Ladies and gentlemen, welcome at the conference, where we are going to discuss our results for Q1 2024. The presentation will be delivered by the members of the board, President of the Board Andrzej Szydło; the Vice President Zbigniew Bryja, who's responsible for development; and Piotr Krzyżewski, VP responsible for finance; and Piotr Stryczek, Vice President responsible for corporate affairs. We have Janusz Krystosiak with us. He's in charge of the investor relations. After the conference, after the interventions from our Management Board , we will have Q&A session, where analysts and journalists will be welcome to ask questions. And let me remind you that we have the streaming of the conference on our website, and this is also the place where you may ask your questions.
We have a special tab for results, where we are going to have all the answers delivered, and there is an email address where you can also send your questions. And now over to our President of the Board, Andrzej Szydło. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Let me just explain that, Vice President Laskowski, is not able to attend. He really wanted to be here because, conference covering the first six months, it's an important event, but for personal reasons, he had to stay back home. Well, just to make things a bit lighter, just, at the beginning of the conference, I have to say that I see the preview of the upcoming long weekend, because we have a decent turnout, but no crowds.
I have to admit that I have an issue reading the presentation that I have in front of me, therefore, I'm going to use the hard copy. I'm going to give you the general highlights, highlights of our performance during the first six months of 2024. I will also touch upon production, and Mr. Bryja will provide more details about production. Finally, financial results, our Vice President, Mr. Krzyżewski, will cover that. I think that it is a neat approach to the presentation to save time for questions and answers. 2024, the first six months. Well, to a large extent, we really want to compare ourselves to the past period, but we are also referring to our budget.
However, today, I'm really going to focus on the comparison to the previous period, and I may also offer some additional comments. However, references to the budget is more of the internal business of the company. Let me first look at the macroeconomic environment. Q2 was quite conducive because of the copper prices. However, we had fairly high volatility. Nevertheless, compared to Q1 2024, we've seen a clear increase in prices. In dollar terms, compared to the first half of 2023, the prices were up by 4%. However, given the depreciation of the dollar against zloty by 7%, in zloty terms, we've seen the negative result of 3%. That will be more visible at the next slide. Now, silver. Silver price, 12% up in dollar terms and 4% up in zloty terms.
So in this case, the depreciation of dollar against zloty was offset, since the price in dollar terms of silver went up by 12% compared to the first half of 2023. And now, in terms of our overall production and dry matter, no major changes. It is, ore in dried weight, it's basically the same as... And I think that quarter- to- quarter and half year to half year, the situation is stable, no major variables. Production of, copper in concentrate was slightly higher, below 1%, compared to the first half of previous year, and, -4.7% is the production of metallic silver. And I've already explained why we've seen this, variance.
In Q1, we've seen actually over 10%, in the negative territory, but this is due to our maintenance cycle, and we need to go back to Q4 2022, when we had actually a standstill because of the maintenance of that particular department of semi-precious metals. Therefore, in Q1 2023, we were actually depleting our inventory, so we had a very high baseline to compare to 2023. Although in Q1, the difference was very substantial. I think that I have a note somewhere about the production, 388 tons in Q1 2023, and Q1 2024, it was 322 tons. So it's a major, major variance, 17% after Q1.
Q2, when we compare ourselves to 2023, it's 10% in production, and 356, this is where we stand at Q2. Therefore, after six months, the overall result is -4.7% for production of metallic silver. Production of gold is -22.4, again, negative, but this is also the result of the high baseline and the smaller processing of the imported concentrate containing that metal. Our CapEx was PLN 1.75 billion. This is where we are 50% up compared to the same period of the past year. Finally, 40%, give and take, is what we see within the scale of the current year. Our revenue was slightly down by 2%, and we landed at PLN 17.48 billion.
Well, in terms of zloty, this is. This shows that -3% copper price in Polish zloty. That to adjust that, net - that to adjusted the EBITDA is 0.7, this is a very good result. We were down by 3% because prior to that, we were at 1.12. If we move to the next slide. I've already mentioned the revenue, PLN 17.48 billion. For KGHM Group, we are down by 1.5% compared to the same period of the 2023. Adjusted EBITDA is PLN 4.2 billion zlotys. We were up by 35% compared to the first 6 months of 2023. And with the increased margin, EBITDA from 17% to over 20%, and the net result, PLN 1.074 billion zlotys.
This is where we see a major increase, over 200% from PLN 400 million last year. In terms of KGHM, so local assets, the revenue is PLN 15 billion, specifically PLN 15 billion 76 million. Adjusted EBITDA is PLN 2 billion 472 million, an 8% increase compared to the first half of 2023, and the net profit is PLN 1 billion 331 million, and that means that we were up by 10%. Let me move to the next slide. I'm not going to make a lot of comments because I've already said a lot. Copper and concentrate, 205.5 thousand tons. Basically, all the products were delivered at the higher level compared to the timeline. We were up by 50%.
Copper, electrolytic copper was also a notable result, and at the same time, we actually made the inventory of anodes for the plant standstill of Głogów I. So the inventory of anodes was over 40,000 tons before the standstill. So that was done, like, in the shadow of electrolytic copper production. So if not for the anodes, the electrolytic copper production output would be higher. But since we had to get prepared for the technological cycle of bath facility, we had to actually prepare the sufficient inventory that will be consumed over the Q3 of this year. In terms of the production, in KGHM S.A., not much to add.
We have to say that in international, we have much better production, but objectively speaking, I have to say that the baseline for the first six months of 2023 was really weak. We had issues with the operation, production, and availability of the mining equipment.
In total, production of payable copper in the group for the Q1 was 358 tons, 2% higher than in the first half of 2023. If we break it down into KGHM Polska Miedź S.A., 293 tons, just 1% less, just because you have to keep in mind the context of building the buffer for the technology downtime. Very good results indeed. Again, the base is 93% up compared to the second quarter. Okay, 93% higher in Robinson, which is the main asset of KGHM International, and a slightly worse performance, 10%, at Sierra Gorda. If we look at the next slide... You can see here to a large extent a repetition of the information that has already been presented.
But I would like to highlight that if you look at production at KGHM Polska Miedź S.A., the share of copper production from our own input and input from third parties is basically the same as last year at 66%, 33%, and 34% from third parties input. In total, paid copper production, KGHM International accounts less than 20% of paid copper within the group. As regards silver production, I have already talked about that. It continues to be 5% lower for the first half this year than the first half last year. It has already been explained, so I will not repeat this. Precious metals, 10% lower, and molybdenum, unfortunately, lower by 50%, mainly from Sierra Gorda. Here we can say that molybdenum is a difficult product.
It is not a side product. However, the production of copper in this mine and at this stage of processing, we focus our attention on copper. Now, I would like to hand over to Mr. Bryja to comment on our production results. Ladies and gentlemen, a lot of points that have already been mentioned will recur in my presentation, but let's go through areas. I will start with Poland. The results of KGHM Polska Miedź S.A. ore production was slightly better than assumed, but in dry output, we are within the assumed range, that is 15.2 tons. Ag content improved and Cu content improved. It is not just the result of better work organization, better work discipline.
It would be too much to attribute the merit entirely to ourselves. On the bars, you can see how the output changed in individual quarters since last year. We now entered better parts of the deposit with a greater content of silver and copper. As a result, we have better quality concentrate. Compared to last year, we have an improvement in terms of Cu content in concentrate. 205.5 thousand tons was the result for the first half of the year, and that is about 3.2 or 3.3 thousand tons more. Regarding electrolytic copper, 223 tons, it has already been explained why we are lower 1% than in the first half last year.
We simply had to accumulate a certain buffer of anodes, and then we had better output, better quality ore, and in the future, we will recoup this. So, this temporary dip will translate into a recovery of the assumed levels of production in the future and the following accounting periods. Production results in Sierra Gorda. Here, unfortunately, we cannot boast such good results as we had in KGHM, because in KGHM we had about 100% performance of the plan. Unfortunately, here, the lower production of payable copper in the Q1 by as much as 11% compared to the same period, 2023, was due mainly to the exploitation of ore of lower content of metal just a fraction of what we had before.
So, worse quality ore, polymetallic, ore with lower content of copper, translates into, lower parameters and molybdenum as well. The same goes for, gold. However, silver maintained good, parameters, so we have a slight improvement in, silver production as compared to the assumed levels. As regards production results, KGHM International, here the situation is opposite to what we had in Sierra Gorda. Last year, we experienced a breakthrough at Robinson. This mine was in a very poor geological condition and worse, meteorological conditions, and as a result, the base for calculation of the plan, was underrated. Now, Robinson is making up, for those, poor results in the past. So in spite of, worse results in Sudbury and Carlota, Robinson's result, even improves the entire consolidated result for the holding.
Even, it improves the result for KGHM, because we have about. Well, I can give you the exact number, actually. In KGHM International copper production was 13,000 tons higher than the assumptions. And again, molybdenum plays a role. Here, molybdenum had a positive contribution. And we might have had a similar result on silver. Unfortunately, Sudbury had a poorer result on silver, and that offset this better result I talked about previously. That was about production, and now I will discuss my area of expertise, because as the person responsible for development, I specialize in this area in the company. The first half of this year meant CapEx as PLN 1.57 million. You can see the pie here.
The greatest expenditures on mining, PLN 1.2 billion, then metallurgy, PLN 201 million. The other activity, PLN 19 million, and research and development, PLN 1 million, and PLN 76 million leasing. If you deduct leasing from the total, you will see the analytical breakdown, how money was allocated to individual products. So recovery. Recovery of the performance of machinery, modernization, and purchases of new machinery, 33%. 38%, maintenance of our production capacity assumed and the production plans. Then we had R&D, including exploration, so matters related to obtaining new areas, new deposits, building shafts, and so on. And 1% accounts for adjustment products. So here we are mainly talking about adjustment to changing legal regulations, EU laws, and so on, but that is a relatively small amount.
One point three six nine million, and then we have external funding and leasing, 76. Altogether, we have PLN 1.57 billion, and that is performance at a level similar to what we had last year on CapEx. In CapEx, you do not have a proportionate spending to the time lapse. Last year, we had three billion, nine hundred and fifty million. That's our target for this year. Now, if you look at the key investments, out of the total of billion four hundred and ninety-four million, we have deposit availability program. Here on the side, you can read the main areas on which we allocated money. Three hundred and forty-five million, building of three shaft, GG-1.
That is equipment of the shaft that has already been drilled and handed over for use in June last year. Now we are building the fixed, rigid scaffolding that will not be line-based, but rigid scaffolding, increase in the capacity of air conditioning at the central unit, and works related to various installations like compressed air, supply, and so on. This is the type of work that needs to be performed at the final stages of shaft completion. Then we have fixed structures. Previously, we had those temporary steel ones, and now we are finalizing this investment. As for GG-2 shaft, we are now in the process of analyzing geological drill results that is necessary in order to design the casing of the shaft.
That is a very significant part of the entire investment, very much dependent on geological conditions. As for the remaining shafts, we are now conducting planning works, buying areas, and next year we would like to start geological studies for Gaworzyce shaft. And if funds are available, because CapEx is not enough to carry out all the investment activities we would like to. So if money is available, we will start building this last shaft as soon as possible. The next activity is providing utilities to mining areas. These are not spectacular projects. They do not have nice names like Odra shaft or something else that would be sonorous and glamorous. Now we are extending pipelines, we are building electricity supply installations, dispatching centers, air conditioning, and so on.
PLN 267 million is the amount we are going to spend on it. The next area is the replacement of our machinery. We're a company that operates about 1,500 vehicles, machinery, operating underground. Every year, we replace about 250 machines. We are going to spend the same amount roughly as we did in the previous years. So this year, we have a slight delay in this project, and that was due to the new standard that came into effect for combustion engines. And therefore, the vendors will supply the machinery till the end of the year with a small delay. So we will complete the plan, but with a slight delay in the schedule. The next plan is water removal from mines.
This subject keeps resurfacing. Since 2019, there has been a greater inflow to Sieroszowice Mine. Now, this phenomenon is under control. Nevertheless, significant CapEx is required, both for building the chamber for pumps and for works performed overground in order to stop water coming to the mine. So for some time, we will see the recurrence of this expenditure. Then, International Financial Reporting Standards and adjustments related to this. That concerns various units, mines and metallurgy centers. We invest in machinery components, renovation. That is not basically a replacement, that's more taking care of maintaining the machinery in working order, and this is more recovery than development, actually.
Now, replacement of the mines and other facilities. And again, we are not speaking about building the new, like, conveyor belts, but actually extending the existing ones. In case of ZWRs, it's about filtration station, and mills, and crushers. And in terms of mills, we have the tanks for sulfuric acid and modernization of the electrolytic refinement in Głogów II, but also in Legnica smelter. So, this is rather modernization, upgrade. So this is new, not new facility, but rather replacement or recovery of the existing ones. The next thing is exploration. We have seven licenses, and on top of it, we have seven licenses for production and seven for exploration and seven non-CU licenses. So we are either doing surveying or drilling or designing across all these areas. But, this is...
This part of CapEx, that is absolutely necessary, and actually it could be higher than it currently is. So just imagine that 1 geological drill that goes down to 1,400 meters, it's over PLN 10 million. So 3 drills or 3 geological openings, it would be over PLN 40 million. But since we are moving more towards northwest, we have to continue exploration. In addition to that, we have not completed the Puck project, where a feasibility study is prepared. We need to answer a number of questions before we actually make a decision about going into the operation of that deposit. We have to be sure that it would be a reasonable investment. Now, we don't have any doubts regarding the investment, the financial side. However, we need to answer some questions regarding geological surveys.
Now, development of the Żelazny Most tailings storage facility. We reached a fairly high level today, 195 meters, about like the crown of the crown height. We got the permit to go to 205 meters. All three municipalities, Grębocice, Rudna, and Polkowice, are interested in this project. Now, they have land development plans under development, and anyone can offer comments and raise their objections, if any. But hopefully, the procedure will be completed, and by June 2025, we should be getting the permit. Now, shafts. The shafts need maintenance. We have to maintain them, and therefore, they, SW-4 is like the shaft that is currently being maintained. And this is sort of a crossline between OpEx and the CapEx.
Since it goes through some layer of salts, we need to keep working on that end because we have to keep the installation operational. So we have to actually remove the salt that is coming into the shaft. And here it's ZWR and Głogów Copper Smelter. This is a minor thing, and more about health and safety. I'm not sure. Perhaps we should say something about Gąski. This is a tiny thing. I think that we are getting too much into details. Okay, but these are tiny things regarding overall upgrade and modernization efforts. And other projects is PLN 64 million, so overall, PLN 1,494 million. As I said, we cannot really get hooked on certain things because some of these efforts are multi-annual, and there are multi-annual contracts.
On other tasks, we have just the competition procedure for selecting contractors. But we believe that our CapEx is safe, and we should be the same level as last year. In 2023, the CapEx was at 98% of the budgeted CapEx, so fairly good result. This slide has been shown for the past year at our conferences because this is where we show the increased efficiency of our output in Deep Głogów , Deep Industrial Głogów . I think that you know where it is. Unfortunately, I cannot really show it on this screen, but we are speaking north towards Sieroszowice and Rudna. Currently, there is one shaft, GG-1, over 1,300 meters deep, 1,350 meters deep, the deepest shaft that we have. We've been interested in this area since 2004.
In 2014, we deployed our first production facility. Currently, there are seven of them, six in Sieroszowice and one in Rudna. So why am I saying that we keep showing this slide for the past year? And let me say upfront that I will be referring to that area during the upcoming presentations, but we will not have a separate slide for that. Because I want to draw your attention to our production efficiency, copper and in ore and silver in ore. So if you compare Q1 and Q2, it's the difference is 2 or 3%. But if you look at the six months of the past year and the six months of this year, it's 18% difference or 16% difference. How come?
Well, because of the ventilation works that were performed last week, and therefore, all the facilities were working full steam. Therefore, it is just a routine business to keep the current capacity and production level. So in a half a year, you will not be interested in this slide because you will see the same thing all over. So instead of the slide, we will be showing something else that will be more exciting for the forward-looking aspects of our business. But for the analyst, this is an interesting slide because it really shows how important it is to build the shaft and to ventilate, to actually let in air. Because air, although it is so light, it really contributes to each ton, additional ton produced. That will be all from me. Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, before we actually move on to the financial performance, let me mention a few words about our production, namely Sierra Gorda and Robinson. So for Robinson, we had an opportunity to travel to Nevada and spend some time there. We were able to make a review. Currently, we are at Pit West 5, and as you know, the production has been moving as scheduled. Now we need to optimize the processes, we have to improve the logistics, we have to optimize maintenance. So this is something that we are going to focus on over the next quarters. And obviously, we need additional prep work for Liberty and Veteran. These are additional sites where we are going to start production of ore, and a lot of activity has been going on there.
For instance, TSF has been fully taken over. TSF in Nevada has been moved in-house. We decided to let go the third-party contractors. That will obviously take some time, but over time, it will have, provide a positive boost to our financial performance on that mine. Sierra Gorda, well, this is quite a challenge, and we've been doing the same thing in Sierra Gorda as we've done in Robinson. So we are sending our teams from Poland, and they work with the local teams to improve operation and efficiency of production. On top of it, the whole model of units and filtering and drilling so that we can actually have long-term believable model, and also drills in the further sites so that we can actually extend the LOM on this mine.
So this is the main activity that will be taking up our time over the next quarters. But now let me look at the financial performance, key indicators, EBITDA: PLN 4.208 billion. And again, we were up by 35% compared to H1 2023. But if we actually build a bridge between H1 2023 and H1 2024, PLN 1.1 billion is really KI. So international, this is approximately PLN 1 billion and 2 million were contributed by KGHM SA, but Sierra Gorda had a negative contribution. Now, let's look at Q2. That was our Q1 in business and as a Management Board . So EBITDA in Q2 2023 compared to Q2 2024, the EBITDA was growing twofold across all the segments.
So KGHM, it was PLN 1.6 billion yearly, and KI was over PLN 400 million on the upside, and Sierra Gorda, PLN 470 million. Other companies have also contributed positively to our EBITDA. The net profit, we were up from PLN 401 million to PLN 1,074 million zlotys, so we more than doubled that. The main impact was the result on our operating activity. Well, the income tax was higher, so it was a negative impact, but nevertheless, at the end of the day, the consolidated net profit was delivered at such a high level. Now, let's take a look at the revenues. As the President of the Board mentioned, the difference between H1 2023 and 2024 was just 2%.
If we look at the bridge on the revenue, then two main drivers that really gave us this picture is, on one hand, a change in the overall market of metals, and copper was up by 4 and silver by 12, and gold by... Well, was also on the upside, but molybdenum just was not in such a good shape. But all these things were contributing positively to our revenue over PLN 700 million. When we look at the US dollar-zloty exchange rate, obviously, this is where we got a hit. Our revenue was down as a result of the US dollar depreciation. However, that was, in a sense, offset by our hedging transactions, and we can stop for a minute here.
57 million, the amount that you see, is the bridge between the two periods, but the actual results on the hedging was over PLN 284 million zlotys. Now, you need to remember that, this is the amount that also has some costs, but on the other hand, there is also accounting issue. But I'm speaking about technicalities of transactions and actually recognizing it in according to our accounting policy. But hedging during the H1 2024, if we put it all together, means that we were almost at zero. So we may say that actually hedging worked, and we were able to eliminate the negative, impact from our baseline business.
Now, when we look at our results from the revenue point of view across segments, KGHM is PLN 15 billion, KI, so international, it's 1.3 billion PLN, and other segments, it's over 1 billion PLN. And costs now. If we return to our first conference, that was for the whole 2023, we told you then that we were knowledgeable about mining and heavy industry, so these would be the first areas we would address. And we also said that a particularly important area for us would be energy. That is essential in terms of costs. So we are showing you now the effects of those efforts year on year, or first half of 2023 to the first half of 2024. We have 6% decrease in costs.
Energy is the principal parameter we want to focus on. More than PLN 600 million was the impact, and it has to be considered from two perspectives: energy and gas. We have introduced a lot of changes, organizational changes, above all, where the risk of energy price changes was carried over to the team that is responsible also for other types of risks. We enhanced our toolbox. We introduced a series of new initiatives. Our CEO is in charge of the committee responsible for energy efficiency. And the main energy-related topics, which translate into our production security and other aspects of our operations are handled there. So you can see the effects of those efforts.
Just to show you how we manage this topic, because we are getting a lot of questions, how we handle this or how we split costs between energy and costs. I maybe give you some examples.
Steam and gas units are our key production sources. We also have generation sources that are responsible for generating energy, and that is then used for creating ice water, for air conditioning. And what we did, in the context of weather conditions, we introduced this predicting the future changes. So we reduced the costs of our gas, we reduced the costs of energy buying, and we are a major beneficiary, because when there is a lot of sunshine, we have negative or zero costs, and then we operate as many units as possible to generate savings. And as regards capacity consumption at sources, we have pumping stations in mining. That is a major issue. From PLN perspective, a cubic meter of water obtained at different times of the day has a completely different price.
So, we are investigating the costs from this perspective, and we try to dynamically steer our infrastructure to make sure that we use as much energy as possible when the price is the lowest and have a lower consumption when the price is higher. So those low-hanging fruits have already been picked up and are being picked up. And now, when we come to the higher-hanging ones, we will have to make greater efforts. We will break the long-lasting trend this year, because if you look at our costs from past years, we have recorded growth. And this year, we would like to change this rule to make sure that the costs stop increasing. That's a very ambitious task, multidimensional one.
For sure, in order to maintain the trend in the long term, keeping costs under control, we will have to incur a lot of CapEx. This translated into C1 results. In the group, it was down by 7% to $2.65. At the same time, PLN became stronger to dollar by 7%. If we take everything into consideration, the difference is at -11%. In total, the difference would be much greater. So the dollar effect comes from the calculation of C1 to US dollar. If you look at KI, we have a major difference, which results from this asset coming back to the production path and C1 going down as a result. Then we had an increase in cost of fuels.
As a result, costs grew, and consequently, C1 increased as well. One of key factors, obviously money. The first half, 2024. Actually, if we look at the time between June and January, the increase in cash was PLN 700 million. But I would like to start from the end, because 700, out of the 700, 400 is investment activity. These were loans and debt instruments. There were a lot of questions after our bond issue at the end of June to the amount of PLN 1 billion and repayment of PLN 400 million of bonds that were then mature. I would like to extend my thanks to our bondholders. That was the cheapest post-COVID non-rated bond issue under the program that we announced for 4 billion PLN.
For sure, we will hold future issuances. But to give you an idea of our strategy, we have cooperation on several levels. One is Polish and international financial institutions. This cooperation keeps developing and will develop. The second leg is external funding without security, without rating. This type of cooperation will also develop. And now we are also extending the tenure. As you know, mining and heavy industry is characterized by heavy CapEx with long return periods. So we want the structure of this funding aligned with what we envisage in our strategy. If we look at CapEx, PLN 2.5 billion, negative cash flows on this... Just bear in mind that we are still ahead of the second half of year, which is going to be investment heavier with greater expenditures.
Operating and investment flows have already been financed. And on balance, we recorded a growth on all areas, an increase in cash at the end of June this year. That would be it. Thank you. Thank you very much, members of the Management Board , for the presentation of financial and operating results for the first half of 2024. Now, we move to the Q&A session. Questions asked online are handled by Mr. Krystosiak. And if questions in the room, please raise your hand and you'll get a microphone. I can see that we already have the first question in the room. Paweł Puchalski, Santander. I have a few questions. The first is about OpEx, and more specifically, employee-related costs.
They grow by 1-2% in the Q2 and in the first half of the year, year-on-year. And if I remember, you were planning a 9% annual increase, plus some one-off changes. Could you tell me, please, whether we should expect in the second half of this year, a strong increase in the scale of increase here? I'm talking about costs that are recognized in your PLN. Employee costs result from our collective bargaining agreement, which remains unchanged. But the provisions of this agreement oblige the parties to make sure that the coefficient of remuneration increase is agreed. This agreement has been achieved. It is at a very decent level for employees, 9.2%.
Additionally, we have agreed a certain motivational system of changing the place of various jobs within the employment grid. This year, we expect to have this level of increase. It's difficult to make quarter-to-quarter comparisons because those arrangements are made at different points in time. There are various levels of annual bonus that is linked to the performance. It is more appropriate to make comments regarding the whole year rather than parts of the year, or make comparisons between parts of the year. I understand what you are asking about from the perspective of profit and loss account.
If you look into this item, you will also find that there the writer of actuarial provision that was 89% for employee benefits, that had a positive impact reducing this item. But on our side, all elements have been reflected in the numbers, so I do not expect any surprises here. I have two more questions then. One, regarding this presentation, because at some point when you were discussing Deep Głogów , you said that in the Q2 and in the first half of the year, you could see strong growths, but those branches have been operational since the Q1 this year. And you said in the upcoming quarters there would be no point discussing this because the picture will become stable.
Does it mean that the company has achieved in the Q2 its target level of output in Głogów, and then you will have no increase in output from this field? And the second question is about CapEx, because on the one hand, you are saying you have to invest a lot in more shafts, and of course, that's understandable. On the other hand, I also hear that savings and OpEx are possible, yet you have to invest more. And the third thing is that Madam Minister said that you needed a 1.2 up to 1.5 extra CapEx on desalinization facilities. Should that lead to the conclusion that next year's CapEx is going to be significantly higher than this year's?
As regards Deep Głogów, my intention was the following: getting air to those installations meant that people can work there, those installations can work there throughout the week, and the capacity in the working branches should not change significantly. They have achieved the optimum level of performance in terms of human work and machinery operation. If there is a new branch of operation of Deep Głogów, we will have an increase. But let's not count branches of Deep Głogów as a separate mine or separate area of activity. We have six branches, and this production is attributed to Rudna. One is to Sieroszowice. So one have one extra question: When is KGHM planning opening of another branch in GG? Opening of another operation branch depends on preparatory works.
Operating branches require all framing installation of air conditioning, power supply, water, and all other utilities. Hence, at the current stage of installation, there is no possibility to set up another branch there. So CapEx now?
Well, I'm not going to give you a straightforward answer to your question. Apologies for that, but more general, PLN 3.5 billion. This is the CapEx that we need to spend to be able to keep the status quo in place and to keep our production output at a certain... at the same level under the current conditions that are more difficult than they used to be five years ago. However, that CapEx will not sustain the long-term growth of the company. If we keep the same CapEx in place, we are not going to be satisfied with long, and we are not going to have the long-term operations of KGHM. Long-term meaning thirty years, plus some projects are long-term, and you have to plan them early on, so that later on you're not chasing the time that is flying by.
The same is true about the access to the new production area and preparing them for reasonable working conditions. So we are certainly going to generate cash and improve our efficiency and operations, but at the same time, we are fully aware that capital expenditure will be on the increase if we want to keep the company growing and be in business in the long-term horizon. That means that we need to start certain capital expenditure early on to be able to sustain stable production and safe operations, and that would include the placement of our tailings and waste products.
We are working currently on the strategy for the KGHM, with the main assumption that the key technologies, technology lines are priorities, and it is our ambition to support it with efficiency projects that will reduce the costs, such as electricity or energy. But first things first. First, we have to invest in our main technology line, so that we are able to produce copper until the last bit, and the same for gold and silver. Our CapEx will be growing over time.
Thank you. I can see Łukasz. Yes, Łukasz Rudnik, the brokerage house.
So let me ask more probing questions about CapEx. PLN 4 billion and PLN 1.5 billion after six months, PLN 2.5 billion for the next six months. So what accounts for this additional PLN 1 billion in CapEx? And what about your salt operations? Are you going to make any final decision anytime soon? And when are you in the position to actually share the information about the accumulated surplus CapEx over five years? Because the regular CapEx is PLN 3.5 billion, but until 2029 or 2030, the surplus of the CapEx would be how many billions? 10, 20, just to be able to sustain the production and keeping the costs in control. So let me start. I'm not sure if I'm able to cover it all. Perhaps my colleagues will support me.
I don't think that we should assess likelihood of CapEx over time, because CapEx is not proportionate to time during the year. But we don't see any risk of not delivering CapEx in 2024. So that answers your first question. At this point, I don't really feel comfortable to share numbers pertaining to the future. I already said that our capital expenditure will be growing, and in addition to the replacement and maintenance CapEx, we are actually building a strategy, and we are putting in place the hierarchy of projects. But at this point, I do not really want to get into details and speak about the exact numbers, whether it's going to be PLN 5 billion or PLN 10 billion of additional CapEx over the next 5 years.
It may vary, depending on the phase of our ongoing capital expenditure projects, but certain works have to be undertaken right now. In terms of the salt production, well, this is the investment project that is very likely to happen, and this is more, it's more about sort of adjusting our position here. It's not about, like, having the business of salt production, but this is more about building a margin of safety because of the problem of the underground waters in the mines that we experienced during the past few years. So there are some activities that have been pursued over the past few months, not to... Well, to prevent the excessive salinization of the Odra River.
So the salt facility will be coming, but we just want to make sure that the installation is of the right scale, not too big, not too small, and it should also stick to the proper parameters in terms of entry and salination. Well, just to offer more comments to that, say bluntly, we are modeling various scenarios. This is part of our strategy preparation work, so all these things will be addressed. The salt facility is not a standalone business. This is a puzzle of the broader water management picture. So we will certainly share that with you, showing the numbers, showing the timeline, for the CapEx.
So please bear with us for a while, because, as we said, we are developing the strategy in-house, and we want to finish it by the end of the year. So we are doing a lot of modeling right now, and the financial model, once completed, will be shared and presented. Well, thank you. Another question is about the Victoria project. Quarter-over-quarter, the CapEx investment expenditure was down, and given the nickel prices that we have today, is it likely that you will make the final decision about this project, or is it postponed, or can we have an acceleration of CapEx? So b asically, I would like to hear some comments about the Victoria project. Well, as you said, we are ahead of the major decision regarding the Victoria project, and this is called advanced exploration in phase I.
And I think that over the next few weeks, we are going to make the decision. So we will be back with the proper information, where we will address various scenarios for this project, including financial scenarios. Okay, another question. Copper was added to the list of the strategic commodities in the EU. Does it mean that you may have some grants or lending mechanism with the low interest rate? So any benefits that will be coming up as a result of the fact that copper was added to the list of strategic commodities? Let me be a bit provocative while answering this question. It is not quite known what kind of benefits may be derived from the fact that copper was added to that list of critical metals.
I think that we may look forward to some benefits, some positive effects of that decision. But perhaps there will be a different approach or somewhat modified approach to the fact that, well, any serious deposits of copper in Europe are located in Poland. Perhaps there will be some positive changes. Together with the shareholders, we will be certainly thinking about it, and the Ministry of Finance will certainly be invited to the table, how to really sustain long-term business of KGHM in the context of, of the current MET tax . I would rather look at it as, like, the better overall atmosphere around KGHM and copper at large. I would not really be looking at grants or other mechanisms of support. Okay, and the final question is about EBITDA.
In the other Polish companies, it was PLN 182 million. It was way better compared to previous quarters. So, is it because of some one-offs, one-off events, or overall, it was higher than the market consensus. So, which companies contributed most, and did you have any one-off events? Well, this is a complex thing. As we promised, we are currently replacing some human resources in our supervisory functions and management functions. So that has to do with your question. You know that we really want to have very professional human resources bringing a lot of experience. On top of it, we launched a broad-based cost optimization process that certainly had a positive boost. And on top of it, the prices of energy, namely electricity and natural gas, and Mr. Krzyżewski has covered that.
And also, we are optimizing our employment, and the cost of, our manpower. So in terms of positive events, it was mostly at Metraco and also ZANEM and Nitroerg, these three companies. Thank you. So perhaps right now we should also give a chance to questions that we get, in our mailbox. Jakub Szkopek, Erste, not with us today, he sent two questions. One is about the Victoria project, but that has been covered, so we are not going to repeat that. And CapEx and development for Victoria project. And the second question is... Well, the update of the modernizations plan for the Głogów smelter and the Precious Metals Division . Has anything changed in terms of, plant standstills?
Well, the plant standstill at the Precious Metals Division are not going to change really, but a cycle of maintenance works, maintenance work, works is not annual, therefore, we can see standstills at different times of the year. In terms of technology, we are not really thinking about any changes, the major UPS. Would you be able to share some update about the Fourth line at Sierra Gorda? Right now, this is the function that is that rotates, but we are owners council president at this point at Sierra Gorda, so this project is underway. Pre-feasibility study is prepared. Together with our partner, we are going to make the decision about this investment and other investment likewise, such as oxide. So we will certainly get back to you once we have more information to share.
But the main business for us is to make this asset operational again, so that our budget, our plan, and the unit model is actually delivered. And one more question from Daniel: The new Management Board has been in place for 4 or 6 months. Are you able to give us some guidance about the strategic review of KGHM operations, especially in the context of potential sale of international assets, or options that you have with the financing of renewable energy sources and that you may deploy in the future? So international assets certainly call for some restructuring. KGHM produces slightly under 20% of copper in these sites, but within the near future, we do not really see the room for any major acquisitions or other investments.
Perhaps Sudbury assets that are too small for KGHM or do not show positive cash flow. So it's rather really sorting out our asset situation and possibly cutting off those that are not needed, with focusing on the key assets like Robinson and Victoria project has already been mentioned. We need to make final decision. It's not just to continue with the additional CapEx over time. And we need to work with our partners, and we will have to optimize Sierra Gorda operations. And that will hopefully generate positive cash flow, whether for oxide project or line four project. But we don't really not want to actually finance this project with owners' lending.
I think that I sufficiently covered that question. Okay, so let's move on. Bank of America, Polina Diyachkina .
A question about the international segment. KGHM International, in the Q2 , recorded a growth in profitability. How lasting is this effect? How lasting can it be in the future? How we should look at the rest of the year in this international segment? Ladies and gentlemen, if we look at Robinson in the context of the tasks that are ahead of this mine and preparation for the following areas, we are prepared for a long-term process and for building regularity in performance. That is our motto of the Management Board . We don't want to have above the target short-term results as a result of a higher grade.
We try to optimize recovery, we try to optimize, maintenance in a very efficiently operating mine. That all translates into, quite measurable millions in extra result. These are the operations we are focusing our attention on right now. Thank you. Let me add that stability is of primary importance. That is storing the ore that later allows us to, have the optimum mix for processing. We cannot consume the spread that we have on the bread, immediately, because, then we are left with, just, bread alone. In the future, we don't want to have anything, like that. We want to have stable production also by, keeping in check, the input that we use on a current basis. I have one more question, right now, also to Mr. Krzyżewski. That is from Łukasz Prokopiuk, BOŚ.
How can the company explain the significant growth in the stock of copper in the markets, LME, Comex, or Shanghai? And what is your evaluation of prospects for copper at the end of this year? Well, that might be tricky because the forecasts are difficult. I actually quite like this question. KGHM is a large producer of copper. But if we were one that is responsible for 60% of supply, we could command the situation in Shanghai or LME. We are among the major producers of copper, but in the total supply, we only have a few percent, so we don't want to comment on stock. Obviously, the lower stock on commodities exchange, the more likely changes in prices. Maybe that shows a slowdown in demand.
We are worried about this to some extent, but we will not comment on this. We do not feel responsible for this stock. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, this latest quarter was very dynamic in terms of changes. The volatility of prices in copper market was significant. But let's keep in mind who we are and who we want to be. We are a long-term asset, and we have a clearly set path forward. Objectively, we expect the demand for copper to grow, and supply is a certain emanation of the fact that copper is a strategic element. Rio Tinto, Serbia will be an important development here. That will be a certain checkpoint for us.
But from the perspective of our assets, we take a long-term perspective, and we know that copper is the asset that is going to be a raw asset, and the demand for it will grow. The projects that we are talking about are many billion projects requiring long-term planning and very intense expertise and know-how, so supply is likely to be limited. The last question on the topic concerning hedging policy, prices of metals and energy and foreign currencies. Mr. President, could you comment on our hedging? Yes, obviously. As you can see in the note to our financial statement, we had a transaction for almost 30,000 tons of copper.
The hedging period is from July this year, till December 2025, and, on silver, we have 3 million troy ounces, and that is from July 2024 till December 2025. So from this perspective, we are actively engaged in hedging policy. Also, as the Management Board , we are actively analyzing the transactions. There will be some transactions which we will want to announce to the market in the upcoming periods. We don't want to surprise ourselves or the public with the transactions, so we are making our careful preparations. But you surely understand our long-term approach to our assets. From this point of view, that will be reflected in our hedging structure. And if you look at the energy price, I will not comment on this. We are secure.
We are hedged here, and the result of the Q2 confirms this to some result. We also have mandates that have been issued for the upcoming transactions. We are probably the largest industry player in the commodities market, so we don't want to send any signals that can boost the volatility in the market that is, anyway, volatile, in the energy-intensive times. So, you know, what is going on in the market, but we will definitely monitor energy and CO2 and gas markets. And Legnica, there was a question from Radio Plus. When are you planning to complete modernization of refinery in Legnica smelter? What expenditures do you plan for this? And will waste disposal have some impact on Legnica smelter?
Frankly, I do not remember the details, but one thing needs to be done about this investment, this project. We need to have a close look at the CapEx that is planned right now, because this CapEx seems very, very hard to maintain. So, we are looking into it, and I have discussed this with people who are responsible for the project in the company. For sure, we don't want to exceed the assumed CapEx. In terms of the completion date, the analysis of the project and the decisions we are going to make in the near future may have some impact on the completion date. I'm vague, but I have to admit that this project that is important for Legnica was not a top priority among what we have done recently.
There were some urgent issues to address. But we will address this question within a month or two, we should have completed the analysis of this project. Thank you very much. Are there any further questions from the room? If there are no questions, over to our director. If there are no further questions in the room, I would like to thank you so much for the questions that you have already asked. You can still ask questions to our... sending them to our email address, and the answers will be published on our website. Thank you very much for the participation in this conference. Thank you, gentlemen, for the presentation of the results. See you at the next event. Thank you.