www.pwc.com Competitive bidding of coal blocks Jul 2012 Agenda • The local and global context • The auction opportunity • Strategies for competitive bidding Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 2 The local context • The challenges of strong demand growth and it’s features; • Coal dominates current and incremental energy use; • Supply diversity is limited, and resource nationalism is rising; e.g., super profit tax, carbon levy, DMO, transfer pricing, equity/profit share, shorter tenor of supply contracts Commercial fuel access Population without electricity South Africa 83% 12 m 16% China 42% 8m 38% Vietnam 34% 9m 39% Country Commercial fuel subsidy (% of total) Pakistan 32% 70 m 18% India 29% 405 m 50% Source: G-20 Joint Subsidy Report June 2010 Generation Capacity (GW) Hydro- 37 Nuclear 4.6 Renew able 17 Therm al- 106 Source: CEA 2010 Commercial fuels in above table: Power, LPG, Kerosene Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 3 The global context The growing disconnect • 2011: a year of a great contrast – record profits for the Top 40 of $133 billion (up 26%) but market cap. fell by 25% • Top 40 invested $98 billion in capital projects in 2011. Plan for a further $140 billion in 2012 • Continue to see high commodity prices, underwritten by higher production costs, lower grades. • The key is the ability to bring on supply through the right projects. Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 4 Capital expenditure up to $98 billion Capital expenditures by commodity ($ billion) Capital expenditures by location ($ billion) 35 25 30 20 25 15 20 15 10 10 5 5 - Source: PwC Analysis Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC - 2011 2010 2011 2010 Source: PwC Analysis Jul 2012 5 Key provisions of auction rules Auction by Competitive Bidding of Coal Mines Rules, 2012 • Rules issued (Feb 2012) for auction of coal blocks • End-use and mode specified for identified coal blocks (54; 18 BT) • Earmarking of coal blocks: • Auctioning of coal blocks: - For Government cos. in steel or power (16; 7.27 BT) at Reserve Price. - Bidders to submit Technical and Commercial offers - For power, through tariff based competitive bidding (16; 8.16 BT). - Floor / Reserve Price: to be notified for each area. Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC - (22, 2.79 BT) Jul 2012 6 Coal blocks identified for allocation End use No. of blocks Resources (MT) Earmarked for Govt. companies Allocation route 1. Reserve Price for blocks earmarked for Govt. Cos. Highest bid price for others Integrated Steel 12 Cement 7 637 0 Highest bid price (>Floor price) Sponge Iron 5 381 0 Highest bid price (>Floor price) Surface Gasification 2 136 0 Highest bid price (>Floor price) 4415 4 2. Power 16 8165 Not yet finalised Commercial mining 12 4453 12 Blocks earmarked for both 1. Tariff based bidding and 2. Central Government Cos., for allocation at Reserve Price Reserve Price Source: MoC notice “Identification of coal blocks for allocation and earmarking for various sectors” dated 30 May 2012 Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 7 Key issues • Areas not identified yet for allocation - allocation or pending exploration • How is technical criteria determined? - sub-rules, standard bidding documents • Balancing growth imperative with industry structure - delivering capacity vs. competition • How will bidders respond? Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 8 Strategies for competitive bidding • Early preparation and a clear strategy • Key decisions (asset, end-use, design, technology, partner) Cost-side Revenue-side • JV with mining majors • Inter-se terms with the end-use plant (more, if surplus or group sale is permitted) • Equipment sizing • Transportation options • Diversify risk into MDO contract • Financing strategy Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC • Design of end-use plant • Assured fuel availability • Quality and grade control Jul 2012 9 Setting the objectives Objectives for the overall bid Be competitive to secure PPAs in tariff based bidding close to regulated rates (reasonable returns in steel and cement) • market share • productivity gains and financing Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Objectives for the mining activity Mine planning, capital expenditure, and good operating practices to keep costs low/optimal. • activities • equipment • availability • contracts Objectives for the auction process Managing one’s participation in bid process • modelling • risk mitigation • procurement • technical scores Jul 2012 10 Assessing the components Land • Land required can be optimized in mining plan by simultaneous back filling of mined area or inpit dumping of OB. Can save land cost by 10% depending on site condition and mine size. R&R • Impact assess, training and deployment, Water supply • Effluent treatment for re-use and minimizing loss of water in mining process over mine life. Logistics • Location, capacity, terrain, layout for material movement (rail, road, slurry, conveyer, etc) Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 11 Assessing the components HEMM • Based on the mine plan, method of mining, production plan etc. Broadly, higher equipment size is seen to reduce costs by about 20-30%. • Strategic sourcing and supplier performance. Operational costs • Equipment scheduling, Placement (e.g., location diesel sump) , Operating protocols etc., optimize cycle time, reducing operational costs (0.5 min less cycle time equates to 1.75 haul trucks in the fleet, thus saving capex and operating cost). Maintenance costs • Maintenance planning & scheduling: proper planned maintenance reduces cost by 10-15%. • Operator training; early problem identification. Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 12 Maintenance management Total (100%) Activity Planned / Productive Maintenance Unplanned Corrective Breakdown Total Company % Multiplier Units Costs total for 150 units 60% 1 60 $40 million 20% 1.5 30 $20 million 20% 3 60 $40 million 100% - 150 $100 million Planned (60%) Unplanned (40%) PM (30%) Corrective (30%) Breakdown (20%) Corrective (20%) Emergency (10%) Urgent (10%) Activity Planned / Productive Maintenance Unplanned Corrective Breakdown Total Company % Multiplier Units Costs total for 118 units 80% 1 80 $53 million 15% 1.5 22.5 $15 million 5% 3 15 $10 million 100% - 117.5 $78 million Total (100%) Planned (80%) PM (45%) Corrective (35%) Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Fleet reduction Unplanned (20%) Breakdown (5%) Corrective (15%) Emergency (1%) Urgent (4%) Jul 2012 13 Assessing the components Explosives • Optimum rate of advance, size of fragmentation can be achieved by selecting right explosives (blasting has 3:1 cost advantage over crushing / grinding; proper technique reduces sizing cost) POL costs • Procurement strategy for POL can help reduce its cost over mine life. • Mobile / in-pit refilling practices help enhance utilization time. Balancing plant Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC • Ancillary plant designed for optimize use. • Beneficiation plant design capability. Jul 2012 14 Assessing the components Grade control and mill feed variability Others Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC • Match ROM coal sizing to end use requirement: production cost varies by the size of coal needed (current pricing suggests 50% reduction in size increases unit cost by 25-60%. Impacts boiler performance; penalty high at 30-50% of price). • • • • Metallurgical and geological interpretation. Safety and statutory requirements. Shared facilities and resources. Historical experience, site specific constraints. Jul 2012 15 In conclusion • For the Governments - deliverability of projects - transparency, public interest, and equity • For the consumers - improved supply and standards • For the bidders / investors - security of supply - bid strategy Competitive Bidding of coal blocks PwC Jul 2012 16 Thank you This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, [insert legal name of the PwC firm], its members, employees and agents do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. © 2010 PricewaterhouseCoopers India Ltd. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers India Ltd which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.