The collective underperformance of the copper project pipeline (projects classified as either ‘probable’ or ‘possible’ in CRU’s gateway methodology) is a subject we have commented on frequently in recent years.
Indeed, our regular analysis tracking for final investment decisions (FID) has shown the rate of approvals required to bridge the supply gap has only been sufficient in three years out of the last decade. However, as we noted in our most recent Copper Long Term Market Outlook (CLTMO), nine projects with the ability to add 826 kt/y Cu were sanctioned in the preceding 12 months.
Tellingly, these included Tia Maria in Peru, which had become symbolic of the broader ESG hurdles faced by the industry, while this month’s announcement that MARA has received approval under Argentina’s Incentive Regime for Large Investments (RIGI) is further encouragement that Tier 1 projects can indeed make progress. So, has the supply side finally woken up to the challenge presented by burgeoning demand, that has seen the quantum of new tonnes required rise to 8.17 Mt by 2036?
There are at least some reasons to be cautious. Firstly, the timeline between the final investment decision and first production has increased to a weighted-average lag of three and a half years, in addition to the 55% rise in time spent in permitting, engineering and procurement (PEP), as noted in our April 2025 CLTMO - available to CRU clients. If interested, request a demo here.
Therefore, it has not been surprising that several key copper mine projects have recently seen delays, including El Teniente New Mining Level in Chile (where the start date has been pushed back to 2027 from 2025) and Grasberg Kucing Liar in Indonesia (to 2030 from 2029). At the same time, commissioning of the Baimskaya project in the harsh conditions above the Arctic Circle in Russia carries elevated delivery risk, given its extensive infrastructure requirements that include a new port and four purpose-built floating 106 MWe nuclear power units.
Record prices are not a boon for project economics… yet
Even getting to a final investment decision is a significant achievement. Recognising that the copper project pipeline has stagnated over the past decade has prompted several leading companies to reconsider development options in major mining districts – note of today’s 239 probable and possible projects, 75 of them were present in 2016’s pipeline. This is particularly important as expectations from governments and communities continue to rise.
Collaborations may offer the opportunity to mine ore bodies more efficiently (Andina/Los Bronces), pool infrastructure (Collahuasi/Quebrada Blanca) and/or reduce corporate and supply chain costs (Copper World/Cactus). Of course, this is not a novel concept – leveraging synergies between Collahuasi and QB for example has been discussed since the early 2000s. However, with average capital intensity rising by 38% in real terms since the beginning of the decade, the benefits in this era are likely to be greater than ever before. Note, this is a topic we have explored in more depth in our latest CLTMO feature ‘A new approach for a new era’. If interested, contact us here.
Then there are those copper mine projects where the steep rises in not only copper prices, but also by-product credits, have led owners to (re)commission new studies. Nevertheless, in most cases this has not led to a ‘re-rating’ of economic returns, as increased projections at top line revenue have been offset by rising capex and/or operating costs.
As such, Internal Rates of Return (IRR) have not risen to levels sufficient to entice capital in many cases – at least not yet. However, using copper prices at today’s levels could signal a paradigm shift. For example, the Jervois Range project has been in our copper project pipeline for over a decade, but in July and August, the owner KGL Resources were able to complete a AU$300 M equity raise. This, together with proceeds from a streaming deal with Wheaton Precious Metals, fully funds construction of the 30 kt/y project in Australia’s Northern Territory.
Western companies will need a step change in execution
Meanwhile, history also offers some warnings when it comes to the ownership profile of the copper project pipeline. Western companies are the holders of over 11.7 Mt in uncommitted copper, and yet as a cohort they have the worst track record of delivery, adding only 636 kt/y of incremental production between 2007 and 2025.
On the other hand, Chinese companies have achieved an impressive CAGR of 13% over the same period, but collectively now own only 11% of tonnes in the 2026 pipeline. Admittedly, this is likely to underplay their potential influence given a counter-cyclical investment strategy that seeks to pick up assets at the nadir of the Western business cycle. For example, there was CMOC’s purchase of a majority stake in Tenke Fungurume in the DRC on the downturn in 2016.
For all the positive recent developments at smaller sites – like Jervois Range and Havieron, Mount Lyell and Sulphur Springs in Australia, or Nussir in Norway, all of which are also now funded (see our latest Copper Market Outlook for a full review of progress) – so far in 2026 we have not seen any Tier 1 projects achieve a positive final investment decision.
Indeed, one of those that appeared best positioned to enter production before the end of the decade (Reko Diq in Pakistan) now faces an uncertain future after its owner Barrick said in April it was slowing development activity and extending a review of the project. It additionally warned of ‘significant increases’ to capex estimates of $5.6–6 bn in Phase 1 and $3.3–3.6 bn in Phase 2.
This leaves only two Tier 1 greenfields from the copper project pipeline, with the potential to add copper supply before 2030. These are Santa Cruz and Copper World, both in the US.
Consequently, the collective output of copper mine projects that have achieved a final investment decision this year has totalled only ~150 kt/y, making it difficult to argue that pipeline activity has accelerated.
However, we believe conditions are now ripe for this to change. In the last 24 months CRU has added more than 4 Mt of potential copper to the copper project pipeline, much of it in the third and fourth quartiles of the IP curve. Using a YTD average copper price of $13,444 /t, this makes 144 copper mine projects theoretically viable, nearly double the number required to fill the supply gap.
Miners with existing assets are throwing off significant free cashflow (for further analysis see the latest report from our Copper Mine Asset Service), while elevated valuations for juniors and explorers make raising capital for development studies easier.
With governments increasingly aware of the competition for capital among jurisdictions and the need to build supply chain resilience, schemes such as RIGI in Argentina and Project Vault in the US are a boon for the copper industry more broadly. As such, the supply side has both money, options and incentives, making a potent combination. The state of play could look very different by this time next year.
We will continue to monitor developments in the pipeline with regular updates provided in both the Copper Market Outlook and the Copper Concentrates Market Outlook to help you keep track of the most important developments. If you are interested in these services, please contact us here.
