Zimbabwe Ferrochrome Plant Technical & Financial Dashboard

1. Executive Investment View

Do not approve greenfield EPC on resource ownership alone.

Installed CAPEX Model

Optimised sensitivity case

Base OPEX

At 3,600 kWh/t and US$0.09/kWh

Base EBITDA

Before sustaining CAPEX, tax and finance

Simple Payback

13.7 years

Too long for high-risk greenfield entry

Investment Position

Conditional

Technically feasible Margin-sensitive

Submerged arc furnace technology is proven and Zimbabwe has operating precedent. Financial attractiveness depends mainly on power, ore, utilisation and realised ferrochrome price.

Preferred Entry Route

Validate mine and concentrator → execute toll-smelting campaigns → confirm product acceptance and netback → assess brownfield participation → approve own furnace only after full value-chain proof.

2. Zimbabwe Market & Policy Context

FY2025 HCFeCr Sales

427,444 t

Implied HCFeCr Value

Simple average; not a spot quotation

Chrome Concentrate Sales

886,752 t

Policy Direction

Beneficiation

Increasing expectation of captive power

Commercial warning: At the FY2025 implied HCFeCr average of approximately US$854/t, the base OPEX case is close to cash break-even before sustaining CAPEX, finance and tax.

3. Product Selection

Product	Advantages	Limitations	Recommendation
High-carbon ferrochrome	Largest market; standard SAF route; local precedent	Power intensive and cyclical pricing	Preferred base product
Charge chrome	Broader ore blend and large buyer base	Potential pricing discount	Alternative
Medium-carbon FeCr	Higher value per tonne	Additional refining and smaller market	Phase 2 only
Low-carbon FeCr	Premium specialty product	Higher CAPEX and process risk	Not initial product

4. Technical Design Basis

Nameplate Output

50,000 tpa

Initial commercial module

Furnace Configuration

2 × ~18 MVA

Or equivalent modular configuration

Specific Electricity

3,600 kWh/t

Range ≈3,000–4,000 kWh/t

Continuous Load

≈22–26 MW

Smelting plus auxiliaries

Parameter	Base case	Design note
Operating days	330 days/year	Allows planned maintenance
Furnace utilisation	85%–90%	Below 80% materially weakens returns
Ore consumption	2.5–2.8 t/t FeCr	Depends on grade, Cr/Fe and recovery
Reductant consumption	0.38–0.45 t/t	Coke/anthracite/coal blend
Flux consumption	0.20–0.35 t/t	Quartzite and other fluxes
Metal recovery	75%–88%	Technology and feed dependent

5. Raw Materials & Indicative Mass Balance

Annual Material Requirements

Input / output	Annual quantity	Specific rate
Chrome ore / concentrate	130,000 t/y	2.60 t/t FeCr
Reductants	21,000 t/y	0.42 t/t
Quartzite / fluxes	13,000 t/y	0.26 t/t
Electrode paste	900 t/y	18 kg/t
Electricity	180 GWh/y	3,600 kWh/t
Ferrochrome product	50,000 t/y	1.00 t/t
Slag and dust	75,000–110,000 t/y	Site-specific

6. Furnace & Process Technology

Route	Energy / recovery view	Project position
Conventional open SAF	Higher energy and emissions	Avoid for new build unless CAPEX dominates
Closed SAF + preheating	Lower energy and better emissions control	Preferred greenfield concept
Closed SAF + pre-reduction	Potential lower electricity and higher productivity	Evaluate after ore testwork
DC furnace	Flexible for fine-rich and difficult feed	Alternative route

Process Flow

Ore preparation → crushing and screening → blending → agglomeration or preheating → SAF smelting → tapping → casting or granulation → crushing and sizing → laboratory release → dispatch.

Slag should be separately processed for metal recovery, aggregate evaluation or engineered disposal.

7. Power Strategy

Annual Electricity

180 GWh

At 50,000 tpa and 3,600 kWh/t

Base Tariff

Planning assumption

Robust Tariff Target

Or lower

1¢/kWh Impact

Annual OPEX movement

Power option	Strength	Weakness	Use
Dedicated grid	Lower initial CAPEX	Tariff and reliability risk	Only with firm supply and curtailment protection
Captive thermal	Firm baseload	High CAPEX and carbon exposure	Possible where fuel and permits are secure
Gas / CBM	Potentially lower emissions	Resource and infrastructure uncertainty	Strategic option
Hydro	Lower carbon intensity	Hydrology and transmission dependence	Desirable contracted component
Solar + battery	Reduces daytime cost	Not standalone baseload	Supplementary only
Off-gas recovery	Lowers net demand	Requires closed furnace integration	Recommended

8. Site Selection & Infrastructure

Preferred

Firm 25–35 MW power with redundancy
Economical ore haul from mine/concentrator
Rail siding or efficient trunk-road access
Closed-loop water and cooling
Industrial land and skilled workforce

Major Concerns

Interruptible grid-only power
Long-distance movement of low-value ore
Road-only export with border delays
No licensed sustainable water source
Single reductant supplier

Preferred Corridor Logic

Kwekwe, Gweru and Midlands brownfield sites generally carry lower infrastructure and skills risk than an isolated greenfield mine-mouth smelter.

9. Indicative CAPEX

Captive generation can add tens or hundreds of millions of US dollars.

Low Envelope

Line-item estimate

Optimised Model

Sensitivity model basis

Base Envelope

Unoptimised line-item total

High Envelope

Before major captive power

Base CAPEX Breakdown

Low / Base / High

10. Base OPEX

Total OPEX

Per tonne FeCr

Electricity

≈39% of OPEX

Ore Feed

≈24% of OPEX

Power + Ore

≈63%

Dominant commercial risk

OPEX Composition

11. Financial Model & Returns

Scenario EBITDA

Scenario	Price	OPEX	EBITDA	Interpretation
Downside				Marginal after sustaining CAPEX
Base				Conditional; long payback
Upside				Attractive if sustained
Strong integrated				Requires low-cost ore and power

Base Revenue

At US$1,000/t

EBITDA Margin

17.5%

Below preferred greenfield robustness

Payback on US$90M

10.3 years

Still highly sensitive

Target Payback

<6–7 years

Needs lower cost or higher price

12. Sensitivity & Break-even Analysis

Variable change	Annual EBITDA impact
FeCr price ±US$100/t
Power tariff ±US$0.01/kWh
Ore cost ±US$10/t ore
Specific power ±300 kWh/t
CAPEX ±US$30M	Large NPV and payback shift

Break-even question	Approximate threshold
Cash OPEX break-even
Price for US$200/t EBITDA margin
Cash break-even power tariff
Preferred robust tariff
Preferred ore delivered cost
Preferred utilisation	≥85%

13. Toll Smelting vs Own Smelter

Criterion	Toll smelting	Own greenfield	Brownfield JV / acquisition
Initial CAPEX	Low to moderate	Very high	Moderate to high
Time to market	Fastest	3–5 years typical	Potentially faster than greenfield
Power risk	Mainly carried by smelter	Investor carries full risk	Shared or inherited
Margin capture	Lower	Highest theoretical	High if asset is efficient
Flexibility	High	Low after commitment	Medium
Legacy liabilities	Low	Low initially	Potentially significant
Recommended role	Phase 1	Phase 3 after proof	Priority transaction route

14. Implementation Plan & Decision Gates

Stage	Period	Work programme	Gate
1. Commercial definition	0–3 months	Ore, buyer, toll and power screening	Credible ore, buyer and power pathways
2. Testwork	3–9 months	Mineralogy, beneficiation, agglomeration and pilot smelting	Target alloy and acceptable energy/recovery
3. Pre-feasibility	6–12 months	Site, technology, CAPEX/OPEX and permitting	Positive risk-adjusted economics
4. Toll campaign	9–18 months	Commercial production through existing smelter	Verified netback and product acceptance
5. FEED & financing	15–30 months	Guarantees, ESIA, power and contracts	Bankable package and funding
6. EPC & commissioning	30–54 months	Construction and ramp-up	Performance tests passed

15. Final Recommendation

Proceed Now

Validate ore and concentrate quality, secure firm power terms, conduct toll-smelting campaigns, confirm ferrochrome product acceptance and assess brownfield opportunities.

Do Not Approve Yet

Do not approve greenfield furnace EPC until power, ore cost, utilisation, product price and offtake meet bankable thresholds. Zimbabwe is credible for ferrochrome, but only a low-cost integrated or brownfield project is presently investable.