Skip to main content [Access key S]Go to homepage [Access key 1]Go to Sitemap [Access key 2]Go to Site terms and conditions [Access key 3]Go to Contact us [Access key 4]Go to Accessibility [Access key 5]
Rio Tinto logo and link to homepage

Advanced search
Home Production and reserves Mineral resources

Production & reserves

Mineral resources

As required by the Australian Securities Exchange, the following tables contain details of other mineralisation that has a reasonable prospect of being economically extracted in the future but which is not yet classified as Proved or Probable Reserves. This material is defined as Mineral Resources under the JORC Code. Estimates of such material are based largely on geological information with only preliminary consideration of mining, economic and other factors. While in the judgement of the Competent Person there are realistic expectations that all or part of the Mineral Resources will eventually become Proved or Probable Reserves, there is no guarantee that this will occur as the result depends on further technical and economic studies and prevailing economic conditions in the future. Resources are stated as additional to the reserves reported earlier. Where operations are not managed by Rio Tinto the resources are published as received from the managing company. Where new project resources are reported for the first time, additional information about them can be viewed on the Rio Tinto web site, in the section titled ‘what we produce’.




 Likely mining
method (a)		 Measured resources
at end 2008		 Indicated resources
at end 2008		 Inferred resources
at end 2008		 Total resources 2008
compared with 2007
 Rio Tinto
interest %
Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade
2008 2007 2008 2007
BAUXITE millions of tonnes % Al2O3 millions of tonnes % Al2O3 millions of tonnes % Al2O3 millions of tonnes millions of tonnes % Al2O3 % Al2O3
Gove (Australia) O/P 11 49.6 32 49.6 3 50.3 46 83 49.7 50.1 100.0
Porto Trombetas (MRN) (Brazil) O/P 401 50.0 401 444 50.0 50.0 12.0
Sangaredi (Guinea) (b) O/P 91 48.9 169 48.4 188 48.1 448 661 48.4 49.5 23
Ducie-Wenlock (Australia) (c) O/P 453 51.8 453 - 51.8 - 100.0
Weipa (Australia) (c) O/P 75 50.2 1,528 50.6 1,603 2,219 50.6 50.9 100.0
BORATES millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes
Rio Tinto Minerals–Boron (US) O/P 5.3 0.1 5.4 5.4 100.0
Jadar (Serbia) (d) U/G 9.0 9.0 - 100.0
Coal type (e) Coal resources at end 2008
Measured Indicated Inferred
COAL millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes
Chapudi (South Africa) O/C SC 90 220 730 1,040 1,040 59.1
Rio Tinto Coal Australia (Australia)
Bengalla O/C+U/G SC 30 81 59 170 170 30.3
Blair Athol (f) O/C SC 7 0.5 7 – 71.2
Clermont O/C SC 11 3.7 15 15 50.1
Hail Creek (f) O/C MC 176 260 435 235 82.0
Hunter Valley Operations O/C+U/G SC+MC 119 526 686 1,331 1,392 75.7
Kestrel U/G MC 9 0.1 9 9 80.0
Kestrel West U/G SC+MC 153 153 153 80.0
Lake Elphinstone O/C SC+MC 61 17 78 78 82.0
Maules Creek (g) O/C SC+MC 57 218 123 398 680 75.7
Mount Pleasant O/C+U/G SC+MC 200 218 281 699 699 75.7
Mount Thorley Operations U/G SC+MC 48 65 113 115 60.6
Oaklands O/C SC 480 800 1,280 1,280 75.7
Valeria O/C SC 200 240 440 440 71.2
Vickery O/C+U/G SC+MC 100 200 300 300 75.7
Warkworth (h) O/C+U/G SC+MC 5 247 351 604 423 42.1
Winchester South O/C SC+MC 90 7 97 97 75.0
Rio Tinto Energy America (US)
Antelope O/C SC 31 30 12 73 73 100.0
Colowyo O/C+U/G SC 161 68 21 250 248 100.0
Cordero Rojo (i) O/C SC 57 87 144 - 100.0
Decker (j) O/C SC 39 39 43 50.0

See notes at the bottom of this page




 Likely mining
method (a)		 Measured resources
at end 2008		 Indicated resources
at end 2008		 Inferred resources
at end 2008		 Total resources 2008
compared with 2007
 Rio Tinto
interest %
Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade
2008 2007 2008 2007
COPPER millions of tonnes grade %Cu millions of tonnes grade %Cu millions of tonnes grade %Cu millions of tonnes millions of tonnes % Cu % Cu
Bingham Canyon (US) (k) O/P 173 0.55 476 0.44 649 9 0.47 0.34 100.0
Eagle (US) (l) U/G 0.5 2.15 0.4 2.07 0.9 0.6 2.12 2.34 100.0
Escondida (Chile) (m)
- sulphide O/P 3.9 0.77 85 0.80 614 0.89 703 740 0.88 0.83 30.0
- sulphide leach O/P 81 0.44 498 0.43 3.583 0.48 4,162 3,612 0.47 0.47 30.0
- oxide O/P 31 0.81 31 39 0.81 0.86 30.0
Grasberg (Indonesia) O/P+U/G 617 0.64 1.985 0.56 237 0.26 2,838 3,049 0.56 0.55 (n)
La Granja (Peru) (o) O/P 2,770 0.51 2,770 - 0.51 - 100.0
Northparkes (Australia)
- open pit (p) O/P         - 12.0 - 0.49 80.0
- underground (q) U/G 8.6 0.95 2.5 0.71 11.1 18 0.90 0.79 80.0
Oyu Tolgoi (Mongolia)
- South Oyu O/P 189 0.43 267 0.34 456 456 0.38 0.38 9.9
- Heruga (r) U/G 760 0.48 760 - 0.48 - 13.5
- Hugo South U/G 490 1.05 490 490 1.05 1.05 9.9
- Hugo North U/G 703 1.82 723 0.97 1,426 1426 1.39 1.39 9.9
- Hugo North Extension U/G 117 1.80 96 1.15 213 213 1.51 1.51 13.5
Palabora (South Africa) (s)
- stockpiles 7.1 0.29 7.1 7.9 0.29 0.31 57.7
Resolution (US) (t) U/G         1,341 1.51 1,341 - 1.51 - 55.0
DIAMONDS millions of tonnes carats per tonne millions of tonnes carats per tonne millions of tonnes carats per tonne millions of tonnes millions of tonnes carats per tonne carats per tonne
Argyle (Australia)
- AK1 pipe O/P+U/G 40 2.9 27 3.1 9 2.1 77 75 2.9 2.9 100.0
- Alluvials O/P 11 0.2 8 0.2 9 0.2 28 28 0.2 0.2 100.0
Bunder (India) (u) O/P     37 0.7 37 - 0.7 - 100.0
Diavik (Canada) O/P+U/G 4.1 3.1 3.9 3.2 8.1 7.7 3.1 3.1 60.0
Murowa (Zimbabwe) O/P 1.4 0.4 1.4 1.4 0.4 0.4 77.8
GOLD millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes millions of tonnes grammes per tonne grammes per tonne
Bingham Canyon (US) (k) O/P 173 0.22 476 0.17 649 9 0.18 0.28 100.0
Cortez/Pipeline (US) (p) (v) O/P+U/G             - 87 - 2.30  
Eagle (US) (l) U/G     0.5 0.18 0.4 0.19 0.9 - 0.19 - 100.0
Grasberg (Indonesia) O/P+U/G 617 0.55 1,985 0.51 237 0.24 2,838 3,049 0.49 0.49 (n)
Greens Creek (US) (w) U/G         - 2.4 - 4.43  
Northparkes (Australia)
- open pit (p) O/P         - 12 - 0.35 80.0
- underground (q) U/G 8.6 0.35 2.5 0.12 11.1 18 0.29 0.29 80.0
Oyu Tolgoi (Mongolia)
- South Oyu O/P 189 0.27 267 0.23 456 456 0.25 0.25 9.9
- Heruga (r) U/G 760 0.55 760 - 0.55 - 13.5
- Hugo South U/G 490 0.09 490 490 0.09 0.09 9.9
- Hugo North U/G 703 0.39 723 0.30 1,426 1,426 0.34 0.34 9.9
- Hugo North Extension U/G 117 0.61 96 0.31 213 213 0.48 0.48 13.5
Wabu (Indonesia) O/P 43 2.56 43 43 2.56 2.56 (n)

See notes at the bottom of this page




 Likely mining
method (a)		 Measured resources
at end 2008		 Indicated resources
at end 2008		 Inferred resources
at end 2008		 Total resources 2008
compared with 2007
 Rio Tinto
interest %
Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade
2008 2007 2008 2007
IRON ORE millions of tonnes %Fe millions of tonnes %Fe millions of tonnes %Fe millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %Fe %Fe
Corumbá (Brazil) (†) O/P 38 64.1 51 63.4 493 62.6 583 583 62.7 62.7 100.0
Hamersley Iron wholly owned (Australia)                
– Brockman 2 O/P 5 62.9     5 62.8 10 10 62.9 62.6 100.0
– Brockman 4 O/P 15 62.4 15 61.9 5 62.6 35 35 62.1 62.1 100.0
– Marandoo Marra Mamba (x) O/P 225 62.8 55 62.5 125 62.9 405 560 62.8 62.4 100.0
– Mt Tom Price high grade (y) O/P 35 63.2 85 63.6 10 64.4 130 100 63.5 63.9 100.0
– Mt Tom Price low grade O/P 25 56.8 30 55.9 5 55.0 60 60 56.2 55.9 100.0
– Mt Tom Price Marra Mamba (z) O/P 15 61.7 5 62.6     20 15 61.9 61.8 100.0
– Nammuldi Detrital O/P 5 60.4 75 60.7     80 80 60.7 60.7 100.0
– Nammuldi Marra Mamba O/P 155 62.8 120 62.6     275 275 62.7 62.8 100.0
– Paraburdoo Brockman (aa) O/P 30 62.9 40 63.6 35 63.4 105 90 63.3 63.6 100.0
– Western Turner Syncline (bb) O/P 40 62.4 15 62.0 5 61.8 60 - 62.2 - 100.0
– Yandicoogina O/P 280 58.0 355 58.0 35 57.5 670 675 58.0 57.9 100.0
Hamersley Iron undeveloped resources (cc)                    
– Brockman O/P 40 62.6 1,190 62.5 2,420 62.5 3,650 3,780 62.5 62.5 (cc)
– Brockman Process ore (dd) O/P 210 57.6 430 57.8 520 56.7 1,160 1,785 57.3 55.6 (cc)
– Marra Mamba O/P 665 62.2 1,550 62.2 2,215 2,110 62.2 62.2 (cc)
– Channel Iron deposits O/P         1,750 57.0 1,750 1,750 57.0 57.0 100.0
– Detrital deposits (ee) O/P 5 63.4 120 61.7 40 61.9 165 195 61.8 61.8 100.0
Hamersley Iron – Channar (Australia) (ff)                  
– Brockman O/P 30 61.8 5 61.7     35 25 61.8 61.9 60.0
Hamersley Iron – Eastern Range (Australia)                  
– Brockman O/P 10 61.6 5 61.7 15 61.8 30 30 61.7 61.7 54.0
Hope Downs (Australia)                      
– Hope Downs 1 Marra Mamba (gg) O/P 5 61.7 80 61.9 20 60.2 105 95 61.6 61.4 50.0
– Hope Downs 1 Detritals (hh) O/P 10 60.2 5 58.8 15 25 59.7 59.5 50.0
Hope Downs undeveloped resources  
– Brockman (ii) O/P 95 62.6 85 61.6 295 62.1 475 385 62.1 62.2 50.0
– Brockman Process ore O/P 60 57.0 5 57.2 120 57.7 185 195 57.5 56.8 50.0
– Marra Mamba and Detritals O/P         220 61.1 220 220 61.1 61.1 50.0
Iron Ore Company of Canada                    
(Canada) (jj) O/P 169 65.0 448 65.0 624 65.0 1,240 1,449 65.0 65.0 58.7
Palabora (South Africa) O/P 240 55.9     240 240 55.9 56 57.7
Robe River (Australia)                    
– Marra Mamba O/P 55 62.0 145 62.1     200 190 62.1 62.3 53.0
– Pisolite (kk) O/P 85 56.9     20 56.8 105 135 56.9 56.4 53.0
Robe River undeveloped resources                    
– Marra Mamba O/P 290 61.3 165 59.5 455 455 60.7 60.6 53.0
– Pisolite O/P 50 58.9 995 58.4 490 57.6 1,535 1,530 58.2 58.1 53.0
– Detritals (ll) O/P     35 61.0 35 - 61.0 - 53.0
Simandou (Guinea) (mm) O/P 1,300 66.0 955 65.9 2,254 - 66.0 - 95.0
LEAD millions of tonnes %Pb millions of tonnes %Pb millions of tonnes %Pb millions of tonnes; millions of tonnes; %Pb %Pb
Greens Creek (US) (w) U/G         - 2.4 - 3.92  
LITHIUM millions of tonnes %Li2O millions of tonnes %Li2O millions of tonnes %Li2O millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %Li2O %Li2O
Jadar (Serbia) (d) U/G         114.6 1.8 114.6 - 1.8 - 100.0
MOLYBDENUM millions of tonnes %Mo millions of tonnes %Mo millions of tonnes %Mo   millions of tonnes %Mo %Mo
Bingham Canyon (US) (k) O/P 173 0.036 476 0.033 649 9 0.034 0.039 100.0
Oyu Tolgoi (Mongolia)                
– Heruga (r) U/G 760 0.015 760 - 0.015 - 13.5
Resolution (US) (t) U/G 1,341 0.040 1,341 - 0.040 - 55.0
NICKEL millions of tonnes %Ni millions of tonnes %Ni millions of tonnes %Ni millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %Ni %Ni
Eagle (US) (l) U/G 0.5 3.16 0.4 2.28 0.9 0.6 2.78 2.65 100.0
Sulawesi (Indonesia) (nn) O/P     162 1.62 162 - 1.62 - 100.0
POTASH millions of tonnes %KCl millions of tonnes %KCl millions of tonnes %KCl millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %KCl %KCl
Potasio Rio Colorado (Argentina) (oo)† S/M 361 34.2 665 30.8 1,026 1,037 32.0 32.1 100.0
SILVER millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes grammes per tonne millions of tonnes millions of tonnes grammes per tonne grammes per tonne
Bingham Canyon (US) (k) O/P 173 2.3 476 2.0 649 9 2.1 1.7 100.0
Grasberg (Indonesia) O/P+U/G 617 3.4 1,985 3.3 237 1.3 2,838 3,049 3.2 3.2 (n)
Greens Creek (US) (w) U/G         - 2.4 - 458  
Wabu (Indonesia) O/P 43 2.5 43 43 2.5 2.5 (n)
TALC millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes
Rio Tinto Minerals – talc (Europe/N America/Australia) O/P+U/G 20 29 32   81 80   100.0
TITANIUM DIOXIDE FEEDSTOCK millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes millions of tonnes
QIT (Canada) O/P 4.1 4.1 4.1 100.0
QMM (Madagascar) D/O 0.2 35.9 1.8 37.9 38.8 80.0
RBM (South Africa) (pp) D/O 1.2 0.1 1.3 3.0 50.0
URANIUM millions of tonnes %U3O8 millions of tonnes %U3O8 millions of tonnes %U3O8 millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %U3O8 %U3O8
Energy Resources of Australia (Australia)
– Jabiluka U/G 1.2 0.887 13.9 0.520 10.0 0.545 25.1 25.1 0.547 0.547 68.4
– Ranger #3 (qq) O/P 60.5 0.062 61.7 0.113 6.1 0.134 128.3 42.4 0.090 0.119 68.4
Rössing (Namibia) (rr) O/P 8.7 0.022 92.9 0.021 12.9 0.023 114.5 191.3 0.021 0.023 68.6
ZINC millions of tonnes %Zn millions of tonnes %Zn millions of tonnes %Zn millions of tonnes millions of tonnes %Zn %Zn
Greens Creek (US) (w) U/G         - 2.4 - 10.12  
La Granja (Peru) (o) O/P     2,770 0.10 2,770 - 0.10 - 100.0

See notes at the bottom of this page


Notes Expand
  • (a) Likely mining method: O/P = open pit; O/C = open cut; U/G = underground; D/O = dredging operation; S/M = solution mining.
  • (b) Following completion of technical and economic studies some resources at Sangaredi were upgraded to reserves.
  • (c) Rio Tinto acquired the operating assets of Alcan with effect from 24 October 2007 and Ducie- Wenlock resources are presented here for the first time. The Weipa deposit includes the resource for Ely as the deposit is contiguous. Resources at Weipa decreased through conversion to reserves. Rio Tinto has an 80 per cent interest in the Awaso mine in Ghana but the resource estimate is still under review.
  • (d) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Jadar is reported for the first time. The borate resource tonnage is expressed in terms of marketable product, whereas the lithium resource is expressed as in situ tonnes.
  • (e) Coal type: SC = steam/thermal coal, MC = metallurgical/coking coal.
  • (f) Following completion of economic studies at Blair Athol and Hail Creek, coal resources have been increased.
  • (g) Resources at Maules Creek have decreased as a result of economic studies.
  • (h) Following completion of economic studies coal resources have been increased at Warkworth. Technical studies have led to a reclassification of resources.
  • (i) Resources at Cordero Rojo have increased following the acquisition of a federal lease, drilling and technical studies.
  • (j) Resources at Decker have decreased as a result of upgrading resources to reserves and technical studies.
  • (k) Resources at Bingham Canyon have increased as a result of updates to the resource model with additional drilling and technical and economic studies. Molybdenum grades reflect reconciliation of model and plant grades.
  • (l) Resources at Eagle have increased as a result of the development of a new resource model incorporating data from additional drilling.
  • (m) Changes in inferred resources at Escondida resulted from technical and economic studies as well as additional drilling.
  • (n) Under the terms of a joint venture agreement between Rio Tinto and FCX, Rio Tinto is entitled to a direct 40 per cent share in resources discovered after 31 December 1994.
  • (o) Rio Tinto acquired La Granja during 2005 and resources are presented here for the first time following technical and economic studies. The timeline and options for development for this project are under review given the current global economic setting.
  • (p) Open pit resources at Northparkes have decreased as a result of upgrading to reserves.
  • (q) Underground resources at Northparkes have decreased as a result of upgrading resources to reserves and technical studies.
  • (r) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Heruga is reported for the first time.
  • (s) Stockpiles at Palabora decreased as the material was transferred for processing.
  • (t) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Resolution is reported for the first time.
  • (u) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Bunder is reported for the first time.
  • (v) On 5 March 2008, Rio Tinto completed the sale of its interest in the Cortez joint venture to its partner.
  • (w) On 16 April 2008, Rio Tinto completed the sale of its interest in the Greens Creek joint venture to its partner.
  • (x) Resources at Marandoo Marra Mamba have decreased following the development of new resource models incorporating additional drilling as well as conversion of resources to reserves.
  • (y) Mt Tom Price high grade resources have increased due to new pit designs and resource model.
  • (z) Mt Tom Price Marra Mamba resources have increased due to a new pit design and resource model.
  • (aa) Paraburdoo Brockman resources have increased due to new pit designs and resource models.
  • (bb) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Western Turner Syncline is reported for the first time.
  • (cc) Resources in this category consist of 32 deposits, 24 of which are wholly owned by Hamersley Iron. The Shovelanna resource (50 per cent Hamersley Iron) is not included as mining lease applications are currently awaiting grant.
  • (dd) Hamersley Brockman process ore resources have decreased following technical studies.
  • (ee) Detrital resources have decreased following geological re-evaluation.
  • (ff) Channar resources have increased due to a new pit design and resource model.
  • (gg) Hope Downs 1 Marra Mamba resources have increased due to remodelling and additional drilling data.
  • (hh) Hope Downs 1 detritals resources have decreased due to remodelling.
  • (ii) Hope Downs Brockman resources have increased as a result of the development of new resource models incorporating additional drilling and the reporting of new deposits for the first time.
  • (jj) Resources at Iron Ore Company of Canada (IOC) have decreased following conversion of resources to reserves and technical and economic studies. Resources are reported as marketable product, using process upgrade factors derived from current IOC concentrating and pellet operations. The in situ material equivalent is 3,121 million tonnes at 38 per cent iron.
  • (kk) Robe River pisolite resources were reduced following a boundary re-evaluation.
  • (ll) Following completion of technical and economic studies, Robe River detrital resources are reported for the first time.
  • (mm) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Simandou is reported for the first time. The timeline and options for development for this project are under review given the current global economic setting.
  • (nn) Following completion of technical and economic studies the resource at Sulawesi is reported for the first time. The timeline and options for development for this project are under review given the current global economic setting.
  • (oo) The Potasio Rio Colorado resource is shown as estimated recoverable tonnes of potash.
  • (pp) Resources at RBM have decreased following technical studies.
  • (qq) Resources at Ranger have increased as a result of the development of a new resource model incorporating results from additional drilling as well as technical and economic studies.
  • (rr) Resources at Rössing have decreased following conversion of resources to reserves and the development of a new pit design incorporating a new resource model and results from additional drilling.
  • † In January 2009, Rio Tinto announced that it had signed definitive agreements to sell its 100 per cent interests in the Potasio Rio Colorado project and the Corumbá mine. The Potasio Rio Colorado sale was completed on 5 February 2009.


Back to top

© 2009 Rio Tinto – All rights reserved.