FMG - Fortescue Ltd

[Antirnator]

Labor is setting the mood for an under promise and over deliver news event. Talk around the place is of Australia meeting its target.

Yes, they promised under i.e. -$275 and delivered over i.e. +$1500 to get to net zero i.e. zero life

 

[JohnDe]

Yes, they promised under i.e. -$275 and delivered over i.e. +$1500 to get to net zero i.e. zero life

View attachment 208319

That was a misunderstanding, they meant to say that they are going to charge everyone an extra $275. I have overachieved and contributing even more from my home and business electricity government tax contributions

 

[basilio]

Where did you read that?

This is the story behind the infinity train review.
Long story short. The idea seemed right but when the engineers got into it it wasn't going to be as simple and cost effective as they had hoped. Back to the drawing board.

Fortescue culls electric train team but 'on track' for 2030

Andrew Forrest's miner is back to the drawing board to find a new solution that does not disrupt production and can be delivered by 2030.

www.boilingcold.com.au

Maybe doable, definitely difficult​

Extra locomotives would allow more electrical power to be stored; however some routes required up to nine units and Fortescue wanted no more than two.

There are limits on the length and weight of a so-called consist: the combination of locomotives and the ore cars they pull.

Longer or heavier consists are more at risk of the couplings between ore cars failing from pressure waves that go from car to car up and down the consist, causing derailment. Some sidings are also too short.

These limits meant that Fortescue could only add locomotives if the consist had less ore cars, and on its heavily used railway that would cut total production and hence revenue.

Fortescue also investigated installing a 65km-long stretch of overhead cables on the rail line to Port Hedland to charge the locomotives. However, the gantries to support the cables were large and expensive as they had to be some distance from the rail line for safety reasons and be able to withstand cyclones.

Also, the gantries and overhead lines could not be installed without at times closing the line to Port Hedland, adding massive amounts of lost revenue to the financial burden of the high capital cost.

Still on track?​

 

[divs4ever]

This is the story behind the infinity train review.
Long story short. The idea seemed right but when the engineers got into it it wasn't going to be as simple and cost effective as they had hoped. Back to the drawing board.

Fortescue culls electric train team but 'on track' for 2030

Andrew Forrest's miner is back to the drawing board to find a new solution that does not disrupt production and can be delivered by 2030.

www.boilingcold.com.au

Maybe doable, definitely difficult​

Extra locomotives would allow more electrical power to be stored; however some routes required up to nine units and Fortescue wanted no more than two.

There are limits on the length and weight of a so-called consist: the combination of locomotives and the ore cars they pull.

Longer or heavier consists are more at risk of the couplings between ore cars failing from pressure waves that go from car to car up and down the consist, causing derailment. Some sidings are also too short.

These limits meant that Fortescue could only add locomotives if the consist had less ore cars, and on its heavily used railway that would cut total production and hence revenue.

Fortescue also investigated installing a 65km-long stretch of overhead cables on the rail line to Port Hedland to charge the locomotives. However, the gantries to support the cables were large and expensive as they had to be some distance from the rail line for safety reasons and be able to withstand cyclones.

Also, the gantries and overhead lines could not be installed without at times closing the line to Port Hedland, adding massive amounts of lost revenue to the financial burden of the high capital cost.

Still on track?​

didn't the engineers do some study on the Queensland electric trains ( and their 'adventures' when used in North Queensland )

now sure that was designed for passenger transport , but to haul serious freight , flaws would only be magnified

let's see if Twiggy opts for a gas/hybrid ( gas to drive the generators to charge the batteries when needed )

the big issue will be cost effective ( and profitable to maintain )

 

[TimeISmoney]

didn't the engineers do some study on the Queensland electric trains ( and their 'adventures' when used in North Queensland )

now sure that was designed for passenger transport , but to haul serious freight , flaws would only be magnified

let's see if Twiggy opts for a gas/hybrid ( gas to drive the generators to charge the batteries when needed )

the big issue will be cost effective ( and profitable to maintain )

Brisbane City Council, Toll Transport, Veolia, all trialled electric trucks and have gone back to mainly diesel fleets in Brisbane. I've met the guy that runs one of the transport yards for BCC, and they told me the natural gas buses they had were a nightmare and kept on catching on fire.

 

[TimeISmoney]

What part of the decarbonisation are you talking about? Because it seems that the major part of of it eg the e solar panels and electric grid they are building is going really well, so much so that BHP is following suit.

I told you Twiggy was putting FMG in a vulnerable position by spending money on decarbonisation while others don't.

​

BHP scraps renewable energy projects, casting doubt on emissions targets​

Tue 9 Sep

Mining giant BHP has dumped plans to build a major renewable energy project at its flagship iron ore operations, sparking claims the company is slowly walking away from efforts to decarbonise.


BHP estimated the project would cut greenhouse gas emissions from its "inland" iron ore division by 15 per cent by the end of the decade and reduce overall emissions by about 2 per cent.

But internal BHP documents seen by the ABC show the miner binned the plans last year because of budget cuts.

The cancellation of the so-called 'Inland Solar PV' project comes amid what one analyst described as a "cooling" by BHP on broader decarbonisation efforts.

In its recent annual report, the mining colossus revealed it had pared back to $US500 million ($759 million) — from $US4 billion previously — the amount to be spent on "operational decarbonisation" by the end of the decade.

 

[divs4ever]

I told you Twiggy was putting FMG in a vulnerable position by spending money on decarbonisation while others don't.

​

BHP scraps renewable energy projects, casting doubt on emissions targets​

Tue 9 Sep

Mining giant BHP has dumped plans to build a major renewable energy project at its flagship iron ore operations, sparking claims the company is slowly walking away from efforts to decarbonise.


BHP estimated the project would cut greenhouse gas emissions from its "inland" iron ore division by 15 per cent by the end of the decade and reduce overall emissions by about 2 per cent.

But internal BHP documents seen by the ABC show the miner binned the plans last year because of budget cuts.

The cancellation of the so-called 'Inland Solar PV' project comes amid what one analyst described as a "cooling" by BHP on broader decarbonisation efforts.

In its recent annual report, the mining colossus revealed it had pared back to $US500 million ($759 million) — from $US4 billion previously — the amount to be spent on "operational decarbonisation" by the end of the decade.

that will depend on if FMG can deliver cost-effectively ( profitably ) , BHP loves big , grandiose , 'world class ' assets ( which often fail to live up to the 'excitement ' )

( i hold both FMG and BHP )

 

[Value Collector]

I told you Twiggy was putting FMG in a vulnerable position by spending money on decarbonisation while others don't.

​

If the solar panels and wind turbines end up supplying energy to FMG cheaper than they were getting from diesel and gas, how is that a risk though?

The others that don’t do it are taking the risk of oil price shocks, I mean when I added solar panels to my house was I taking extra risk than my neighbors that didn’t? Maybe you could argue I did, but it certainly paid off, and pays off every day.

It’s not like they are taking a huge risk, it’s proven technology, the only risk is that the electricity from the renewables might be a few percentage points more expensive than burning gas and diesel, but that works both ways, it might be way cheaper.

 

[Value Collector]

that will depend on if FMG can deliver cost-effectively ( profitably ) , BHP loves big , grandiose , 'world class ' assets ( which often fail to live up to the 'excitement ' )

( i hold both FMG and BHP )

BHP also don’t really vertically integrate, Fortescue for example owns ships, BHP leases them, but FMG’s vertical integration has been key to them reducing their costs.

 

[divs4ever]

If the solar panels and wind turbines end up supplying energy to FMG cheaper than they were getting from diesel and gas, how is that a risk though?

The others that don’t do it are taking the risk of oil price shocks, I mean when I added solar panels to my house was I taking extra risk than my neighbors that didn’t? Maybe you could argue I did, but it certainly paid off, and pays off every day.

It’s not like they are taking a huge risk, it’s proven technology, the only risk is that the electricity from the renewables might be a few percentage points more expensive than burning gas and diesel, but that works both ways, it might be way cheaper.

that is the billion dollar question , having invested in 3 solar arrays ( in the past ) i am aware of the bonuses and flaws

while i still am not convinced FMG can run such on operation without a diesel/gas backup is still might be cost effective in the near/mid term ( without being totally independent of fossil fuels )

BUT how do we ( the investors ) factor that risk/reward into the shares we own ( or are about to sell or buy )

also we have the issue of rapidly evolving battery technology , will Twiggy guess that one correctly he is liable to need a lot of them

 

[sptrawler]

that is the billion dollar question , having invested in 3 solar arrays ( in the past ) i am aware of the bonuses and flaws

while i still am not convinced FMG can run such on operation without a diesel/gas backup is still might be cost effective in the near/mid term ( without being totally independent of fossil fuels )

BUT how do we ( the investors ) factor that risk/reward into the shares we own ( or are about to sell or buy )

also we have the issue of rapidly evolving battery technology , will Twiggy guess that one correctly he is liable to need a lot of them

At the end of the day it will all boil down to the profit margin, there is likely to be more profit pressure from new iron ore suppliers, than from experimenting with renewables. IMO.

 

[Value Collector]

l
while i still am not convinced FMG can run such on operation without a diesel/gas backup is still might be cost effective in the near/mid term ( without being totally independent of fossil fuels )

They aren’t attempting to switch of the gas back up any time soon, it’s a staged approach and each added stage will be proven, one day when they realise the gas turbines are sitting unused for a couple of years they might discontent, but in the mean time they will be sitting there providing back up.

BUT how do we ( the investors ) factor that risk/reward into the shares we own ( or are about to sell or buy )

There is far more risky capital allocations in mining, eg exploration than costs millions every year.

Just add a margin of safety to your cost of production estimate if you think the renewables will cost more than diesel and gas.

also we have the issue of rapidly evolving battery technology , will Twiggy guess that one correctly he is liable to need a lot of them

Only part of the carbon reductions rely on batteries, and it doesn’t really matter if they install an exisiting battery tech today and then a new tech comes out in 2 years, because we would still just use the other battery till its design life expires and then replace it with the new.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

that will depend on if FMG can deliver cost-effectively ( profitably ) , BHP loves big , grandiose , 'world class ' assets ( which often fail to live up to the 'excitement ' )

( i hold both FMG and BHP )

A very good point. FMG will try it and if successful all the better. I use solar and energy saving devices. Let's see how FMG compare to BHP while the warriors from both sides argue over the merits. The annual reports next year and in 2027 will tell us.

gg

 

[countrylad]

BHP to me seems to think they are to big to fail at times, their hubris worries me on plenty of occasions.

 

[divs4ever]

They aren’t attempting to switch of the gas back up any time soon, it’s a staged approach and each added stage will be proven, one day when they realise the gas turbines are sitting unused for a couple of years they might discontent, but in the mean time they will be sitting there providing back up.




There is far more risky capital allocations in mining, eg exploration than costs millions every year.

Just add a margin of safety to your cost of production estimate if you think the renewables will cost more than diesel and gas.


Only part of the carbon reductions rely on batteries, and it doesn’t really matter if they install an exisiting battery tech today and then a new tech comes out in 2 years, because we would still just use the other battery till its design life expires and then replace it with the new.

i was thinking more supply resilience , even generators break down and need repairs , and some battery tech i hear doesn't handle high temperatures well i remember several times it was 45 degrees C ( plus ) in Brisbane , so am guessing that might be more common in Northern W.A. which asks , do the batteries need some cooling options for summer

 

[divs4ever]

BHP to me seems to think they are to big to fail at times, their hubris worries me on plenty of occasions.

--BHP, the world's largest miner by market value, could appoint its first female chief executive, the Financial Times reports, citing unnamed sources.

--BHP's current head of Australia Geraldine Slattery is the lead candidate to replace Mike Henry, who is expected to step down by the middle of next year, although the board wasn't in any rush to make any change, the report says.

--The 140-year-old London- and Australian-listed company declined to comment to the FT.

Full story: https://tinyurl.com/t3r6twsn

Write to Ian Walker at ian.walker@wsj.com

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

September 19, 2025 10:10 ET (14:10 GMT)


that might change in the near future , but she is an 'in-house' candidate the current culture might prevail

 

[Value Collector]

i was thinking more supply resilience , even generators break down and need repairs , and some battery tech i hear doesn't handle high temperatures well i remember several times it was 45 degrees C ( plus ) in Brisbane , so am guessing that might be more common in Northern W.A. which asks , do the batteries need some cooling options for summer

I sure it will be figured out, I know the batteries on my Tesla are liquid cooled as are the Tesla Mega pack grid scale batteries. so I am guessing it’s not something that can’t be engineered and solved.

 

[TimeISmoney]

A very good point. FMG will try it and if successful all the better. I use solar and energy saving devices. Let's see how FMG compare to BHP while the warriors from both sides argue over the merits. The annual reports next year and in 2027 will tell us.

gg

You only have to go as far as to look at FMG's shrinking revenue and profits, and if they keep on going down the same path, they're going to be in trouble before long. I can't legally disclose the mine due to a NDA, but a major mine tried to go electric, and they had to go back to diesel because electric was unreliable due to all the vibration on a mine site.

A lot of mine site electrical generation these days is a mixture of diesel and natural gas run generation by the way, and they hedge against diesel prices with contracts.

 

[sptrawler]

i was thinking more supply resilience , even generators break down and need repairs , and some battery tech i hear doesn't handle high temperatures well i remember several times it was 45 degrees C ( plus ) in Brisbane , so am guessing that might be more common in Northern W.A. which asks , do the batteries need some cooling options for summer

Most grid size container packaged batteries are full of rack mounted modules and are air condition temperature controlled.

Temperature isn't as much of an issue, as is modules becoming out of balance( different charge), well that's what I've heard and it makes sense out of balance packs would mean out of balance load sharing I would think.

VC probably has more of an understanding and be able to better explain it.
I would have a go, but I don't use AI, so I wouldn't want to be drawn into a debate.

 

[divs4ever]

because electric was unreliable due to all the vibration on a mine site.

i wasn't expecting THAT issue , thanks for the heads up

dust , heat , humidity , but vibration flew straight under my radar

cheers