{"id":"2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","language":"en","title":"Material procurement: delivered cost, usable output and the cash tied up between them","summary":"Six dated disclosures connect smelter restarts, power and gas commitments, billet conversion, coal delivery and inventory funding; the quantitative cases below are explicit assumptions.","body":["Six August–September disclosures frame a procurement problem as of October 9, 2026. Portland’s working pots concern operating equipment; Hydro’s Norwegian power contract concerns future energy; Equus gas concerns a conditional development pathway; RevoCast concerns product conversion and regional distribution; the IEA coal review concerns fuel markets; Glencore concerns inventory funding. These are different boundaries, periods and evidence types. Combining them into one measured metal-cost index would be unjustified. Their common economic question is how a material reaches an accepted specification, becomes usable output and consumes cash before the buyer collects payment.","Begin with the receiving boundary. Delivered material cost includes the purchase reference, conversion charge, transport and agreed delivery expenses. Inspection, rejection, handling losses and yield then determine cost per accepted tonne. Finance has a time denominator, while production has a physical denominator. Record who owns the cargo in transit and when payment starts. Otherwise the same material can enter both transit stock and warehouse stock, or financing can begin before the buyer actually funds it. A cash-flow model should reconcile physical batches and payment dates before introducing a commodity-price scenario.","The Portland disclosure establishes a restart milestone, not saleable metal output. More operating equipment can support supply, but quality, stable production and subsequent casting remain necessary. RevoCast’s announced conversion route reinforces this product distinction: billet capacity is not a guaranteed delivery of the alloy and dimensions a customer needs. The procurement review should ask for qualified specification, acceptable batch size and a dated dispatch plan. Local production can reduce distance without proving an observed lead-time saving. If receiving inspection delays release, nearby material may still tie up capital rather than immediately enter production.","Energy sourcing needs its own boundary. Hydro’s contracted 876 GWh per year corresponds arithmetically to 100 MW averaged across 8,760 hours; this is an average energy equivalent, not a guarantee of 100 MW in every hour. Ten years give 8.76 TWh, consistent with the disclosed approximately 8.8 TWh. The tariff is undisclosed. Smelting cost cannot be inferred without actual power consumption, hourly terms and the remaining supply portfolio. Moreover, the contract starts in 2031, so it is not a measured saving on electricity purchased in 2026.","Alcoa’s approximately 50 TJ per day prospective Equus supply is likewise an energy quantity, conditional on project delivery in the early-to-mid-2030s. It cannot establish current refinery cost or erase the need for interim supply. Development conditions, demand coverage and backup arrangements belong in the review. Converting gas energy to volume requires a stated heating value and reference conditions. Comparing gas with electricity also requires the useful service: process heat at a specified temperature differs from a generic unit of final energy, and a technically unsuitable fuel is not made suitable by a low price.","Coal makes the quality denominator especially visible. Consider a fictional delivered fuel at US$120 per tonne purchase plus US$30 per tonne logistics, a lower heating value of 24 GJ per tonne and 80% useful-heat efficiency. The calculated heat cost is 150 / (24 × 0.80) = US$7.8125 per useful GJ, or US$28.125 per useful MWh using 3.6 GJ/MWh. If assumed logistics rise to US$50 per tonne, it becomes 170 / 19.2 = US$8.8542/GJ, or US$31.875/MWh. These are hypothetical inputs, not coal quotations from the IEA. Moisture, ash, losses and plant performance can change the comparison; metallurgical coal is not an interchangeable heating input.","Now separate financing from the invoice. Assume an accepted metal lot of 1,000 tonnes with US$2,000/t metal, US$150/t conversion, US$100/t logistics and US$50/t other receiving expenses. The mutually exclusive components give US$2,300/t and US$2.3 million for the lot. These prices and quantities are invented examples, not offers from Alcoa, Hydro, Rio Tinto or Glencore. Assume the entire lot is funded for 30 days at 8% simple annual interest using a 365-day basis. Carrying finance is 2,300,000 × 0.08 × 30 / 365 = US$15,123.29, or US$15.1233 per tonne for that period.","The native chart isolates four financing cases. A 10% assumed increase in the whole landed invoice gives US$2,530/t and 30-day finance of US$16.6356/t. A separate increase in funding time from 30 to 60 days, with price unchanged, gives US$30.2466/t. Applying both assumptions gives US$33.2712/t. The difference from baseline is about US$18.1479/t, or US$18,147.95 for the 1,000-tonne lot. Price and days multiply; their percentage effects on finance are not simply additive. These scenarios neither predict shipment delays nor estimate the probability of future prices.","The holding period must represent actual funding exposure. Supplier credit can postpone cash outflow; a deposit can start exposure before delivery; customer collection can continue it after processing. For a steady operating business, inventory days, receivable days and payable days can describe a cash-conversion cycle, but each component needs its own cost or revenue basis. Applying a single stock price indiscriminately to receivables and payables would distort the amount funded. An advance payment is also not automatically the full shipment value. Use actual cash flows and avoid adding a separate safety-stock expense when that stock already appears in the funded balance.","Glencore’s net-funding disclosure illustrates a reported inventory-price channel, but its company-defined net funding is different from net debt. It cannot calibrate the fictional buyer’s rate, credit days or balance. Higher replacement values can increase cash requirements without increasing physical stock. A price hedge may reduce market exposure while requiring collateral; physical delivery can still be delayed. Funding availability, counterparty terms and product qualification therefore sit beside commodity reference prices, rather than being inferred from them. A low purchase price is insufficient if the material cannot be used or the buyer cannot finance the payment schedule.","Comparing procurement options should preserve these separate mechanisms. A longer contract can improve supply visibility but expose a different price formula; a nearer caster can shorten a route but require qualification; a restart can increase equipment availability without guaranteeing a finished product; a fuel switch can lower a modeled energy cost while needing capital and maintenance changes. Assess each option against the same accepted product or useful service, time period and cash boundary. Do not double-count a logistics saving that is already embedded in a delivered quotation, or label a financing saving as a measured reduction in smelting cost.","The next evidence is contract-specific: dated quotes, energy and quality bases, usable output, shipment and acceptance dates, ownership, deposits, credit terms and funding rates. This analysis uses evidence available through October 9 and examines procurement planning for the remainder of 2026–2027, with later contract starts separately identified. Its arithmetic is deterministic and has no calibrated probability distribution or confidence interval. Taxes, foreign exchange, hedges, storage, equipment investment and losses are excluded from the numerical cases unless stated. The purpose is a reproducible cost decomposition, preserving observed disclosures, conditional plans and analytical assumptions as distinct evidence."],"keyPoints":[],"sections":[],"text":"Material procurement: delivered cost, usable output and the cash tied up between them\n\nSix dated disclosures connect smelter restarts, power and gas commitments, billet conversion, coal delivery and inventory funding; the quantitative cases below are explicit assumptions.\n\nSix August–September disclosures frame a procurement problem as of October 9, 2026. Portland’s working pots concern operating equipment; Hydro’s Norwegian power contract concerns future energy; Equus gas concerns a conditional development pathway; RevoCast concerns product conversion and regional distribution; the IEA coal review concerns fuel markets; Glencore concerns inventory funding. These are different boundaries, periods and evidence types. Combining them into one measured metal-cost index would be unjustified. Their common economic question is how a material reaches an accepted specification, becomes usable output and consumes cash before the buyer collects payment.\n\nBegin with the receiving boundary. Delivered material cost includes the purchase reference, conversion charge, transport and agreed delivery expenses. Inspection, rejection, handling losses and yield then determine cost per accepted tonne. Finance has a time denominator, while production has a physical denominator. Record who owns the cargo in transit and when payment starts. Otherwise the same material can enter both transit stock and warehouse stock, or financing can begin before the buyer actually funds it. A cash-flow model should reconcile physical batches and payment dates before introducing a commodity-price scenario.\n\nThe Portland disclosure establishes a restart milestone, not saleable metal output. More operating equipment can support supply, but quality, stable production and subsequent casting remain necessary. RevoCast’s announced conversion route reinforces this product distinction: billet capacity is not a guaranteed delivery of the alloy and dimensions a customer needs. The procurement review should ask for qualified specification, acceptable batch size and a dated dispatch plan. Local production can reduce distance without proving an observed lead-time saving. If receiving inspection delays release, nearby material may still tie up capital rather than immediately enter production.\n\nEnergy sourcing needs its own boundary. Hydro’s contracted 876 GWh per year corresponds arithmetically to 100 MW averaged across 8,760 hours; this is an average energy equivalent, not a guarantee of 100 MW in every hour. Ten years give 8.76 TWh, consistent with the disclosed approximately 8.8 TWh. The tariff is undisclosed. Smelting cost cannot be inferred without actual power consumption, hourly terms and the remaining supply portfolio. Moreover, the contract starts in 2031, so it is not a measured saving on electricity purchased in 2026.\n\nAlcoa’s approximately 50 TJ per day prospective Equus supply is likewise an energy quantity, conditional on project delivery in the early-to-mid-2030s. It cannot establish current refinery cost or erase the need for interim supply. Development conditions, demand coverage and backup arrangements belong in the review. Converting gas energy to volume requires a stated heating value and reference conditions. Comparing gas with electricity also requires the useful service: process heat at a specified temperature differs from a generic unit of final energy, and a technically unsuitable fuel is not made suitable by a low price.\n\nCoal makes the quality denominator especially visible. Consider a fictional delivered fuel at US$120 per tonne purchase plus US$30 per tonne logistics, a lower heating value of 24 GJ per tonne and 80% useful-heat efficiency. The calculated heat cost is 150 / (24 × 0.80) = US$7.8125 per useful GJ, or US$28.125 per useful MWh using 3.6 GJ/MWh. If assumed logistics rise to US$50 per tonne, it becomes 170 / 19.2 = US$8.8542/GJ, or US$31.875/MWh. These are hypothetical inputs, not coal quotations from the IEA. Moisture, ash, losses and plant performance can change the comparison; metallurgical coal is not an interchangeable heating input.\n\nNow separate financing from the invoice. Assume an accepted metal lot of 1,000 tonnes with US$2,000/t metal, US$150/t conversion, US$100/t logistics and US$50/t other receiving expenses. The mutually exclusive components give US$2,300/t and US$2.3 million for the lot. These prices and quantities are invented examples, not offers from Alcoa, Hydro, Rio Tinto or Glencore. Assume the entire lot is funded for 30 days at 8% simple annual interest using a 365-day basis. Carrying finance is 2,300,000 × 0.08 × 30 / 365 = US$15,123.29, or US$15.1233 per tonne for that period.\n\nThe native chart isolates four financing cases. A 10% assumed increase in the whole landed invoice gives US$2,530/t and 30-day finance of US$16.6356/t. A separate increase in funding time from 30 to 60 days, with price unchanged, gives US$30.2466/t. Applying both assumptions gives US$33.2712/t. The difference from baseline is about US$18.1479/t, or US$18,147.95 for the 1,000-tonne lot. Price and days multiply; their percentage effects on finance are not simply additive. These scenarios neither predict shipment delays nor estimate the probability of future prices.\n\nThe holding period must represent actual funding exposure. Supplier credit can postpone cash outflow; a deposit can start exposure before delivery; customer collection can continue it after processing. For a steady operating business, inventory days, receivable days and payable days can describe a cash-conversion cycle, but each component needs its own cost or revenue basis. Applying a single stock price indiscriminately to receivables and payables would distort the amount funded. An advance payment is also not automatically the full shipment value. Use actual cash flows and avoid adding a separate safety-stock expense when that stock already appears in the funded balance.\n\nGlencore’s net-funding disclosure illustrates a reported inventory-price channel, but its company-defined net funding is different from net debt. It cannot calibrate the fictional buyer’s rate, credit days or balance. Higher replacement values can increase cash requirements without increasing physical stock. A price hedge may reduce market exposure while requiring collateral; physical delivery can still be delayed. Funding availability, counterparty terms and product qualification therefore sit beside commodity reference prices, rather than being inferred from them. A low purchase price is insufficient if the material cannot be used or the buyer cannot finance the payment schedule.\n\nComparing procurement options should preserve these separate mechanisms. A longer contract can improve supply visibility but expose a different price formula; a nearer caster can shorten a route but require qualification; a restart can increase equipment availability without guaranteeing a finished product; a fuel switch can lower a modeled energy cost while needing capital and maintenance changes. Assess each option against the same accepted product or useful service, time period and cash boundary. Do not double-count a logistics saving that is already embedded in a delivered quotation, or label a financing saving as a measured reduction in smelting cost.\n\nThe next evidence is contract-specific: dated quotes, energy and quality bases, usable output, shipment and acceptance dates, ownership, deposits, credit terms and funding rates. This analysis uses evidence available through October 9 and examines procurement planning for the remainder of 2026–2027, with later contract starts separately identified. Its arithmetic is deterministic and has no calibrated probability distribution or confidence interval. Taxes, foreign exchange, hedges, storage, equipment investment and losses are excluded from the numerical cases unless stated. The purpose is a reproducible cost decomposition, preserving observed disclosures, conditional plans and analytical assumptions as distinct evidence.\n\nTechnical and economic analysis\n\nAnalysis as of: 2026-10-09\n\nEvidence cutoff: 2026-10-09\n\nOutlook horizon: 2026–2027\n\nIllustrative sensitivity\n\nIllustrative financing cost of one metal lot\n\nAssumed full-lot funding: 1,000 tonnes at USD 2,300/t, 8% simple annual interest, 365-day basis. Whole landed invoice +10% and funding duration 60 days are independent sensitivities, not company prices, annual costs or forecasts.\n\nThese calculations illustrate stated assumptions; they are not observations or a calibrated forecast.\n\nBaseline: 30 days: 15.1233 USD per accepted tonne for the stated funding period\n\nInvoice +10%: 30 days: 16.6356 USD per accepted tonne for the stated funding period\n\nUnchanged invoice: 60 days: 30.2466 USD per accepted tonne for the stated funding period\n\nInvoice +10%: 60 days: 33.2712 USD per accepted tonne for the stated funding period","category":"energy","region":"world","topics":["technical-analysis","mining","working-capital","raw-material-costs"],"eventDate":"2026-10-09","eventDateBasis":"analysis-as-of-date","publishedAt":"2026-10-09T20:23:17Z","modifiedAt":"2026-10-09T20:23:17Z","publicationBasis":"first-publication","preparedAt":"2026-10-09T20:13:29Z","sourcePublishedAt":"2026-08-05","translatedAt":null,"sources":[{"name":"Glencore — 2026 Half-Year Report","url":"https://www.glencore.com/media-and-insights/news/2026-half-year-report","publishedAt":"2026-08-05","licence":"Copyright Glencore; no open reuse licence. Terms prohibit scraping and public reproduction or translation of source content. Sparse attributed facts in original reporting only; no source prose, media or datasets reproduced.","licenseUrl":"https://www.glencore.com/en/terms/terms-of-use","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"Glencore — 2026 Half-Year Report; original Wellficent reporting and analysis, not an endorsement."},{"name":"Alcoa — Portland powers ahead with 380 pots","url":"https://www.alcoa.com/australia/en/news/newsletter-stories/releases?id=2026%2F09%2Fportland-powers-ahead-with-380-pots","publishedAt":"2026-09-15","licence":"Copyright Alcoa; no open reuse licence. Independent factual reporting; no source prose or media reproduced.","licenseUrl":"https://www.alcoa.com/global/en/general/legal-notices","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"Alcoa — Portland powers ahead with 380 pots; original Wellficent reporting and analysis, not an endorsement."},{"name":"Hydro — Hydro and Statkraft sign long-term power contract","url":"https://www.hydro.com/en/global/media/news/2026/hydro-and-statkraft-sign-long-term-power-contract/","publishedAt":"2026-08-24","licence":"Copyright Hydro; no open reuse licence. Independent factual reporting; no source prose or media reproduced.","licenseUrl":"https://www.hydro.com/en/global/legal-notice-terms-and-conditions/","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"Hydro — Hydro and Statkraft sign long-term power contract; original Wellficent reporting and analysis, not an endorsement."},{"name":"Alcoa — 10-year conditional Equus gas sales agreement","url":"https://www.alcoa.com/australia/en/news/releases?id=2026%2F08%2Falcoa-signs-10-year-gas-sales-deal-with-equus-energy&year=y2026","publishedAt":"2026-08-19","licence":"Copyright Alcoa; no open reuse licence. Independent factual reporting; no source prose or media reproduced.","licenseUrl":"https://www.alcoa.com/global/en/general/legal-notices","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"Alcoa — 10-year conditional Equus gas sales agreement; original Wellficent reporting and analysis, not an endorsement."},{"name":"Rio Tinto — RevoCast aluminium billet supply agreement","url":"https://www.riotinto.com/en/news/releases/2026/rio-tinto-and-revocast-partner-to-expand-low-carbon-aluminium-billet-supply-in-north-america","publishedAt":"2026-09-28","licence":"Copyright Rio Tinto; website reproduction restricted to unaltered noncommercial content with acknowledgement. Independent factual reporting; no source prose or media reproduced.","licenseUrl":"https://www.riotinto.com/utility/terms-conditions","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"Rio Tinto — RevoCast aluminium billet supply agreement; original Wellficent reporting and analysis, not an endorsement."},{"name":"IEA — Coal Mid-Year Update 2026, overview","url":"https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-mid-year-update-2026","publishedAt":"2026-09-10","licence":"CC BY 4.0; excludes third-party material labelled separately.","licenseUrl":"https://www.iea.org/terms/creative-commons-cc-licenses","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"IEA (2026), Coal Mid-Year Update 2026, IEA, Paris, https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-mid-year-update-2026, Licence: CC BY 4.0. This is a work derived by Wellficent from IEA material and Wellficent is solely liable and responsible for this derived work. The derived work is not endorsed by the IEA or its Member countries in any manner."},{"name":"IEA — Coal Mid-Year Update 2026, trade chapter","url":"https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/567e2760-0394-4d51-a74b-d3343c7b389d/CoalMid-YearUpdate2026.pdf","publishedAt":"2026-09-10","licence":"CC BY 4.0; excludes third-party material labelled separately.","licenseUrl":"https://www.iea.org/terms/creative-commons-cc-licenses","checkedAt":"2026-10-09","attribution":"IEA (2026), Coal Mid-Year Update 2026, IEA, Paris, https://www.iea.org/reports/coal-mid-year-update-2026, Licence: CC BY 4.0. This is a work derived by Wellficent from IEA material and Wellficent is solely liable and responsible for this derived work. The derived work is not endorsed by the IEA or its Member countries in any manner."}],"translations":{"en":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","tr":"https://wellficent.com/tr/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","ar":"https://wellficent.com/ar/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","fr":"https://wellficent.com/fr/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","es":"https://wellficent.com/es/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","ru":"https://wellficent.com/ru/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis","pt":"https://wellficent.com/pt/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-procurement-working-capital-analysis"},"corrections":[],"locations":[],"type":"analysis","analysis":{"kind":"technical-economic","asOf":"2026-10-09","evidenceCutoff":"2026-10-09","horizon":"2026–2027","chart":{"kind":"illustrative","unit":"USD per accepted tonne per funding period","title":{"en":"Illustrative financing cost of one metal lot","tr":"Bir metal partisinin varsayımsal finansman maliyeti","ar":"تكلفة تمويل افتراضية لدفعة معدن","fr":"Coût de financement illustratif d’un lot de métal","es":"Coste ilustrativo de financiación de un lote metálico","ru":"Условная стоимость финансирования партии металла","pt":"Custo ilustrativo de financiamento de um lote metálico"},"unitLabel":{"en":"USD per accepted tonne for the stated funding period","tr":"Belirtilen finansman dönemi için kabul edilmiş ton başına USD","ar":"USD لكل طن مقبول خلال فترة التمويل المحددة","fr":"USD par tonne acceptée pour la période indiquée","es":"USD por tonelada aceptada durante el periodo indicado","ru":"USD на принятую тонну за указанный срок","pt":"USD por tonelada aceita no período indicado"},"note":{"en":"Assumed full-lot funding: 1,000 tonnes at USD 2,300/t, 8% simple annual interest, 365-day basis. Whole landed invoice +10% and funding duration 60 days are independent sensitivities, not company prices, annual costs or forecasts.","tr":"Varsayımsal tam parti finansmanı: 1.000 ton, 2.300 USD/ton, yıllık basit %8 faiz, 365 gün temeli. Tüm teslim faturası +%10 ve 60 günlük süre bağımsız duyarlılıktır; şirket fiyatı, yıllık maliyet veya öngörü değildir.","ar":"افتراض تمويل الدفعة الكاملة: 1,000 طن بسعر 2,300 USD/طن وفائدة سنوية بسيطة 8% وأساس 365 يوما. زيادة الفاتورة كاملة 10% ومدة 60 يوما حساسيتان مستقلتان، وليستا أسعار شركة أو تكلفة سنوية أو توقعا.","fr":"Financement intégral supposé : 1 000 tonnes à 2 300 USD/t, intérêt annuel simple de 8%, base 365 jours. Facture entière +10% et durée de 60 jours : sensibilités indépendantes, ni prix d’entreprise, ni coûts annuels, ni prévisions.","es":"Financiación completa supuesta: 1.000 toneladas a 2.300 USD/t, interés simple anual 8%, base 365 días. Factura completa +10% y plazo de 60 días son sensibilidades independientes, no precios empresariales, costes anuales ni previsiones.","ru":"Условное полное финансирование: 1 000 тонн по 2 300 USD/т, простые годовые 8%, база 365 дней. Рост всего счёта на 10% и срок 60 дней — независимые проверки чувствительности, не цены компаний, годовые затраты или прогнозы.","pt":"Financiamento integral suposto: 1.000 toneladas a 2.300 USD/t, juros simples anuais de 8%, base 365 dias. Fatura inteira +10% e prazo de 60 dias são sensibilidades independentes, não preços empresariais, custos anuais ou previsões."},"rows":[{"label":{"en":"Baseline: 30 days","tr":"Başlangıç: 30 gün","ar":"الأساس: 30 يوما","fr":"Base : 30 jours","es":"Base: 30 días","ru":"База: 30 дней","pt":"Base: 30 dias"},"value":15.123287671232877},{"label":{"en":"Invoice +10%: 30 days","tr":"Fatura +%10: 30 gün","ar":"الفاتورة +10%: 30 يوما","fr":"Facture +10% : 30 jours","es":"Factura +10%: 30 días","ru":"Счёт +10%: 30 дней","pt":"Fatura +10%: 30 dias"},"value":16.635616438356163},{"label":{"en":"Unchanged invoice: 60 days","tr":"Sabit fatura: 60 gün","ar":"الفاتورة ثابتة: 60 يوما","fr":"Facture inchangée : 60 jours","es":"Factura sin cambio: 60 días","ru":"Неизменный счёт: 60 дней","pt":"Fatura inalterada: 60 dias"},"value":30.246575342465754},{"label":{"en":"Invoice +10%: 60 days","tr":"Fatura +%10: 60 gün","ar":"الفاتورة +10%: 60 يوما","fr":"Facture +10% : 60 jours","es":"Factura +10%: 60 días","ru":"Счёт +10%: 60 дней","pt":"Fatura +10%: 60 dias"},"value":33.271232876712325}]}},"relatedArticles":[{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-portland-pot-restart","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-portland-pot-restart","title":"Portland reaches 380 operating pots, putting restart economics behind aluminium supply","language":"en"},{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-norway-power-contract","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-norway-power-contract","title":"Hydro secures future Norwegian power volume without disclosing a tariff","language":"en"},{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-equus-refinery-gas","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-equus-refinery-gas","title":"Alcoa’s conditional Equus gas agreement ties refinery supply to project delivery","language":"en"},{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-revocast-billet-delivery","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-revocast-billet-delivery","title":"Rio Tinto and RevoCast put regional billet conversion into the supply equation","language":"en"},{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-coal-delivered-energy","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-coal-delivered-energy","title":"IEA coal update makes delivered energy the relevant procurement comparison","language":"en"},{"canonicalSlug":"2026-cost-chain-mining-glencore-inventory-funding","url":"https://wellficent.com/en/news/2026-cost-chain-mining-glencore-inventory-funding","title":"Glencore’s inventory funding shows how commodity prices reach working capital","language":"en"}],"image":{"url":"https://wellficent.com/assets/editorial/cost-chain-mining-2026.webp","width":1536,"height":1024,"alt":"Conceptual metal billet and coil warehouse beside a bulk cargo terminal and freight rail line.","credit":"Wellficent · AI-generated conceptual illustration made with ImageGen; not a documentary photograph.","licenseUrl":"https://wellficent.com/assets/editorial/cost-chain-illustrations-rights.txt"}}