Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the AngloGold Ashanti full year 2021 results. All participants are currently in listen-only mode, and there will be an opportunity to ask questions later in the conference. If you should need assistance during the call, please signal an operator by pressing star and then zero. Please also note that this event is being recorded. I would now like to turn the conference over to Mr. Stewart Bailey. Please go ahead, sir.
Great. Thanks very much, Chris, and welcome everybody to our full year 2021 results call. We've got the ExCo team present. Alberto and Christine will run you through the presentation, and we'll take questions immediately after. I'll ask you all, before we start the presentation, just to look at the safe harbor statement which is in the pack. It's got important information concerning forward-looking statements. I'd ask you to consult it when you have a minute. Alberto.
Thank you, Stewart. Good day, everyone. We ended the year with our all-injury frequency rate at 2.13 injuries per million hours worked, which remains well below the ICMM member average. It is also worth noting that injury severity continues to decline. We did have two fatalities in the first half of the year, two too many, always unacceptable, and we are working hard on our major hazards to minimize the probability that those events happen again. We're making progress, as I said, on our revitalizing the safety strategy, which is focused on the control needed to eliminate major hazards that create significant harm or death. What that means is that each person on every site knows by heart the three or four major hazards that are most likely to cause fatalities and what is needed to prevent them.
This is crucial in eliminating all accidents and especially fatalities from our sites. Our emphasis on COVID-19 remains on safely ensuring business continuity. We're also working with health governments and communities to provide healthcare support and other assistance in areas that are feeling strain from the pandemic. About 80% of the workforce was fully vaccinated by the end of the year. This excludes booster shots. These higher vaccination levels will be a significant plus for our employees and our business. We published our inaugural climate change report in December, in line with TCFD recommendations of the task force on climate-related financial disclosures. The report highlights the way we're being proactive and transparent in mitigating current and future climate risks and the measures we're taking to strengthen the climate resilience of our business, our value chain partners, host communities, and the environment in which we operate.
We also join our peers in the ICMM by committing to a target of net zero scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2050, and to accelerate action on scope 3 emissions. Some may remember that we set our first decarbonization targets in 2008 for a 30% reduction in emissions intensity by 2022. We reached the goal four years early. In fact, we ended last year with emissions intensity a full 47% lower. The picture on absolute emissions is even better, close to 70% down from the base set in 2007. These reductions are due to changes in our asset mix as well as from energy efficiency and fuel switching projects. We know there's more to do. Watch this space for our 2030 targets, which we're in the advanced stages of development.
I hope to release this in the coming months. We're pleased to see a continuation of our operating parameters continue to stabilize, especially the 12% half-on-half gain from our operations, excluding Obuasi. Encouraging to see the improvement underpinned by strong performances across most of our assets, which was driven by underground grades improving 19% half and half. We achieved our revised production and capital guidance and cost guidance was achieved when adjusting for the impacts of COVID-19. Reinvestments in our bigger assets, Geita, Tropicana, and Iduapriem, have tracked well and remain on schedule. There's a huge amount to do to close the gap between this performance and what each asset should be. Our sites are better resourced now to deliver on their plans. We continue to scrub our operating and capital budgets, and just last week, we launched our full asset potential process at Sunrise.
While it will take time to get to where we want to be, you should start to see an improving trend. We have no time to waste. Cumulative inflation for the current year to date is estimated to be around 8%, with increases across most categories. While there are encouraging signs in the evolution of the pandemic, it impacted production by around 47,000 ounces last year and all-in sustaining costs by $34 an ounce. The absolute rise in AIS and all-in sustaining costs last year was driven mainly by the 57% increase in sustaining CapEx. Despite the scale of the investment program and impact of COVID and the Obuasi suspension, we still generated $104 million of cash flow. That leaves our balance in a solid position with gearing still very low and liquidity strong.
Our final dividend of $0.14 takes the payout for the full year to $0.20. I'm also happy to report that Obuasi has successfully resumed underground mining, and we have concluded the Corvus transaction. Just probably to clarify, the cumulative inflation to 2021 was 5%. We expect an 8% inflation in 2022. Key metrics. Here is a snapshot of some of the key operating and financial metrics. I don't intend on going through in detail, but let me draw your attention to some key points. Let's start with capital, which was almost 50%. As we push ahead with our reinvestment strategy and the ongoing compliance with TSF regulations in Brazil, we also continue to spend at Obuasi phase three without the benefit of any meaningful production.
Exploration was also sharply higher, consistent with our aim of improving our ore bodies, which I will cover later in more detail. You'll see the impact of the increased investments in our cost and cash flows, which were also impacted by the lower production and lower price. The African overview. Kibali continues to be a steady performer with production flat on year. We also saw depletion more than replaced with a marginal increase in ore reserves. Iduapriem's production was lower as expected. As we strip cut 7 ahead of accessing higher block, higher grade block 7 and 8 later this year. Higher all-in sustaining costs reflect near-term investment in waste stripping and on new TSF. Exploration was a highlight, adding about 900,000 ounces of new ore reserve pre-depletion.
Siguiri showed marked improvement, a combination of better grades and higher throughput as we ramp up the processing plant. Aïss was better year on year, and we expect further improvement as we ramp up delivery of oxide ore from block two. Geita's production was lower for the mine plan as we continue to develop two new mines on the property at Nyamulilima, Geita Hill East. I'm encouraged that development of the open pit is ahead of schedule. We see mine ore increasing through this year, accounting for roughly 50% of gold production in 2022. Geita had another successful year on the exploration front, adding 800,000 ounces before depletion, with strong additions at Nyamulilima and Geita Hill East.
In fact, this is the fourth consecutive year ore reserve has grown net of depletion, with ore reserves growing 112% in the last four years from 1.25 million ounces to 2.65 million ounces. Demonstrating the quality of this world-class ore body that we see driving Geita to be a multi-decade mine. We expect Geita to revert to steady-state operations next year with annual production north of 500,000 ounces. Latin American overview. It was a challenging year across these operations as COVID-19 and its second order effects negatively impacted operations. Brazil saw a stronger second half with production up 18% over H1, but they're operating well below potential. We made the call to scale back plant throughput to keep with our permitted tailings limits while we fast-track the transition to dry stacking.
This combination of lower production and additional capital contributed to abnormally high all-in sustaining cost, unit cost. We spent about $140 million of TSF conversion in 2021, a peak year, but which will continue to taper into 2025. As a result, all-in sustaining cost, unit cost will trend down once the transition to dry stacking is complete. AGA Mineração reported production of 331,000 ounces compared to the 362 achieved the year before. This is largely due to the underperformance of CdS mine, which will now be managed by the Cuiabá operating team. The Cuiabá is operating very well, and we expect it to continue operating well in 2022. Capital for the period was $61 million, which added $740 an ounce to all-in sustaining cost.
Cerro Vanguardia's performance was significantly lower at 83,000 ounces relative to the 114,000 ounces reported last year. Costs included an additional capital requirement for the TSF, resulting in AIS, AISC increasing to $2,200 an ounce, and that is clearly not comparable to the previous year. In 2021, Cerro Vanguardia operated with limited mining capacity due largely to COVID impacts and the restrictions related to moving personnel to and from the site. We saw operating improvements, however, in H2, largely due to expanded on-site accommodations that gives us improved flexibility for staff rotations and changing COVID regulations. Australia overview. Australia's production shortfall was largely due to the wall failure in the Boston Shaker open pit, which we highlighted in Q2, and grade reconciliation challenges at Sunrise Dam during the first half of the year.
Both of them have been solved in the second half, and hence we expect better 2022. A stronger Aussie dollar also impacted costs. It was pleasing to see, however, that the asset recording a strong second half of the year, both assets improving by about 21% when compared to the first half. At Tropicana, material movement in the open pit was 21% lower than planned in 2021, primarily due to the severe shortage of skilled operators and maintainers, exacerbated by international and state COVID border closures, coupled with a booming sector in Western Australia that has continued in this year. Hopefully, the borders will be open in March 3. Stay tuned for that one. The mine plan was adjusted to mitigate this shortfall and reduce the impact on gold production.
Progress in the lower priority bulk waste work area suffered as a consequence, resulting in less waste stripping of cutbacks being carried out. The impact of lower stripping is typically felt 1-2 years out and not in the current period. It is extremely important for future years, particularly 2023 and 2024, that the pits are sequenced optimally and the waste stripping is carried out on schedule. Hopefully when they reopen, we will be able to recover what we have lost in the past months. This will be a focus of 2022. At Sunrise Dam, gold production was 226,000 ounces against 256,000 last year. This reflects the unfavorable grade reconciliations in the underground mine, which was flagged in the first half.
All-in sustaining cost was consequently higher compared to the prior year. Mining in the Golden Delicious open pit is progressing well, and this transitional material is being stockpiled and blended with underground ore and will contribute to high production. If you compare again the first half with the second half, in the second half, we had solved most of the reconciliations issues, and you would have seen an increase in production of about 20% from about 107 - 127. We expect probably that second half to be replicated into the two halves of 2022. We have been focused on improving our flexibility at Sunrise Dam through the investment strategy.
In 2021, Sunrise Dam added 700,000 ounces of mineral resource and 400,000 to ore reserves in 2021 pre-depletion. Lastly, we have established a task team to undertake a full asset potential review across the portfolio, and the objective of this initiative is to complete a detailed analysis of each asset, including mine design and key operating parameters, to understand the reasons for the gap between current and best possible performance. Sunrise has been identified as the first site to undergo the process, and the review commenced earlier this month. Moving to Obuasi update. You will recall we started underground mining in October. Since then, the restart plan has tracked to schedule. In fact, the processing plant has achieved 2,000 tons per day in January.
If you recall, we said that we will wanna be by 4,000, which is the limit of the current plan by June, so I think we're well on track. Areas of assessment completed include Sansu, Block 8 Lower, and the Decline. At Sansu, the stopes have been re-sequenced and released for mining. At Block 8 Lower, probe drilling is ongoing, and we expect to start releasing those stopes in the coming month. Phase 3, which runs to end 2023, is also tracking the plan. This includes upgrading the KMS shaft and material handling system, a new ventilation shaft, underground pump stations, and refurbishment in the BSP sub-shaft. Where does this place us for the year?
We're seeing production between 214,000 and 216,000 at an all-in sustaining cost of $1,250-$1,350 per ounce. We see the annualized production rate in Q4 at about 320,000 ounces to 350,000 ounces. We expect annual production to remain around that level in 2023 until phase three is completed late next year, which will allow a step up to 5,000 tons per day. With all three phases of the project complete, production from 2024- 2028 is anticipated to average between 400,000 and 450,000 ounces at an all-in sustaining cost of around $900-$950 an ounce. A truly world-class mine.
Exploration is foundational to our business. This slide shows exactly why we should all be excited about the potential this company has to offer. If we take a step back to provide the context, we spent the better part of the last decade shoring up a wobbly balance sheet. That deleveraging was understandably at the expense of some reinvestment. With our balance sheet now significantly stronger and our portfolio significantly simpler, we can safely turn to reinvesting in our core, in our ore bodies. We're in the midst of a program to increase investment in ore reserve, development, and brownfield exploration to increase reserve conversion, extend reserve lives, improve mining flexibility, and upgrade knowledge of our ore bodies. This use of incremental sustaining CapEx will, we believe, unlock talent value from within our existing portfolio. We've made strong progress so far.
We've had a cumulative addition over the last two years of 8.7 million ounces of ore reserve coming into our inventory at only $68 an ounce. This compares to recent M&A multiples, about $300 an ounce. Our ore reserve inventory has grown 33% over this period, and given the resource base we sit on, we expect to leverage this to grow ore reserve further. Last year alone, we added 2.7 million ounces of ore reserve before depletion. Even more impressive, we added more, about 10% more ore tons and 44% more ounces to the proved ore reserve category. This is at first quarter grades when compared to our peers and bodes well for our medium-term future. On the greenfield front, we declared a maiden mineral resource of 3.4 million ounces at Silicon in Nevada.
Let's move to Nevada. We completed the Corvus acquisition last month, giving us a prime position in the largest new gold district in Nevada. Our aim is to use this foothold to establish a meaningful, low cost, long life production base over the medium term. This consolidation has the potential for significant synergies from economies of scale and integrated infrastructure, including water rights, adjacent concessions, and processing facilities. Our conceptual development plan for the district envisions the North Bullfrog deposit, previously owned by Corvus, being developed first with initial production in three years. This will be followed by Silicon, which is at 3.4 million ounces of resource and primed to grow further, and then potentially to the Merlin target near Silicon. The timing for mining activities at the Mother Lode deposit is expected to commence only in the long term after the company completes additional work.
We see these deposits being developed in a modular fashion, mined initially as open pits and processed using heap leach and gravity recovery, where applicable. This suggests low capital intensity to develop in a staged fashion, a district expected to yield upwards of 300,000 ounces of annual production for over 15 years at a tier one cost structure. Sulfide processing and underground mining will be evaluated in the longer term. Our technical team has initiated its evaluation of the Corvus resource. For 2022, multiple activities are planned to take place in the district. Reserve conversion drilling at North Bullfrog and Silicon, pre-feasibility at Silicon and commencing a concept study for the Merlin deposit. Permitting for North Bullfrog will start before mid-year.
Importantly, given the various deposits across the tenement, our approach to bringing these deposits to account will take place over a number of years in a staged and de-risked manner. Unlocking value. We have reinforced the leadership team with three key external appointments in recent months and a significant experience in transforming talent management, business improvement and mine planning to an already seasoned group of existing executives. Terry Briggs, a 30-year veteran of the industry and currently Vice President Planning at Newmont, is the new Chief Development Officer. He will have oversight of planning, exploration, and business development, and he will be one of the few CVs I know that has experiences in all of those. Lisa Ali, who joins in April 2022, also as Chief People Officer after a long career with senior leadership roles at British Petroleum and most recently at Newcrest.
Marcelo Godoy, appointed in November as Chief Technology Officer from a senior leadership role at Newmont, where he served for nine years and headed up exploration there, will provide further inputs to the operating model and to the full potential review that we have embarked on. You will have also seen that Christine Ramon, our CFO, today we announced that after seven years and a pillar of strength to the company during her role as interim CEO, will take early retirement in June to spend more time with her family.
Two slides ago, I talked about how the balance sheet was strengthened in the past years, and that is the biggest legacy that Christine Ramon leaves to me and her team: a strong balance sheet, a fabulous debt profile, including the last $700 million some months ago, good relationship with credit rating agencies. Without that, we really could not progress the plans that we have right now. She deserves this rest, but in the end, it is the legacy that she leaves behind, and we will be grateful for that. We wish her the very best. Core priorities. I said from the beginning, we are back to basics. I approach six months in the CEO role.
Our immediate objectives remain clear: to narrow or focus on costs, competitiveness, to sharpen operational performance and project execution, to improve cash conversion and to offer a compelling investment proposition. As I mentioned last year, we've redesigned the operating model for the organization and also the organizational structure which supports it. This was canvassed with employees late last year ahead of a restructuring across the business footprint. We've now implemented it. This is a profound change for our business. Whereas functional support roles used to reside at three or four places in the organization, they're now at only two places, at the center or corporate and the business unit level. Corporate sets policy and standards, and they provide assurance.
The business units have the resources in their direct control to execute their plans and deliver their budgets on a day-to-day basis in line with these standards. This kind of restructuring inevitably results in the removal of certain roles. We limited our retrenchments by offering voluntary severance packages, and in the end, our central function structures reduced from 526 positions in 2021 to 311 positions at the end of January 2022. We estimate and, let's say, NPV savings about $800 million at a 5% discount or yearly of $40 million. Aside from much more important than the cost savings, we have what I believe is a far more efficient and effective structure.
We're eliminating duplication and unnecessary work and ensuring that the right people are in the right place with the right accountabilities and the right responsibilities. Full asset potential review. With the operating model in place, we now move on to establish a task team to undertake a full asset potential review across the portfolio. A cross-functional teams of specialists led by our Chief Technology Officer, Marcelo Godoy, have started the process of assessing the full potential of our operating assets. I will talk you through this process in more detail shortly. Production and costs. In parallel to this process, I have a team conducting a productivity improvement and cost review. This is focused on removing all costs that are not aligned to our key strategic imperatives.
These teams are carefully scrutinizing the 2022 plans to ensure we stay on top of the issues and deliver on our commitments. This team is scrubbing capital and operating costs and establishing stretch targets, which will also start to get at the potential of our assets. Lastly, key to our long-term success is continually improving our overall social license to operate. We're working on safety. We're continuing to respond to our host governments and community needs and making sure we progress on decarbonization plans. All this is vital to our long-term success. Full asset potential review process. We have started the process of assessing the full asset potential of our operating sites. This is very important. This process will be site-led, site-owned, with the overall program designed and coordinated by Marcelo Godoy, our new CTO, who has significant experience with these type of programs.
This will involve a detailed analysis of each asset, including mine design and key operating parameters, to understand the reason for the gap between current and best possible performance. This full assessment of each asset will take approximately three months and will result in identifying key areas of performance improvement to be implemented over the ensuing 18-24 months. We're talking about looking at mine planning, processing, metallurgical recovery, labor productivity, external pre-spend, procurement, capital spend, all of the key levers that really will be able to, and then we'll identify the key ones that would enable us to make a step change in each of the assets. As I said, this process will ultimately be owned by each site leadership team. It will be tracked until the full value of initiatives is realized.
Sunrise Dam and Siguiri are the first cabs off the rank. I will now hand over to Christine to cover the financial performance. Thank you.
Thanks, Alberto. Moving on to the cost performance. Our cost performance in 2021 reflects the continued reinvestment across our portfolio, notably Obuasi, Iduapriem, Geita, and Tropicana. It also reflects significant investments in tailings compliance in Brazil. Our overall focus remains on improving our operational performance, underpinned by the operating model changes, cost discipline, and the full asset potential program. Total cash costs increased 22% or $173 an ounce to $963 an ounce. This was mainly due to lower grades and stockpile drawdowns at certain operations. The second half reflected an 8% drop in cash costs to $925 an ounce on the back of a 12% increase in production from our operating assets, excluding Obuasi, and that was helped by higher underground grades.
Inflationary pressures were partially mitigated by weaker local currencies, lower royalties, and higher silver by-product contribution. Our proactive supply chain strategies include holding 3-6 months inventories of consumables and spares, delayed the inflationary impacts, and enabled business continuity during the year. We are closely monitoring the sea freight market given ongoing capacity constraints, which are squeezing lead times on deliveries as well as freight and logistics costs. We've taken a proactive posture on managing our supply chain since the onset of the pandemic, and we'll continue to do that to ensure resilience and continuity of supply. Open pit grades were 26% lower year-on-year, with most operations affected other than Siguiri and Sunrise Dam.
Recovered grades from underground were 3% higher year-on-year, with grade improvements reflected at Geita and Kibali, which more than offset lower grades in Brazil, Sunrise Dam, and Serra Grande. The strong recovery at Sunrise Dam was especially pleasing after the negative grade recon in the first half. The reinvestments in our sites with the highest geological potential to extend life and improve flexibility remains a key priority. Sustaining capital increased by $281 million or 57%, mainly due to the tailings investments as well as ongoing stripping at Tropicana, and all-in sustaining costs were $1,365 an ounce, up 31% year-on-year, and driven by the higher sustaining CapEx and also the rise in cash costs.
They include an estimated $34 an ounce COVID-19 impact and a $55 an ounce impact for the Brazil tailings compliance. Moving on to the balance sheet. Our balance sheet strategy is based on disciplined capital allocation and self-funded improvements in the balance sheet over the long term. Adjusted net debt of $765 million at year-end is down 76% from its 2014 peak, all without any equity raise, and finance costs are 61% lower over the same period. We remain committed to maintaining a robust balance sheet. Our leverage target remains below 1x adjusted net debt to adjusted EBITDA through the cycle. We are currently less than half of that. In October, we raised a seven-year bond of $750 million, priced at a record low coupon of 3.375%.
The proceeds have been used to repurchase the more expensive 2022 notes, further optimizing our finance costs. This translates into a $13 million interest saving annually. Liquidity remains strong, providing good flexibility. Our cash balance of $1.15 billion excludes our $499 million share of the DRC cash balance. Our $1.4 billion multicurrency RCF facility was largely undrawn at year-end, and we funded the $365 million Corvus deal last month from cash on hand. Our credit ratings remain unchanged, with investment-grade ratings from Moody's and Fitch, with negative and stable outlooks respectively. S&P stays one notch below investment grade with a positive outlook. We have a balanced capital allocation framework and continue to follow a disciplined and focused approach to value creation.
Last year, we generated $1.4 billion of cash from operations and received $231 million of dividends from joint ventures. After tax payments and financing costs, we invested about $717 million, which amounts to about 47% of our cash from operations in sustaining CapEx. That was to fund all reserve developments as well as waste stripping. We self-funded our growth capital of $311 million, and that includes $122 million at Obuasi and $58 million at Geita for the new open pit and underground development. Our dividend policy remains 20% of free cash flow before growth capital, which we pay biannually.
In line with this policy, our board approved a final dividend of $0.14 a share, and that was based on the free cash flow generated in the second half, which will be paid in March 2022. Moving on to cash. Addressing our cash lock-ups. While our free cash flow continued to be impacted by lock-ups of VAT at Geita and Kibali and export duties at CVSA, there were improvements on this front. In Tanzania, our net overdue VAT input credits refunds decreased during quarter four by $10 million to $142 million, and this was due to our ability to offset verified VAT claims of $26 million against corporate tax payments. That took total VAT offsets against corporate taxes last year to $54 million.
We continue to engage with the Tanzanian authorities regarding the mechanism to recover $123 million relating to historical VAT, which was accumulated through to the end of June 2020. In the DRC, our share of Kibali's cash awaiting repatriation was $499 million at year-end. This was lower than the $512 million balance at the end of Q3. This cash is held in US dollar accounts and remains fully available for operational requirements. Important to note is that we received $231 million from Kibali last year, which is 64% higher than what we received in 2020. To break it down, it comprised $150 million of shareholder loan repayments and $81 million of dividends net of withholding taxes.
This included $107 million received in December alone. Barrick, our JV partner and Kibali's operator, remains fully engaged with the relevant authorities regarding cash repatriation and the 2018 Mining Code. Also in the DRC, our attributable share of recoverable VAT decreased by $1 million to $73 million at year-end. In Argentina, interest receivable decreased by $4 million during Q4 to $19 million. During Q4, we received a dividend of $19 million from CBSA in Argentina, with the balance awaiting approval from the Argentine Central Bank. In Argentina, we had a cash balance equivalent to $139 million at the end of December, and this cash is invested locally and remains fully available for CBSA's operational requirements. Moving on to the guidance for 2022.
In line with past trends, production this year is expected to be about 55% weighted to the second half, and unit costs are expected to decline into the second half of the year as production picks up. Based on the planned production profile, we expect that unit cash costs and all-in sustaining costs will exceed the top level of the annual cost guidance ranges before trending below those ranges in the second half. This takes into consideration Obuasi's ramp-up to 4,000 tons per day in the second half, and it will add 140,000 ounces to this year's production. Just to sum up production, we've been guided between 2.55-2.8 million ounces.
In addition to the contribution from Obuasi, we'd be looking for marginal improvements in production at Tropicana, Sunrise Dam, Iduapriem, and Siguiri, and consistent performances at the remaining assets. So far this year, production is tracking expectation. Except for Brazil, where exceptional rainfall has caused some disruption at our operations in Minas Gerais during January. Cash costs, the range there is expected to be $925-$1,015 an ounce, and this range does build in inflationary pressures on the back of oil, consumables, and logistics, as well as pay scales. Inflationary pressure for the year is estimated at around 7%-8%, and we have benefited from delayed inflation impacts in 2021 due to our strategic partnerships on certain global spend categories, as well as the stocking approach we followed at our operations.
We anticipate sustained inflationary pressure through at least the first half of the year, which we will look to manage through our long-range consumable contracts, leveraging our global spend and ongoing collaboration with our strategic suppliers. As Alberto has mentioned, the operating model changes and the full asset potential programs are expected to further mitigate inflationary pressures. To sum up, the all-in sustaining costs are expected to be between $1,295 and $1,425 an ounce, which is consistent with last year's levels. AISC and sustaining CapEx underpin our reinvestment strategy. We do continue our multi-year reinvestment strategy in exploration, ore reserve, and underground infrastructure development, waste stripping. Of course, we anticipate the Brazil tailings compliance capital as well as an incremental $45 million of ore reserve and infrastructure development to support Obuasi's ramp-up.
The total capital expenditure is different to last year. It's weighted now to the first half and is guided at between $1.05 billion-$1.15 billion, and that comprises sustaining capital expenditure of $770 million-$840 million, which is almost three-quarters of our total capital for the year. On a per ounce sold basis, this amounts to $275-$300 an ounce, which is in line with 2021. These costs will remain elevated in the near term, but are planned to reduce to more normalized levels of around $200-$250 an ounce from 2024 onwards. Non-sustaining or growth capital, we guide at $280 million-$310 million and includes remaining funding for Obuasi Phase Three, the Havana stripping at Tropicana.
We've got things for the Geita Hill underground, study costs for the two Colombian projects, and then a new TSF at Iduapriem. The profiling of growth capital is weighted heavily to the first half of the year, and that's largely due to the stripping relating to Tropicana. When we look at exploration expense and study costs, that's guided in line with previous levels, and there's an additional $42 million to move our Nevada projects forward. We remain mindful that the further waves of COVID-19 and its impacts on communities and economies, and the actions that authorities may take in response are largely unpredictable. Our guidance therefore continues to exclude any impact on production and costs relating to COVID-19. Thus far, we're not seeing any significant impacts.
Argentina was impacted earlier in the year and is almost back to normalized underground capacity. Western Australia remains high risk, and we'll certainly continue to monitor that. I will now hand over to Alberto to conclude.
Thanks, Christine. We do have our work cut out for us. Keeping our people safe and well and supporting our community is a priority. There's no getting around the fact that 2021 was tough and underwhelming. With the improvements recorded in the second half, coupled with the implementation of the new operating model, we are well-positioned to continue our recovery. We're focused on improvement and delivering more consistent results in line with the targets that we have set out. Just to recap at Obuasi, we're firm on our ramp-up target and continuing to develop the project to ensure the ramp-up is as smooth as possible. A particular emphasis we place on improving operating and capital efficiencies, and we continue to look for appropriate capital savings along with the full asset potential review.
Building on the successes of the last two years, our world-class exploration team are aiming for another year of more than replacing depletion, while the technical team for Nevada. As I have said before, we are committed to transparent reporting on the progress made to further decarbonize our business and how we're adapting to the business risks and opportunities presented by a changing climate and efforts to counter that. Why? To finish why AngloGold Ashanti. At AngloGold Ashanti, we have a high-quality asset portfolio, a self-generated project pipeline, good people, and an excellent balance sheet. However, we're not close to realizing our full potential. How do we get there? We have to go back to basics. We have to get the business of mining right. We will continue to strengthen our teams wherever necessary, ensuring we have the right people in the right roles at every level.
Implementation of the operating model will ensure we're optimally structured and organized to execute work in a way which supports our values and our strategy. We continue to entrench our leadership in ESG, particularly in the climate sphere, where we've reduced more than half our emissions in a little more than a decade. When I started at AGA, I recognized that we have very good assets, a very strong technical team of traditional gold mining started with AGA and a strong balance sheet.
I believe now that the work we have done with the operating models, with reinforcements of the ExCo, with putting the right people in the right place across all of our operations, and now with the full asset potential process, that we are clearly on our way back to taking AGA back to its place among the top gold mining companies, which is where it belongs. Thank you. With that, I open to questions.
Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, if you wish to ask a question, please press star and then one on your touch-tone phone or on the keypad on your screen. You will hear a confirmation tone that you have joined the queue. If you wish to withdraw your question, please press star and then two to remove yourself from the queue. Our first question is from Jared Hoover of RMB Morgan Stanley. Please go ahead.
afternoon, Alberto and team. Thanks for the call. Three questions from me, please. The first is around your Full Potential program, and if Marcelo is on the line, it could be better if he answered, if possible. I guess my question really is, your commentary in your release alludes to him having lots of experience in full asset potential programs. I wanted to get a feel from him how difficult it really is to close the gap between current performance of an asset versus what its full potential is.
Obviously, I know all the work hasn't been done as yet, but maybe if you could give us a feel for what are some of the typical challenges you would have to try and close the gap, to give us a sense for the size of the task here at AngloGold. Okay. I'll follow up with my other two questions after this. Thanks.
Okay. I'll ask Marcelo to help us on this. I'm reminded of what this rapper called Kendrick Lamar, I think, or something like that, my kids like, but he has a song saying, "There's really no success without a struggle." Nothing is easy. Nothing is painless. It will be hard. As I've said in other places, I like that Jack Welch sort of quote, "Only babies like change." Change is difficult. I'm very encouraged by just the preliminary. We've already been in a month on this, and how the Sunrise people on the ground have embraced the team that is gonna make these changes. They could have done two things.
They could have said, "No, we do things well, and what are you gonna teach us?" "Let's think outside the box." They have gone for the second one. It's early days, but I'm very confident that we have the right attitude in our teams to say, "How can we think outside the box, and how can we really take these assets to their full potential?" With that, Marcelo.
Thank you.
You have the experience of-
Thank you, Alberto Calderon. Look, great question. In general, from my experience, it takes about three months to get to a point where we understand the opportunities. Those opportunities are always ranked by ease of implementation and value. After these three months, we will go through a process that will take about 6-24 months to implement those initiatives. For a single site, we can have from five to up to 15 opportunities that we may want to pursue at any given point in time. This initial part of identifying, diagnosing, and designing the programs are critical. We really play the same playbook in all the sites that you go.
One advantage of the process is that the learnings from our site can be rapidly replicated into other sites, which obviously make us gain a lot of time. In terms of where the opportunities are, first, mine planning and strategic investment. That's the strategy, and mine plan optimization is a big lever that we have to generate opportunities where value is locked up in mine sites. I see that as one of the major levers that we have. We go into mining equipment, mining strategies. Processing fixed equipment and metallurgical recoveries. G&A, utilities, infrastructure, and labor productivity. Finally, external spend is one of the biggest buckets that we have as well, consumables, services, and sustaining capital.
These five pillars, they're the five areas of full potential where we assign a specific project manager that will take the project through to completion and delivery of those values. In terms of, you know, one of the key aspects and success factors of this process is really that it's site-led, site-owned, and site-led. Basically, my team helps them, the sites get into the design phase where the opportunities are mapped. From there on, the site takes absolutely 100% over into delivery and tracking the results. By the end of the year, we will have a much clearer idea of the size of the prize here, so the teams are just starting now. We start in Sunrise Dam a couple of weeks ago, and we start at Siguiri last Saturday.
The work is well underway, and the teams are very excited about what lies in front of them, and really looking forward to see the value that we are going to deliver on these projects.
Great. Thanks very much. Thanks very much for that. Quite comprehensive, Alberto and Marcelo. I mean, that leads quite nicely maybe into my second question, 'cause you mentioned one of the levers there is external spend such as SIB CapEx. I mean, if I look at the SIB CapEx levels, there is a higher for longer step-up of about $300 an ounce to 2024. I guess I'm really trying to get some confidence around do you think that by the time we get to 2023 and 2024, is there a scenario where you could come back to us and say, "The ore bodies are not exactly what you thought it was, and now the spend is actually gonna continue into 2025 and 2026"?
That's really my SIB CapEx question. Then my last question on gold CapEx. At Obuasi, it looks like you're spending about $100 million in 2022. My understanding was that phase three was a total of about $85 million spread over about two years. Does that imply that you are pulling forward all the project CapEx, and that you could actually hit that 400,000-450,000 ounces per annum production level quicker than what's been guided? I'll leave it there. Thank you.
If you look at it in millions of dollars, we spent $500 million in sustaining CapEx in 2019 and 2020, and then we're jumping to $800 million. In hindsight, that's always easy, we probably should have spent a bit more. We are in catch-up mode in several of those assets. Now, we do have an idea, it's just that we want greater confidence. We do have a good idea of what's happening with that investment in the next five years. I can say that so currently what we see is that we can keep that $300 per ounce level, which is high, sustaining CapEx for the next three years, let's say.
We should go back to about $220 an ounce. Now, that implies a certain profile of reserves added, resources added, et cetera. If in the full actual potential, there is room to spend more, but with probably a much more greater upside that we have identified, so be it. We don't think so. I don't think that we will go much higher than that. I think $300 an ounce is a lot of money and I would think that we are along that. But there's no. In the end, this is about what can add the greatest value. If at the end we say we have to be $350, we will tell you, "And this is because this asset is gonna go to whatever, 20% higher production," or something like that.
That's how I would see it. I have confidence that we know already that the Brazilian, for example, which is so much money that is painful, is a temporary thing. We also know that there was catch-ups in Obuasi, as you said, and there was in Geita. What we know and what we don't know, we know, but in the areas that we suspect, I think that will take us to that $220. If we go in the Rumsfeld unknown unknowns, I can't tell you. But in the known unknowns, we should be fine. Obuasi and yes, there's another big investment. But that investment, as we outlined in the presentation, is for the shaft. It's for taking the plant to 5,000 tons per day.
It is a necessary step at the end of 2023 to be able to ramp up from about, let's say, around 300-350 to around 400-450. I don't think that we will be able to, at this stage. I would be surprised that we do anything quicker. The more important thing is that we already for 2023 then have a very sizable production coming from Obuasi. We're prepared in 2024 for that jump with greater production and very competitive all-in sustaining costs. Christine.
Yeah. Just on the growth CapEx that Jared referred to for Obuasi. There is, you know, some tailwinds in phase two.
Mm-hmm.
Very small tail spins. It is about $100 million that's budgeted in total for 2022. There's about $90 million for phase three included in that-
Yeah.
$100 million. Yeah.
That's for phase three. Okay.
Very clear. Thanks very much.
After Jared.
Thank you. The next question is from Dominic O'Kane of JP Morgan. Please go ahead.
Hello, Alberto. Just two questions from me. On Kibali and the DRC, it does appear that there's light at the end of the tunnel in terms of the cash repatriations. I note that Mr. Bristow, on the Barrick Q4 results last week, indicated that there was going to be a $300 million dispersal later this month. I wonder if you could just maybe comment if that is also your expectations. Given the very low level of leverage with the balance sheet, can you maybe give us some indications about how you're thinking about cash proceeds? Is it possible to think about share buyback? Second question is regarding Nevada. Could you maybe just give us some insights into permitting requirements for your Nevada properties? I'm thinking specifically environmental and land access permitting requirements. Thank you.
Thank you. Let me go in reverse order, and then at the end, I'll ask Christine to help me. From the permitting, the Nevada is probably one of the best jurisdictions that you can be in. They're in the States, and it depends at the luck of the draw, basically two permitting agencies. You can be in the Department of the Interior, and that's called Bureau of Land Management. And then you can also be in the Department of Agriculture, and that's the forestry. We have the Department of the Interior that has a very good track record of expeditious and very, let's say, pro-business. Let me say it in a pro-business means still highest environmental standards, protection of water, everything.
It just means that they allow business to get the environmental license in good time. That is why we have put out there that in three years we can be in production. Probably in any other jurisdiction we would be talking about five years. That is on Nevada. On the second one, cash flows. Look, as we look into the future, we still are on a very capital intensive phase. We're also funding everything with our own cash flows. We are committing to a policy that is working, that is new, that is the 20% of the cash flows to dividends. As I look into the next years, I don't see any reason to change that. I'm happy with a strong balance sheet.
I'm happy with self-funding. Let's put as an example, if we whatever money we get from Kibali, if this realizes, for example, the $300 million, you could earmark 20% for shareholders as cash. That's in with that commitment. On Kibali, we are, I would say I'm most happy about what happened in December and the past months. Basically in December, we had this $107 million. It shows that the mechanism works and it does give a credibility that the money that we have there, and we have left a net $499 million, that money, let's say, is in safety in our own control in U.S. dollars earning interest, and that we tested a mechanism that work. For more details, I'll ask Christine to help me.
Thanks, Alberto. I think like Alberto says, we've seen good momentum. Barrick has confirmed that the necessary paperwork is in place to effect the cash repatriation. I think your specific question was relating to the tranche of $300 million. I think we've heard from Barrick as well, that the process has started to remit the funds. I think, you know, we only recognize that once the funds are received in our AngloGold bank account, because the funds get remitted from Kibali JV in country to Kibali, Jersey. From there, the dividend is declared through to the respective shareholders. I think we'll be able to confirm that once the funds are received. As Alberto said, there's really positive momentum.
Could I just ask a follow-up question? Alberto, given net debt to EBITDA is at 0.4 times, do you not regard AngloGold Ashanti to be in a position of excess capital? Or specifically, when does AngloGold Ashanti move to a position of excess capital?
No. This is the reason why I You learn from investors as you go around the world, and I remember talking to that one investor and probably another, I don't know if it is this one or another company, but said, "Yes, if you had perfect certainty on the price of gold, well, then you will say, well, yes, we could do X or Y, but you don't." What looks like a very even lazy balance sheet, if gold goes to $1,600, becomes different. Look, at this stage, I like strong balance sheets. I like low debt. When you have a single commodity like we do, it's just much better to be like that. I think that there's really too much risk, more than people ordinarily see for changing that.
From the first moment I said, I'm grateful for the strong balance sheet. I'm grateful for that long, low net debt. If anything, we want a better debt profile, which had happened with the $700 million. I really don't intend to change that strategy at this stage. Maybe in one or two years, if the asset potentials and all of that continues to go well and the gold price is high, then we can talk again, but not at this stage.
Thank you very much. The next question is from Adrian Hammond of SBG Securities. Please go ahead.
Hi, Alberto. Yeah, congrats on another successful third quarter. I just wanna. I have two questions for you and one for Christine, one for Stuart. Just curious on your comments around your view of the global peers. I mean, how do you view AngloGold Ashanti relative to those peers, and where would you like to be? The second question, you know, appreciate you're going through this asset review process. Is there a scenario that assets don't make the cut, that you would sell them, and it's possible that AngloGold Ashanti would be a smaller company? For Christine, could you just, you know, up to now Kibali's, we've been modeling and 40% repatriation effectively, what should we be penciling going forward?
Should those monies that are sitting in cash in the lockup be subject to dividends? Then for Stuart, I mean, appreciate ESG is you know starting to only take real effect now on the business in terms of cost. But is there a cost per ounce that we could attribute ESG to ESG for the group? Thanks.
Okay. Let me start with AngloGold Ashanti and peers. Look, what you see with peers with the latest results is that something in cash costs with about $800 and something on all-in sustaining costs of about $1,100 would be a solid company. Now, there's differences on if you have a magnificent resource and then you have byproducts and all of that, you could be at $700 or lower. I think with the type of resources that we have and all of that, and something, as I said, with an $800 and $1,100 on all-in sustaining would be that sort of allow us to join back in in sort of what I would consider a well run and competitive top tier mining gold mining company.
For the full asset potential, look, I'll probably start by saying that there's no point of being an asset hugger or of saying that we need to be the third largest or whatever. I am probably more wedded again to the Jack Welch. You always have to understand if your assets are worth more inside than outside of AngloGold. Now, my assessment after being some months here is that all or maybe almost all of our assets are worth more inside AGA than outside. That's my assessment today. There may be some marginal assets and then some marginal projects that, when we do more work, we may change sort of opinion. But that would be more the exception than the rule.
I think with the full asset potential, you could understand that the insights that we would have. It would make again versus the valuation in the market much better that they remain inside AGA. That's so that I'm pretty confident that will be the base. If not full or most in terms of ounces or the overwhelming majority of our production ounces. In terms of ESG, I will let Stewart know. I don't think we have any copper ounces. What I will tell you is we are in the process in the next months of assessing our targets for 2030.
We have put out our targets for 2050, and we will now put out, when we finish that work, sometime this year, we will put out a pretty comprehensive commitment of our ESG, net reductions for 2030 as a credibility step change towards the commitment of reaching 2050 or before for net zero. Stuart.
Thanks, Alberto. Adrian, I'll keep it reasonably brief. I think there are some clear things, you know, some clear outgoings that you can see on ESG with respect to community investment and whatnot. I think the bigger, more philosophical question is that there's a cost of not doing your ESG properly, which far outweighs whatever it is that we spend by multiples. I think so really what you wanna do is make sure that you are reducing your environmental footprint, and there's clear benefits to that. That you're paying salaries, tax, royalties, so that you're a good tenant because we after all have to keep our landlords happy. I think, you know, making sure that your governance is top-notch because if you don't do that, you end up in a very difficult spot.
I think we don't see ESG as a cost at all in the business. For us, it really is about doing it right, maintaining our social license to operate, and ultimately that begets business success in many other ways.
Okay. As relates to your question on Kibali, I think certainly when we spoke about the 40%, that came through loan repatriation, that was because of the changes in the Mining Code. I think what you can expect is the cash flows expected from Kibali this year, a continued sort of 40% repatriation coming through in respect of loans and the balance to come through in the form of dividend payments, that will come through from the DRC. We certainly expecting all of the cash flows from Kibali to come through this year. Of course, from a timing perspective, they normally come through one quarter in arrears. I think you can factor that into your model.
As relates to the cash that is locked up at the end of December, the $499 million, which is our share, you asked what can we expect in terms of dividends. I think, you know, that goes into free cash flow when we receive it, and it'll come through in the dividend formula, which is 20% of free cash flow, free growth capital.
Great. Thanks, everyone.
Thanks, Adrian.
Thank you. The next question is from Patrick Mann of Bank of America. Please go ahead.
Okay. I've got a follow-up just on the Kibali cash flow and how it works. The dividend portion that comes through and then there's a kind of capital portion which relates to debt, which I suppose is what the Kibali JV owes the shareholders for building the mine. I mean, for how long can that cash be repaid? Or what is the balance of that debt that the JV owes the shareholders? For example, how long can you take 100% of the cash out of the DRC? And then I suppose at some point then it reverts, and then is it go back to 40% of free cash flow after the debt is repaid? Thanks.
Yes. The shareholders' loan, our attributable share of it is $1.2 billion, and Barrick has got a similar share, and that earns interest at 8% per annum. That is the shareholder loan amount. Clearly, when I spoke about the 40% coming through with loan repatriation, as the loan repatriation comes through, it gets all set against the shareholders' loan. It's still at least another three or four years before that loan gets depleted or repaid, as one would put it. I think then I said the balance of the cash would then come through in the form of dividends, which is subject to withholding taxes of 10%.
Thanks. In long term, right, so post the shareholder loan being repaid, what amount are you allowed to dividend out of the country?
Long term, I think just bear in mind that when the Mining Code changed in 2018, it did allow for companies operating in the remote region of the DRC to apply for an exemption, which is what the Kibali JV has done. Long term, that application now has already been made, and long term we expect for the cash to flow through freely. It would not then be subject to the 40% limitation.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Patrick.
Thank you. The last question is from Leroy Mnguni of HSBC. Please go ahead.
Hi. Good afternoon, guys. Thanks for the opportunity. My questions are around Obuasi. I see you've had a marginal decline in reserves. Is it correct of me to assume that that comes out of block 8? And then just looking at the diagram on slide 12, I think it is that KMS shafts you seem to require sooner than what I recall in terms of the timeline. Has anything shifted there in terms of the long-term plans? Are the two related? Have you brought that forward because of what happened at block 8 last year? And then, my final question is just your production guidance range seems quite wide. Could you maybe give us a bit of color on which are the operations that you're a little uncertain on in terms of production in 2022, please?
Okay. Thank you. The first is no, the 400,000 ounces are not in block 8. We have said before that we didn't lose anything and that is the case. What happened is our mine planning guys are always re-optimizing at different prices. We still have a very low $1,200 price for resource, and there were some far away blocks that were way into the future. I think but marginally, but the assessment being conservative was, okay, there's about 400,000 ounces that we are taking off from the resource. But if you look at the quality probably of the reserves that have been outlined and all of that nothing of that has really changed.
Regarding the—I would say that nothing has changed on the on the shaft. I did say last year, I said that when we put out for the first time in November the Obuasi guidance, we did say that we would be in 5,000 tons per day at the end of 2023, and that has been. To do that, we need to spend that $90 million of capital, growth capital, in Obuasi. This is just a reaffirmation of what we said then. There's really no changes there. If you go to production guidance for the company. If you remember where we landed last year was 2,472. Our midpoint guidance is 200,000 ounces higher than last year.
Of that, if everything goes perfect, and this is the problem with guidance as in Obuasi, we will be adding 140,000 ounces to the company. Boston Shaker is much better. Boston Shaker is normal, so we should. That probably has less risk. We should be adding on Tropicana another 30,000 ounces. On the rest of the company, we would add some X number of thousand ounces. Now, on the flip side, you have Brazil started the year with torrential rains that you have seen. We started with COVID. At some point in Argentina, we had 75% of the workforce in quarantine. That is, we only had 25% of the workforce working.
If you look at the production in for the month of January versus our budget in CdS, it would have been about 20%. The impact of the torrential rains plus COVID was really devastating. What I'm telling you is there's always. It's easy putting out a guidance if everything is perfect. Twenty years in mining tells me that the probability of surprises is much higher than the probability of having significant increases. That's where there's a judgment call. We are cognizant of the fact that rebuilding credibility is low and losing credibility is swift and fast. We wanted to make sure that in the scope of risks, and again, if you go back to Obuasi, yes, we, if everything goes fine, we increase by 140,000 ounces.
It's perfectly feasible that we have a two-month delay in something with the paste plant and then you're down up to 200. In the long term of the company, it's not an issue, but for the guidance it is. I've been asked a lot of times, are you being excessively conservative? I don't think we have. I think 200,000 ounces is a good midpoint estimate. But the ranges, and by the way, it's a normal range. If you look to other companies like Barrick, they have roughly the same 10% range. It just caters. If everything goes as we planned it right now, we should be above that midpoint. But as I said, things don't happen that way. I'm comfortable with the guidance.
I'm comfortable with the low guidance because that should we when we discuss this, and believe me, we discuss this long and hard with the team, with the operators, with the finance team. It's like, okay, what can you ensure us that you have a very, very high probability? That's like then you say, okay, everything goes wrong. That's the low end of the guidance. Everything goes right, and it's the high end of the guidance. The world usually converges to the midpoint.
That's very clear. Thanks, Alberto.
Thanks, Leroy.
Thank you very much, sir. Ladies and gentlemen, we have no further questions, and I'd like to hand back to Alberto for some closing comments.
Look, thank you very much for your questions. I always find this process instructive because you see things from a different angle. Thank you for your questions. Thank you for your patience. I think, I would hope that the next results will go a bit shorter. You never think these things are gonna be so long. Again, it was. You always wanna be as comprehensive as possible. Thank you again for your patience, for your questions. As always, I'll see you soon again. Bye, and thank you.
Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, that then concludes today's event, and you may now disconnect.