Rio2 gold project in Chile on track for 2026 start
The company recently received a US$50 million (A$78 million) third prepayment instalment from United States-based precious metals investment firm Wheaton Precious Metals International, under a precious metals purchase agreement for Fenix.
The funding stream has been a continued strong endorsement of Rio2's construction and development of its massive oxide-hosted, heap leach gold project. The latest prepayment is a key marker along the project's path towards launching mine production by the end of the year.
From October 2024 to June this year, Rio2 has invested $56.4 million in the venture against a $57.8 million budget, excluding corporate overheads and 2022 pre-construction costs.
The 1514-strong workforce is 94 per cent Chilean, including 41 per cent who hail from the surrounding Atacama, highlighting the company's strong emphasis on local employment.
Construction milestones include the installation of 12.7 hectares of geosynthetics and 4 hectares of over-liner material on a leach pad, which the company expects will carry production through the first six months.
The main haul road is 90 per cent complete, while a second haul road is 40 per cent complete. Both routes are critical for connecting the Fenix South mine pit to the leach pad.
At the adsorption, desorption and recovery plant, work has progressed on the adsorption areas, reagent handling and storage facilities, while the process plant's structural assembly is almost complete.
Cladding is 90 per cent finished and the first of three electrical switch rooms is in transit from the nation's capital, Santiago.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Forget a social media ban. If tech companies won't stop targeting teens like me, block them
And my algorithm is relatively benign. In the US, parents who are suing social media companies for allegedly causing their children to take their own life have reported that their children's feeds were filled with material about 'suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders'. Loading For social media companies, profits clearly come before teens' mental health. So perhaps seriously jeopardising those profits would be the most effective way to force change. While the impending social media ban threatens fines of up to $50 million for social media companies that do not take 'reasonable steps' to prevent workarounds, that probably isn't going to be enough of a punishment to create change. The term 'reasonable steps' is too vague, and the profits made from having under-16s illegally using social media apps would likely outweigh the fines. It's instead worth looking to some of the more drastic steps that have been taken in the US against social media companies, for various reasons. The US government's banning of TikTok, though relating to data privacy concerns rather than mental health, did effectively lead to the app going offline in US for a day (the ban was then postponed, but is due to come back into effect in September, unless its parent company ByteDance sells its American operations to a US-owned company.) This kind of broad government action against social media companies, threatening to entirely suspend their operations unless they cease recommending distressing or disturbing content to teenagers, might be worth trying in Australia. But even if this doesn't happen – if there's no effective legislation from the government, and we can't change the fact that kids will be exposed to dangerous content – one of the easiest and most important ways to reduce the harm of social media is education. Parents and schools often warn us about online predators, but not about how we should deal with content that makes us feel bad about ourselves or other people. And that's probably because adults and authorities don't fully understand what we're being exposed to. If schools partnered with social media experts and psychologists to learn what kinds of content social media is promoted to young people, what warning signs parents should look for if their child is at risk of internet-induced mental health issues, and how young people can disengage from harmful content or learn how to better deal with it, then we might make some progress. It's akin to giving kids and teenagers a vaccine against the social media virus, rather than trying to keep it out of the country. Loading Because, after all, social media doesn't cease being a cesspit of negativity and danger once children turn 16. These highly powerful algorithms profit off worsening our mental health, and they're relentless. Educating young people on how to critically engage with or distance themselves from harmful online content is a long-term form of protection. Crisis support is available from Lifeline 13 11 14.
The Age
2 hours ago
- The Age
Forget a social media ban. If tech companies won't stop targeting teens like me, block them
And my algorithm is relatively benign. In the US, parents who are suing social media companies for allegedly causing their children to take their own life have reported that their children's feeds were filled with material about 'suicide, self-harm, and eating disorders'. Loading For social media companies, profits clearly come before teens' mental health. So perhaps seriously jeopardising those profits would be the most effective way to force change. While the impending social media ban threatens fines of up to $50 million for social media companies that do not take 'reasonable steps' to prevent workarounds, that probably isn't going to be enough of a punishment to create change. The term 'reasonable steps' is too vague, and the profits made from having under-16s illegally using social media apps would likely outweigh the fines. It's instead worth looking to some of the more drastic steps that have been taken in the US against social media companies, for various reasons. The US government's banning of TikTok, though relating to data privacy concerns rather than mental health, did effectively lead to the app going offline in US for a day (the ban was then postponed, but is due to come back into effect in September, unless its parent company ByteDance sells its American operations to a US-owned company.) This kind of broad government action against social media companies, threatening to entirely suspend their operations unless they cease recommending distressing or disturbing content to teenagers, might be worth trying in Australia. But even if this doesn't happen – if there's no effective legislation from the government, and we can't change the fact that kids will be exposed to dangerous content – one of the easiest and most important ways to reduce the harm of social media is education. Parents and schools often warn us about online predators, but not about how we should deal with content that makes us feel bad about ourselves or other people. And that's probably because adults and authorities don't fully understand what we're being exposed to. If schools partnered with social media experts and psychologists to learn what kinds of content social media is promoted to young people, what warning signs parents should look for if their child is at risk of internet-induced mental health issues, and how young people can disengage from harmful content or learn how to better deal with it, then we might make some progress. It's akin to giving kids and teenagers a vaccine against the social media virus, rather than trying to keep it out of the country. Loading Because, after all, social media doesn't cease being a cesspit of negativity and danger once children turn 16. These highly powerful algorithms profit off worsening our mental health, and they're relentless. Educating young people on how to critically engage with or distance themselves from harmful online content is a long-term form of protection. Crisis support is available from Lifeline 13 11 14.
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Perth investor says he lost millions in alleged fraudster's ‘Ponzi scheme'
A former client says he lost millions in his dealings with an alleged Perth fraudster who often bragged about his connections with high-level banks across Europe and painted his lucrative investment scheme as 'exclusive and for those in-the-know'. However, private investor Chris Marco has admitted he was using their money to pay returns to other clients in what one witness told his West Australian Supreme Court trial on Tuesday 'reeked of a Ponzi scheme'. Marco is on trial, facing 44 charges after allegedly defrauding investors of about $36.4 million. His former executive assistant, Linda Marissen, has been charged with 30 offences for her alleged role in the crimes. Both have pleaded not guilty to all charges. Giving evidence on Tuesday, Perth-based accountant Charles Napoli said he decided to invest when he became aware of Marco through one of his clients. He invested $1 million with Marco, who promised to invest his money in lucrative overseas investment structures called 'private placements'. Private placements are when a company raises money by selling shares, bonds, or securities to a select group of private investors, rather than through the public stock exchange. Napoli said he was a risk-averse investor, but he was assured by Marco's promise his principle investment would be kept in a blocked bank account that had a multimillion-dollar insurance policy attached. He said it gave him confidence that he could invest with the Nedlands-based businessman, as well as his 'experience' in the financial sector. Napoli said Marco regularly spoke about the 'four or five years' he spent in Europe learning about private placements and investing, and how he had 'all the right connections'.
