Minorca Mine (Laurentian and East Pits) Feasibility Study: $70M NPV Over a 14-Year Mine Life
Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.'s Minorca Mine (Laurentian and East Pits) in St. Louis County, Northeastern Minnesota, USA (Mesabi Iron Range) has a Feasibility Study outlining an after-tax NPV of $70M. The mine plan runs 14 years at about 2.8 MLT wet flux pellets per year.
Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.'s Minorca Mine (Laurentian and East Pits) has reported Feasibility Study results for the iron ore (magnetite taconite / flux pellets) project in St. Louis County, Northeastern Minnesota, USA (Mesabi Iron Range). The study headlines an after-tax net present value of $70M at a 10% discount rate. It reflects Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.'s (CLF) latest disclosed economics for the asset.
Economics. The after-tax NPV is $70M using a 10% discount rate. Economics are based on Three-year trailing average realized pellet price US$98/LT (wet flux pellet); Mineral Reserves evaluated at US$90/LT wet flux pellet FOB Lake Superior; Mineral Resources constrained at US$90/LT pellet value.
Production and mine plan. The project envisions an open-pit operation. Life of mine is 14 years. Average annual production is approximately 2.8 MLT wet flux pellets. Average head grade is 23.8% MagFe (LOM reserve grade). Metallurgical recovery averages 34.1%. The open-pit strip ratio is 0.8 (reserve waste:crude ore); 1.23:1 resource pit shell (waste to crude ore).
Resources and ownership. The company holds a 100% interest in the project.
These figures are extracted from Cleveland-Cliffs Inc.'s technical disclosures and reflect the most recent Feasibility Study on file. Compare this project against other developers and producers in our project economics database, and always verify the numbers against the original technical report before making any investment decision.
Reserves & Resources
| Category | Tonnage | Grade | Contained |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proven | 102.8 MLT | 23.7% MagFe | — |
| Probable | 6.8 MLT | 25.1% MagFe | — |
| Proven & Probable | 109.7 MLT | 23.8% MagFe | 37.4 MLT wet pellets |
| Category | Tonnage | Grade | Contained |
|---|---|---|---|
| Measured | 484.3 MLT | 22.9% MagFe | 159.3 MLT wet pellets |
| Indicated | 317.2 MLT | 22.9% MagFe | 104.4 MLT wet pellets |
| Measured & Indicated | 801.5 MLT | 22.9% MagFe | 263.7 MLT wet pellets |
| Inferred | 30.1 MLT | 21.1% MagFe | 9.1 MLT wet pellets |
Our Analysis
- NPV after-tax
- $70M
higher than 8% of 553 projects we track
- Mine life
- 14yrs
- Study price assumption
- Three-year trailing average realized pellet price US$98/LT (wet flux pellet); Mineral Reserves evaluated at US$90/LT wet flux pellet FOB Lake Superior; Mineral Resources constrained at US$90/LT pellet value
A 14-year mine life is the number that frames everything else here. That is long enough to matter, short enough that this is not a generational asset, and it tells you the returns rest on steady execution rather than a long tail of optionality. For a producing iron ore operation on the Mesabi Iron Range, that horizon is the durability you are underwriting.
The returns themselves are modest by the standards of the projects we track. An after-tax NPV of $70M ranks higher than only 8% of that universe. That is not a project that sells itself on headline economics, and it should not be pitched as one. What it does have is feasibility-level study work, the build-ready estimate with a plus or minus 15% band, which means these numbers carry more weight than a scoping exercise would. The study assumes a three-year trailing average realized pellet price of US$98/LT, with reserves and resources both evaluated at US$90/LT, so the valuation already embeds a step down from recent realized pricing. That is a sensitivity worth watching, not a cushion.
The constraint that matters most is scale relative to the owner. This is one of 18 projects we track for a US$7.41B mid-cap, and the NPV sits well below that market cap on a rough currency-adjusted basis. That cuts both ways: the asset is immaterial to the equity story, so it will never be the reason to own the shares, and it also means the market has little reason to re-rate on its back. The single question is whether a 14-year, feasibility-stage operation of this size can clear the company's internal hurdle for capital against the many competing calls on the same balance sheet.
Our take, benchmarked against the project economics in the Mining Stocks database. Figures are estimates drawn from company technical reports — not investment advice; always verify against the source filing.
Get the next one first
Be the first to know about new mining results, and how they compare to other projects.