Stavely Minerals is testing smaller and potentially easier-to-fund development routes for Thursday’s Gossan after a large open-pit study delivered strong economics but demanded substantial upfront capital. The alternatives could reduce capital intensity, although the company expects they may produce lower NPVs.
- Small-footprint underground study targeting the high-grade Cayley Lode
- Hybrid starter pit and underground option under review
- Heap-leach route considered for 22Mt chalcocite blanket
- Earlier open-pit case carried A$818M pre-tax NPV7 and 40% IRR
- No preferred development pathway has been selected
Stavely tests alternatives to its large open-pit plan
Stavely Minerals Limited (ASX:SVY) is weighing a smaller mine against the headline economics of its Thursday’s Gossan copper-gold-silver project, opening studies into underground, hybrid and heap-leach development routes in western Victoria.
The move comes after the company’s Thursday’s Gossan scoping study outlined a three-stage open pit and 4 million-tonne-a-year processing operation with a pre-tax NPV7 of A$818 million, a 40% internal rate of return and projected payback within 2.5 years of production. That scenario was also expected to generate average annual free cash flow of about A$110 million from first production.
Cayley Lode anchors the underground option
The first alternative would be a small-footprint underground operation focused on the high-grade Cayley Lode, which contains 9.1 million tonnes at 1.6% copper-equivalent, including 1.2% copper, 0.27 grams per tonne gold and 8.4 grams per tonne silver.
Stavely is also examining a hybrid sequence that would begin with a starter open pit before moving underground. Separately, it is considering heap leaching the chalcocite-enriched blanket, a 22 million-tonne resource grading 0.39% copper. The company has not presented economic outcomes for any of these alternatives.
Lower capital could come with lower NPV
The trade-off is clear in the filing. The large open-pit case is expected to deliver the highest NPV, but requires A$333 million for the processing plant and site infrastructure, including a 30% contingency, alongside A$139 million in pre-production stripping costs.
Stavely says the alternative scenarios are likely to have lower NPVs but may require less capital, potentially producing comparable rates of return. The studies will compare capital efficiency, processing rates, metal production, revenue, operating costs and routes including standalone processing, toll treatment and ore sales.
Funding and approvals remain part of the decision
The company also says the smaller options may offer a simpler permitting pathway and attract greater community support. That matters because the large-scale concept would likely require Stavely to secure a development partner or sell to a larger multi-asset company, according to Executive Chair and Managing Director Chris Cairns.
Thursday’s Gossan forms part of Stavely’s 100%-owned Stavely Copper-Gold Project, whose total mineral resource is stated at 59 million tonnes grading 0.53% copper-equivalent. Those figures are mineral resources rather than a selected mining reserve, and the new work remains a comparative study rather than a commitment to a revised mine plan.
Bottom Line?
The next study must show whether a smaller Thursday’s Gossan footprint can preserve credible returns while making funding and approvals more achievable.
Questions in the middle?
- Will the underground and hybrid cases retain comparable returns once development access, mining rates and processing costs are modelled?
- Can heap leaching the chalcocite blanket produce an economically useful standalone or supplementary stream?
- Will a lower-capital pathway improve Stavely’s ability to secure funding or attract a development partner?