fund you know those expansions. We, in the case of the Centinela second concentrator, have secured a combination of project financing for $2.5 billion, with shareholder funding from you know for the balance including you know the recycling of capital associated to the BOT or the water system.
And therefore, you know, the project is, from that point of view, funded, at the asset level, at Centinela level, with that combination, and that is, already in place. And in the case of the expansions at Pelambres, we've done there the, first phase, which involved the diesel plant that's already built, are undertaking this replacement infrastructure, and essentially, Pelambres has a strong, balance sheet and cash flow generation to be able to fund, these, you know, these investments. We undertake these investments, just as a reminder, following our capital allocation, and therefore, one of the, conditions in the capital allocation is to, retain our strong balance sheet, even, you know, through these phases of growth, and therefore, the funding and the financing associated is based on that premise as well.
So we think that we have the strength in our balance sheet to be able to undertake these investments. And as I say, you know, in the case of Centinela, which is the biggest one, the financing plan is already in place with commitments, being, I mean, having been closed, and we're now actually drawing down from the funding as we continue to invest and progress construction. So, within the capabilities of the company. I don't know, Mauricio, if you want to add anything to that?
No, maybe just to wrap up to say that additional debt is part of the options, as you said. But we have a strong cash generation in our operating companies, especially in those that are growing, Centinela and Pelambres. And through the capital allocation framework, we are fully committed to maintain a strong balance sheet and attractive returns to our shareholders, even during this growth period. And just to wrap, debt is an option that we are proud of being open our access to DCM markets a few years ago, and we are very pleased with the reaction and the feedback that we receive from the debt investor every time that we tap the market.
So it's an open alternative, but we have the benefit of having a strong generation units and within our portfolio. And as you said, we may use the balance sheet, but always maintaining our commitment with a strong balance sheet translated as an investment credit rating.
Thank you. Rob, over to you-
The next question-
In case there are more questions.
The next question is from Edward Goldsmith at Deutsche Bank. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hi, Ivan and Richard. Thank you for taking the questions. Two from my side. Firstly, just going back to costs. We've seen cash costs at Antucoya and Zaldívar increase significantly in recent years, particularly compared to Los Pelambres and Centinela. How entrenched are the cost increases at these smaller scale operations? And then the second question is on the Twin Metals Minnesota project. Where does this stand currently, and what are the potential alternatives that you could advance while the litigation takes place? Thank you.
Yeah. Okay, on the cost of Antucoya and Zaldívar, I mean, these are smaller operations, and they're also hydro, and therefore they're typically higher, you know, in the cost curve, by the very nature of, you know, the activities involved in producing copper there, compared to Centinela concentrates and Pelambres. And therefore I think that the cost, in reality, reflects that. Now we are achieving, I would say, very good operational results at Antucoya, and now also we've seen improvements in the use of the plant at Zaldívar, and therefore I think we're achieving higher levels of efficiency there. So we expect that that, combined with the cost improvement program, should see us enhance, you know, the cost position and achieve higher productivity.
These operations, especially Antucoya, as Mauricio mentioned, is running, you know, quite well. But, you know, there is obviously the limitation that these are higher cost operations. Some of the increase in the past had to do with high prices for acid. You know, they use acid in leaching, and therefore, some of that has reversed, and that's why, you know, we've seen some cost improvements there. But I think there, the scope for efficiency continues to the extent that we're able to run, you know, these plants more efficiently, and some of that we're seeing very clearly at Antucoya, and we will continue to move in that direction. There's no reason to expect, therefore, any structural cost deterioration in both Antucoya and Zaldívar.
But on the other hand, to the contrary, we expect that we will continue to make improvements there in how we run these facilities, and that should translate into better costs. Regarding Twin Metals, I mean, there we've got basically two situations. I mean, one of some of the leases are being litigated, and therefore, we have a process, you know, in the courts in the U.S. to be able to get them back. These were not renewed, as we think we have an automatic right for renewal. And therefore, we are expecting, therefore, to progress the case, you know, in the tribunals.
Now, there are some other leases which are essentially private and state-owned, and these are what we call the sort of Birch Lake properties, which are south of Maturi, which is, you know, the property that's been litigated, and we think that we can sequence a project starting with these mineralization, and that would be therefore the sequence that we think that we can accommodate to be able to expedite the development of Twin Metals. I mean, we still think, you know, it's a long-dated option in the sense that, you know, this will take, you know, time to fully permit, but we think that this sequence provides a advantage by means of not having, you know, federal leases involved. So that's the situation in Twin Metals.
The next question is from Jason Fairclough from Bank of America. Please unmute yourself and begin with your question.
Hi, folks. Just back with a follow-up question, and I guess two related questions here, Iván. I guess first question is, any thoughts on Argentina as a potential destination to invest? And then, the other thing is, with all the M&A going on in the sector, there's lots of discussion about, I think Duncan's word for it is adjacencies. I.e., when you have one ore body, which is next to another ore body, there's an opportunity for synergies. So I'm just showing you a little picture here. I'm sure you've seen this one before. So if you look in the top left, you can see here Los Pelambres, and if I look in the bottom right, and it's really not that far, there's something called El Pachón, which has been around for quite a while.
What do you think?
Look, I think, let me first, Argentina, I think, you know, great place, and there's a lot of good change that seems to be happening, I mean, from a business environment point of view in Argentina. So, you know, we look with a lot of interest, and monitor what's happening there. I think obviously for big mining investments, you know, these changes need to settle and be considered, you know, permanent to be able to undertake, you know, investments which carry more risks. And therefore, you know, our focus regionally tends to be more in Chile and in Peru. But we watch that with interest. Now, you've got the picture there of Pachón.
Yeah, we've certainly known about this site and mineralization for a long time. You know, we are focused on developing Los Pelambres, I would say, and its infrastructure to be able to achieve this extended mine life, and we think there's you know, huge value to be obtained by doing that. Now, obviously, you know, we would look at opportunities if they exist, but we're basing our strategy of developing Los Pelambres on the basis of you know, what we own and have today. So that's the plan now, and obviously, if opportunities arise, you know, we will continue to look into those, but nothing concrete at this stage.
Just a follow-up if I-
And, uh-
Sorry, go ahead.
No, no, go ahead.
I was gonna say, just as a follow-up-
Go ahead
How do we think about this idea of accessing Argentine resources through Chile? Because it just seems like the logistics are a lot better to go that way than all the way over to the other coast. But I think historically, there just hasn't been so much of a relationship to allow that to happen.
Yeah, and I think that's what we're seeing improving. So I would say certainly that seems to be in a better foot today. I agree. I mean, some of these ore bodies, which are, you know, in the Andes, in the Argentinian Andes, will find it much more optimal to be able to undertake its logistics through the Chilean side. And I would say in some of them, that'll be probably more of an even existential issue from an economic point of view, huh? And therefore, you know, the site that you mentioned, for example, I think has got that very issue.
And therefore, you know, there is a bilateral treaty between Chile and Argentina to be able to regulate how this would operate, but it has not been put in practice, before, and therefore, you know, it's a good framework. You know, we know it, and it does, you know, provide some opportunities. So I think the legal setup seems to be there, and if the political will from the governments remains present, I think this may mean that that may be possible to use. But I agree with you that for many of these deposits, the logistics are, you know, much more optimal if things are moved through Chile, and that would have to be part of the plan, no question.
Okay, thanks. Appreciate the color.
Yeah.
Thank you. There are no further questions. I'll therefore hand back to Iván for closing comments.
Okay. Well, thank you very much to everybody, and I hope you... This has been informative. I would also like to say again that we've got Alejandra Vial here with us. She's the Vice President of Sustainability, and I'm sure you'll have a chance to meet with her directly, as we sort of progress, you know, in other meetings, either in person or via video. So welcome to Alejandra. Thank you all, and we'll see you soon. Goodbye.