6-K
RIO TINTO LTD (RTNTF)
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, DC 20549
FORM 6-K
REPORT OF FOREIGN PRIVATE ISSUER
PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-16 OR 15D-16 UNDER
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Month of February 2023
| Commission file number: 001-10533 | Commission file number: 001-34121 |
|---|---|
| Rio Tinto plc | Rio Tinto Limited |
| ABN 96 004 458 404 | |
| (Translation of registrant’s name into English) | (Translation of registrant’s name into English) |
| 6 St. James’s Square | Level 43, 120 Collins Street |
| London, SW1Y 4AD, United Kingdom | Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia |
| (Address of principal executive offices) | (Address of principal executive offices) |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F:
Form 20-F ☒ Form 40-F ☐
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1): ☐
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7): ☐
EXHIBITS
99.1Stock Exchange announcement dated 1 February 2023 entitled ‘Total voting rights and issued capital’
99.8Stock Exchange announcement dated 22 February 2023 entitled ‘Our approach to climate change 2022’
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrants have duly caused this report to be signed on their behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorised.
| Rio Tinto plc | Rio Tinto Limited | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| (Registrant) | (Registrant) | ||
| By | /s/ Steve Allen | By | /s/ Steve Allen |
| Name | Steve Allen | Name | Steve Allen |
| Title | Company Secretary | Title | Joint Company Secretary |
| Date | 1 March 2023 | Date | 1 March 2023 |
Document
| EXHIBIT 99.1<br><br>Notice to LSE | | --- || 1 February 2023 | | --- |
Total voting rights and issued capital
In accordance with the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rule 5.6.1R, Rio Tinto plc notifies the market that as of 31 January 2023:
1.Rio Tinto plc’s issued share capital comprised 1,255,854,921 Ordinary shares of 10p each, each with one vote.
2.6,098,083 ordinary shares of 10p each are held in treasury. These shares are not taken into consideration in relation to the payment of dividends and voting at shareholder meetings.
Accordingly the total number of voting rights in Rio Tinto plc is 1,249,756,838. This figure may be used by shareholders (and others with notification obligations) as the denominator for the calculation by which they will determine if they are required to notify their interest in, or a change to their interest in, Rio Tinto plc under the FCA’s Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules.
Note:
As at the date of this announcement:
(a)Rio Tinto plc has also issued one Special Voting Share of 10p and one DLC Dividend Share of 10p in connection with its dual listed companies (‘DLC’) merger with Rio Tinto Limited which was designed to place the shareholders of both companies in substantially the same position as if they held shares in a single enterprise owning all of the assets of both companies;
(b)the Special Voting Share facilitates joint voting by shareholders of Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited on joint electorate resolutions; and
(c)there are 371,216,214 publicly held Rio Tinto Limited shares in issue which do not form part of the share capital of Rio Tinto plc.
LEI: 213800YOEO5OQ72G2R82
Classification: 2.5 Total number of voting rights and capital disclosed under article 15 of the Transparency Directive
| Contacts | Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Media Relations, UK<br><br>Matthew Klar<br><br>M+ 44 7796 630 637<br><br><br><br>David Outhwaite<br><br>M +44 7787 597 493<br><br><br><br>Media Relations, Americas<br><br>Simon Letendre<br><br>M +514 796 4973<br><br><br><br>Malika Cherry<br><br>M +1 418 592 7293<br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, UK<br><br>Menno Sanderse<br><br>M: +44 7825 195 178<br><br><br><br>David Ovington<br><br>M +44 7920 010 978<br><br><br><br>Clare Peever<br><br>M +44 7788 967 877 | Media Relations, Australia<br><br>Matt Chambers<br><br>M +61 433 525 739<br><br><br><br>Jesse Riseborough<br><br>M +61 436 653 412<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, Australia<br><br>Tom Gallop<br><br>M +61 439 353 948<br><br><br><br>Amar Jambaa<br><br>M +61 472 865 948 | |
| Rio Tinto plc<br><br>6 St James’s Square<br><br>London SW1Y 4AD<br><br>United Kingdom<br><br><br><br>T +44 20 7781 2000<br><br>Registered in England<br><br>No. 719885 | Rio Tinto Limited<br><br>Level 43, 120 Collins Street<br><br>Melbourne 3000<br><br>Australia<br><br><br><br>T +61 3 9283 3333<br><br>Registered in Australia<br><br>ABN 96 004 458 404 |
This announcement is authorised for release to the market by Steve Allen, Rio Tinto’s Group Company Secretary.
riotinto.com
| Notice to LSE Page 2 of 2 |
|---|
Document
| EXHIBIT 99.2<br><br>Notice to LSE |
|---|
Rio Tinto expresses its gratitude to search crews for locating missing capsule
01 February 2023
PERTH, Australia--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Rio Tinto expresses its gratitude to Western Australia’s Department of Fire and Emergency Services for coordinating the successful search effort to locate a missing capsule lost while in transit from the company’s Gudai-Darri iron ore mine in the Pilbara, Western Australia.
Rio Tinto would also like to thank the specialist search crews from the Australian Defence Force, the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency and the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, as well as all other support agencies, for their crucial role in the search and recovery efforts.
Rio Tinto Iron Ore Chief Executive Simon Trott said, “We are incredibly grateful for the hard work of everyone involved in finding the missing capsule.
“While the recovery of the capsule is a great testament to the skill and tenacity of the search team, the fact is it should never have been lost in the first place. I’d like to apologise to the wider community of Western Australia for the concern it has generated.
“We are taking this incident very seriously and are undertaking a full and thorough investigation into how it happened.
“This sort of incident is extremely rare in our industry, which is why we need to investigate it thoroughly and learn what we can to ensure it doesn’t happen again. As part of our investigation, we will be assessing whether our processes and protocols, including the use of specialist contractors to package and transport radioactive materials, are appropriate.”
Notes to editors
The device involved is an industrial gauge which is commonly used in the mining industry. In this instance it was being used at our Gudai-Darri mine site to measure iron ore feed in the crushing circuit of the fixed plant.
The capsule is small (6mm diameter, 8mm long), round and stainless steel, and forms part of a level sensor (gauge) that is used in some fixed plant assets.
The gauge, packed by a specialist radioactive materials handler, was collected by a transport contractor from the Gudai-Darri mine site on 12 January.
| Contacts | Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Media Relations, UK<br><br>Matthew Klar<br><br>M +44 7796 630 637<br><br><br><br>David Outhwaite<br><br>M +44 7787 597 493<br><br><br><br>Media Relations, Americas<br><br>Simon Letendre<br><br>M +1 514 796 4973<br><br><br><br>Malika Cherry<br><br>M +1 418 592 7293<br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, UK<br><br>Menno Sanderse<br><br>M +44 7825 195 178<br><br><br><br>David Ovington<br><br>M +44 7920 010 978<br><br><br><br>Clare Peever<br><br>M +44 7788 967 877 | Media Relations, Australia<br><br>Matt Chambers<br><br>M +61 433 525 739<br><br><br><br>Jesse Riseborough<br><br>M +61 436 653 412<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, Australia<br><br>Tom Gallop<br><br>M +61 439 353 948<br><br><br><br>Amar Jambaa<br><br>M +61 472 865 948 | |
| Rio Tinto plc<br><br>6 St James’s Square<br><br>London SW1Y 4AD<br><br>United Kingdom<br><br><br><br>T +44 20 7781 2000<br><br>Registered in England<br><br>No. 719885 | Rio Tinto Limited<br><br>Level 43, 120 Collins Street<br><br>Melbourne 3000<br><br>Australia<br><br><br><br>T +61 3 9283 3333<br><br>Registered in Australia<br><br>ABN 96 004 458 404 |
riotinto.com
Document
| EXHIBIT 99.3<br><br>Notice to LSE |
|---|
Rio Tinto and Marubeni partner to create stronger and more responsible Aluminium supply chains
16 February 2023
MELBOURNE, Australia--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Global miner Rio Tinto and Japanese trader and business conglomerate Marubeni Corporation have agreed a first sale under a new strategic Collaboration Agreement to secure a sustainable and reliable supply of Rio Tinto’s Responsible Aluminium products to Japanese downstream manufacturers.
The first sale is a batch of Rio Tinto’s RenewAlTM high purity aluminium, from the renewably powered New Zealand Aluminium Smelters (NZAS), to a major Japanese motorcycle manufacturer committed to reducing carbon emissions throughout its supply chains and manufacturing process.
The agreement, the first of its kind in Japan and the Asia-Pacific region, is focused on providing downstream industry with a simple, integrated way to achieve ESG-related goals and requirements, such as reducing carbon footprints, disclosing lifecycle assessment (LCA), and sourcing responsibly. It will also provide strong long-term security of supply at a time of growing supply-chain risks.
It combines Rio Tinto’s suite of Responsible Aluminium products - which include RenewAlTM, the industry’s first certified low carbon aluminium, Aluminium Stewardship Initiative (ASI) certified aluminium, and the digital traceability platform START - with Marubeni’s extensive trading network, commercial capability and carbon credit mechanism, Neutr-AlTM, which will be offered as part of the collaboration.
Tolga Egrilmezer, Rio Tinto Head of Sales & Marketing, said “We are excited to be a part of the first producer-trading house marketing partnership focused on delivering sustainability throughout the aluminium supply chain.
“Consumers want to know more about the products they buy and be assured that they have been produced responsibly and sustainably. By working with partners like Marubeni, we can help our downstream customers in the aluminium value chain meet this growing consumer demand, while at the same time advancing our commitment to decarbonise our product value chains.”
Marubeni Chief Operating Officer, Metals & Mineral Resources Division Daisuke Tsuchiya said “Marubeni's Mid-Term Management Strategy GC 2024 positions green strategy as a fundamental platform to enhance corporate value. Aluminium-related business is an area of focus within this green strategy to enable a transition to a decarbonised society. Through this collaboration, Marubeni will contribute to creating a decarbonised society by supplying responsible aluminium, produced by Rio Tinto, to various customers through Marubeni’s interface, which has been built up over through the company's many years of aluminium trading.”
Notes to editors
Rio Tinto
Rio Tinto is an industry leader in the supply of responsibly produced materials, including in responsible aluminium production.
In 2016, Rio Tinto launched RenewAlTM, the world’s first certified low CO2 primary aluminium brand. It has helped to pioneer responsible production standards for the global industry as a founding member of the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative (ASI), becoming the first producer to offer ASI Aluminium in 2018. Learn more at www.aluminium-stewardship.org.
In 2021, Rio Tinto launched START, a new standard in transparency, traceability and provenance. Using secure blockchain technology, START provides key environmental, social and governance (ESG) information about how Rio Tinto products were made. It covers fourteen criteria: global warming potential, water management, waste management, energy sources, air emissions, biodiversity, land management, recycled content, safety performance, community investment, third-party assessments, ethics & compliance training, diversity in leadership and our whistleblower programme. Through START, Rio Tinto empowers its customers and their customers, to make a more sustainable choice.
Marubeni
Marubeni Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries use their broad business networks, both within Japan and overseas, to import and export (including third country trading), as well as conduct domestic business, across wide-ranging fields. These include metals & mineral resources (including in aluminium), lifestyle, ICT business & logistics, food, agri business, forest products, chemicals, energy, power, infrastructure project, aerospace & ship, finance, leasing & real estate business, construction, industrial machinery & mobility, next generation business development and next generation corporate development. Additionally, the Marubeni Group offers a variety of services, makes internal and external investments, and is involved in resource development throughout all of the above industries.
Neutr-AlTM is a carbon credit mechanism Marubeni offers to customers where it is applicable. It helps offset greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the aluminium supply chain including transportation activities. Such carbon credits are created by GHG reduction and/or absorption activities in Japan and abroad.
| Contacts | Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Media Relations, UK<br><br>Matthew Klar<br><br>M +44 7796 630 637<br><br><br><br>David Outhwaite<br><br>M +44 7787 597 493<br><br><br><br>Media Relations, Americas<br><br>Simon Letendre<br><br>M +1 514 796 4973<br><br><br><br>Malika Cherry<br><br>M +1 418 592 7293<br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, UK<br><br>Menno Sanderse<br><br>M +44 7825 195 178<br><br><br><br>David Ovington<br><br>M +44 7920 010 978<br><br><br><br>Clare Peever<br><br>M +44 7788 967 877 | Media Relations, Australia<br><br>Matt Chambers<br><br>M +61 433 525 739<br><br><br><br>Jesse Riseborough<br><br>M +61 436 653 412<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, Australia<br><br>Tom Gallop<br><br>M +61 439 353 948<br><br><br><br>Amar Jambaa<br><br>M +61 472 865 948 | |
| Rio Tinto plc<br><br>6 St James’s Square<br><br>London SW1Y 4AD<br><br>United Kingdom<br><br><br><br>T +44 20 7781 2000<br><br>Registered in England<br><br>No. 719885 | Rio Tinto Limited<br><br>Level 43, 120 Collins Street<br><br>Melbourne 3000<br><br>Australia<br><br><br><br>T +61 3 9283 3333<br><br>Registered in Australia<br><br>ABN 96 004 458 404 |
riotinto.com
Document
| EXHIBIT 99.4<br><br>Notice to LSE |
|---|
Road to a Greener Future: Rio Tinto Partners with BMW Group on Premium Aluminium Car Parts
21 February 2023
LONDON--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Gone are the days when premium car buyers simply looked for speed, style, and luxury. Today, there's increasing interest in the origin, sustainability and emissions profile of the materials used to build their cars.
The new mantra for the high-end auto industry is “green is the new black.” From the leather used for upholstery to the metals used for engine parts, premium car buyers are increasingly demanding vehicles made from responsibly sourced materials.
This fundamental shift in the automotive market has led to the creation of a new, innovative partnership between Rio Tinto and the BMW Group, leaders in their respective industries who share a common goal of developing more responsible, sustainable, traceable and secure supply chains.
Under this new partnership, Rio Tinto plans to provide responsibly sourced aluminium to the BMW Group’s vehicle production plant in Spartanburg, South Carolina, for use in body components from 2024.
Low-carbon primary aluminium from Rio Tinto’s hydro-powered operations in Canada, combined with recycled content, could generate a reduction of up to 70 percent in CO2 emissions compared to the BMW Group’s benchmark for aluminium.
The two companies have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which will see technical experts working together on how to embed these low-carbon solutions into the BMW Group’s supply chain while ensuring the highest standards of vehicle quality are maintained. The partnership provides for the use of aluminium produced using ELYSIS™ on BMW production vehicles. ELYSIS™ is the world’s first carbon free smelting technology for aluminium as it enables the production of aluminium metal without direct carbon dioxide emissions during the smelting process, instead emitting pure oxygen.
Rio Tinto and the BMW Group will also work to deploy START from Rio Tinto. START provides supply chain traceability to customers and consumers with information about provenance and ESG standards.
Rio Tinto Chief Commercial Officer Alf Barrios said: “Rio Tinto’s world-leading position in responsible aluminium production means we can offer innovative solutions to our customers on their decarbonisation journey toward net zero. As global demand for responsibly sourced materials continues to grow, automakers are increasingly looking to partner with suppliers who share their commitment to traceability and sustainability. Rio Tinto is proud to play a role in helping to drive a greener future in the premium car industry through this partnership with the BMW Group and we look forward to deepening our ties with the automotive industry in the years ahead.”
BMW AG member of the Board of Management, responsible for Purchasing and Supplier Network, Joachim Post, said: “We have clear goals for lowering CO2 emissions in the supply chain. By using innovative materials, we can reduce our vehicles’ carbon footprint – even before handing them over to customers. The agreement to supply low-carbon aluminium is based on several pillars: in addition to hydroelectric power and secondary material, we also want to lead the automotive industry by ramping up our use of aluminium with no direct CO2 emissions from the smelting process.”
The Honourable François-Philippe Champagne, Canada’s Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry, said: “Canada is a global destination of choice for low-carbon investment. This exciting partnership between BMW and Rio Tinto is proof that Canada is well positioned to seize the economic benefits of the clean economy. I am proud to see that low carbon Canadian aluminum will be going into BMW’s vehicles. Canada will continue to enhance our competitive advantages—abundance of critical minerals, skilled labour, clean energy, proximity to markets—to grow our economy and to support made-in-Canada innovation.”
Notes to editors
ELYSIS is a technology company created through a partnership between aluminium industry leaders Rio Tinto and Alcoa, with support from Apple and the governments of Canada and Quebec. ELYSIS is scaling up a revolutionary technology that enables the production of metal without direct carbon dioxide emissions during the aluminium smelting process, instead emitting pure oxygen. The technology uses inert anodes to replace the carbon anodes traditionally used during electrolysis, the process used to make primary aluminium. Learn more at www.elysis.com.
In 2021, Rio Tinto launched START, a new standard in transparency, traceability and provenance for the aluminium industry. Using secure blockchain technology, START provides key information about how Rio Tinto aluminium was made, covering fourteen criteria: global warming potential, water management, waste management, energy sources, air emissions, biodiversity, land management, recycled content, safety performance, community investment, third-party assessments, ethics and compliance training, diversity in leadership and Rio Tinto’s whistleblower programme. Through START, Rio Tinto empowers its customers and theirs to make a more sustainable choice.
| Contacts | Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com | |
|---|---|---|
| Media Relations, UK<br><br>Matthew Klar<br><br>M +44 7796 630 637<br><br><br><br>David Outhwaite<br><br>M +44 7787 597 493<br><br><br><br>Media Relations, Americas<br><br>Simon Letendre<br><br>M +1 514 796 4973<br><br><br><br>Malika Cherry<br><br>M +1 418 592 7293<br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, UK<br><br>Menno Sanderse<br><br>M +44 7825 195 178<br><br><br><br>David Ovington<br><br>M +44 7920 010 978<br><br><br><br>Clare Peever<br><br>M +44 7788 967 877 | Media Relations, Australia<br><br>Matt Chambers<br><br>M +61 433 525 739<br><br><br><br>Jesse Riseborough<br><br>M +61 436 653 412<br><br><br><br>Alyesha Anderson<br><br>M +61 434 868 118<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, Australia<br><br>Tom Gallop<br><br>M +61 439 353 948<br><br><br><br>Amar Jambaa<br><br>M +61 472 865 948 | |
| Rio Tinto plc<br><br>6 St James’s Square<br><br>London SW1Y 4AD<br><br>United Kingdom<br><br><br><br>T +44 20 7781 2000<br><br>Registered in England<br><br>No. 719885 | Rio Tinto Limited<br><br>Level 43, 120 Collins Street<br><br>Melbourne 3000<br><br>Australia<br><br><br><br>T +61 3 9283 3333<br><br>Registered in Australia<br><br>ABN 96 004 458 404 |
riotinto.com
ex05d22changestoreserves
Notice to ASX/LSE 22 February 2023 Notice to ASX/LSE Page 1 of 6 Changes to Ore Reserves and Mineral Resources Rio Tinto has today announced to the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) changes in Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves to support its 2022 annual reporting1, including: • Increased Ore Reserves at the Rio Tinto Kennecott (RTK) copper operations Bingham Canyon deposit in Utah. • Increased Mineral Resources at the Winu copper project in Western Australia. • Revised resource classification for the Mineral Resources at the QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) Petriky mineral sands deposit in Madagascar. • Revised classification for the Ore Reserves at the Richards Bay Minerals (RBM) Zulti South mineral sands deposit in South Africa. Supporting information relating to the changes of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves is set out in the Table 1 Release and its appendices. This release provides a summary of those changes. Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves are quoted in this release on a 100 percent basis. Mineral Resources are reported in addition to Ore Reserves. The figures used to calculate Mineral Resources and Ore Reserve are often more precise than the rounded numbers shown in the tables, hence small differences may result if the calculations are repeated using the tabulated figures. These changes will be included in Rio Tinto’s 2022 Annual Report, to be released to the market on 22 February 2023 (London time) / 23 February 2023 (Melbourne time), which will set out in full Rio Tinto’s Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves position as at 31 December 2022, and Rio Tinto’s interests. Rio Tinto Kennecott Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves for the RTK Bingham Canyon open pit are presented in Table A and Table B2. Ore Reserves tonnes have increased by 70% as a result of the completion of a pre-feasibility study for the Apex pit wall pushback which has enabled the conversion of Mineral Resources plus previously unclassified mineralisation to Ore Reserves. Mineral Resources have decreased as a result of this conversion. Winu Mineral Resources for the Winu copper project are presented in Table C3. This updated Mineral Resource represents a 19% increase in tonnage, no change in copper grade, a 12% increase in gold grade, a 19% increase in contained copper metal and a 33% increase in contained gold metal. The updated Mineral Resource is supported by the advancement of mining and processing studies and additional drilling information acquired since the release of the Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource published in the 2021 Rio Tinto Annual Report. There are no Ore Reserves reported for Winu. Winu continues to advance agreement making with host Traditional Owners, the Martu and Nyangumarta. Planned drilling, fieldwork and study activities continue to strengthen the development pathway ahead of applications for regulatory and other required approvals. 1 These Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves were reported in accordance with the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 (JORC Code) and the ASX Listing Rules in a release to the ASX dated 22 February 2023 titled “Ore Reserve and Mineral Resource updates: supporting information and Table 1 checklists” (Table 1 Release). Rio Tinto confirms that it is not aware of any new information or data that materially affects the information included in the Table 1 Release, that all material assumptions and technical parameters underpinning the estimates in the Table 1 Release continue to apply and have not materially changed, and that the form and context in which the Competent Persons’ findings are presented have not been materially modified. 2 The Competent Persons responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to Rio Tinto Kennecott Mineral Resources were Kim Schroeder and Pancho Rodriguez, who are Members of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). The Competent Person responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to Rio Tinto Kennecott Ore Reserves is Brady Pett (MAusIMM). 3 The Competent Person responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to Winu Mineral Resources was James Pocoe (MAusIMM). EXHIBIT 99.5
Notice to ASX/LSE Page 2 of 6 QIT Madagascar Minerals The Petriky Mineral Resources form part of the QMM Mineral Resources which are presented in Table D4. The previously reported Petriky Mineral Resource was classified as Indicated however it was re-classified to Inferred for the 2022 reporting period. The rationale to down-grade Petriky resources from Indicated to Inferred was a combination of development risk and delays in obtaining sufficient mineralogy and geotechnical data. Government permitting to recommence drilling in the Petriky sector has been delayed, increasing the risk of future resource development of Petriky, which has been identified as one of the alternatives to replace Mandena once depleted. There are no Ore Reserves reported for Petriky; Ore Reserves for QMM are for the Mandena deposit and are presented in the Rio Tinto 2022 Annual Report. Richards Bay Minerals The Zulti South Ore Reserves form part of the RBM Ore Reserves which are presented in Table E5. RBM Ore Reserve tonnes for 2022 include a change in classification for the Zulti South project from Proven Reserves to Probable Reserves. The change results from increased uncertainty in the modifying factors as a result of schedule delays, due to ongoing community and security challenges. The original project timelines have been affected. The project remains on full suspension. Any restart of project activities is dependent on the receipt of internal approvals, after which the classification for the Zulti South Ore Reserves would be reviewed. All Mineral Resources at Zulti South have been converted to Ore Reserves, thus there are no additional Mineral Resources reported. 4 The Competent Person responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to QIT Madagascar Minerals Mineral Resources was Adriaan Louw, who is a Member of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (SACNASP). 5 The Competent Person responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to Richards Bay Minerals Mineral Resources was Anton Cawthorn-Blazeby (MAusIMM). The Competent Person responsible for the information in the Table 1 Release that relates to Richards Bay Minerals Ore Reserves is Sinetemba Mnunu (MAusIMM).
Notice to ASX/LSE Page 3 of 6 Table A Rio Tinto Kennecott Copper Bingham Canyon Open Pit Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit (3) O/P 49 0.50 0.15 2.42 0.019 30 0.42 0.15 2.44 0.015 79 0.47 0.15 2.43 0.018 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo % Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit (3) 14 0.21 0.16 1.19 0.006 93 0.43 0.15 2.24 0.016 100.0 256 0.39 0.20 1.75 0.017 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Mineral Resources are reported on a dry in situ weight basis. 3. Bingham Canyon Open Pit Mineral Resource molybdenum grades interpolated from exploration drilling assays have been factored based on a long reconciliation history to blast hole and mill samples. Table B Rio Tinto Kennecott Copper Bingham Canyon Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 Type of mine(1) Proved Ore Reserves Probable Ore Reserves Total Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit(3) O/P 484 0.40 0.18 2.10 0.037 395 0.35 0.17 1.82 0.029 880 0.38 0.18 1.97 0.033 Average mill recovery % Rio Tinto interest Rio Tinto share Total Ore Reserves recoverable metal as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Cu Au Ag Mo % Mt Cu Moz Au Moz Ag Mt Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit(3) 87 69 72 59 100.0 2.890 3.406 40.386 0.172 541 0.44 0.17 2.22 0.029 1. Type of Mine: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Ore Reserves are reported as dry mill feed tonnes. 3. Bingham Canyon Open Pit Ore Reserve molybdenum grades interpolated from exploration drilling assays have been factored based on a long reconciliation history to blast hole and mill samples.
Notice to ASX/LSE Page 4 of 6 Table C Winu Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Winu (Australia) O/P - - - - 222 0.45 0.35 2.73 222 0.45 0.35 2.73 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Winu (Australia) 499 0.38 0.33 1.98 721 0.40 0.34 2.21 100.0 608 0.40 0.30 2.26 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Mineral Resources are reported on a dry in situ weight basis. Table D QIT Madagascar Minerals Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon QMM (Madagascar) O/P 445 4.3 0.2 398 4.0 0.2 843 4.2 0.2 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon % Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon QMM (Madagascar) 596 3.9 0.2 1,439 4.1 0.2 80.0 1,470 4.1 0.2 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Titanium dioxide feedstock Mineral Resources are reported as dry in situ tonnes.
Notice to ASX/LSE Page 5 of 6 Table E Richards Bay Minerals Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 Type of mine(1) Proved Ore reserves Probable Ore Reserves Total Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon RBM (South Africa) O/P 552 1.6 0.2 732 3.1 0.4 1,284 2.4 0.3 Rio Tinto interest Rio Tinto share Total Ore Reserves Marketable product as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) % Mt Titanium Dioxide Feedstock Mt Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon RBM (South Africa) 74.0 10.4 2.5 1,393 2.3 0.3 1. Type of Mine: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. The marketable product (zircon at RBM and zirsil at QMM) is shown after all mining and processing losses. Titanium dioxide feedstock Ore Reserves are reported as dry in situ tonnes.
Appendix 4 Notice to ASX/LSE Page 6 of 6 Contacts Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com Media Relations, UK Matthew Klar M +44 7796 630 637 David Outhwaite M +44 7787 597 493 Media Relations, Americas Simon Letendre M +1 514 796 4973 Malika Cherry M +1 418 592 7293 Investor Relations, UK Menno Sanderse M +44 7825 195 178 David Ovington M +44 7920 010 978 Clare Peever M +44 7788 967 877 Media Relations, Australia Matt Chambers M +61 433 525 739 Jesse Riseborough M +61 436 653 412 Alyesha Anderson M +61 434 868 118 Investor Relations, Australia Tom Gallop M +61 439 353 948 Amar Jambaa M +61 472 865 948 Rio Tinto plc 6 St James’s Square London SW1Y 4AD United Kingdom T +44 20 7781 2000 Registered in England No. 719885 Rio Tinto Limited Level 43, 120 Collins Street Melbourne 3000 Australia T +61 3 9283 3333 Registered in Australia ABN 96 004 458 404 This announcement is authorised for release to the market by Steve Allen, Rio Tinto’s Group Company Secretary. riotinto.com
ex06d22reservessupport
Notice to ASX 22 February 2023 Notice to ASX Page 1 of 55 Ore Reserve and Mineral Resource updates: supporting information and Table 1 checklists Rio Tinto today announces changes in Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves to support its 2022 annual reporting, including: • Increased Ore Reserves at the Rio Tinto Kennecott (RTK) copper operations Bingham Canyon deposit in Utah. • Increased Mineral Resources at the Winu copper project in Western Australia. • Revised resource classification for the Mineral Resources at the QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) Petriky mineral sands deposit in Madagascar. • Revised classification for the Ore Reserves at the Richards Bay Minerals (RBM) Zulti South mineral sands deposit in South Africa. The changes in Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves are reported in accordance with the Australasian Code for Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 Edition (JORC Code) and the ASX Listing Rules. Supporting information relating to the changes of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves is set out in this release and its appendices. Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves are quoted in this release on a 100 percent basis. Mineral Resources are reported in addition to Ore Reserves. The figures used to calculate Mineral Resources and Ore Reserve are often more precise than the rounded numbers shown in the tables, hence small differences may result if the calculations are repeated using the tabulated figures. These changes will be included in Rio Tinto’s 2022 Annual Report, to be released to the market on 22 February 2023 (London time) / 23 February 2023 (Melbourne time), which will set out in full Rio Tinto’s Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves position as at 31 December 2022, and Rio Tinto’s interests. Rio Tinto Kennecott Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves for the RTK Bingham Canyon open pit are presented in Table A and Table B. Ore Reserves tonnes have increased by 70% as a result of the completion of a pre-feasibility study for the Apex pit wall pushback which has enabled the conversion of Mineral Resources plus previously unclassified mineralisation to Ore Reserves. Mineral Resources have decreased as a result of this conversion. Winu Mineral Resources for the Winu copper project are presented in Table C. This updated Mineral Resource represents a 19% increase in tonnage, no change in copper grade, a 12% increase in gold grade, a 19% increase in contained copper metal and a 33% increase in contained gold metal. The updated Mineral Resource is supported by the advancement of mining and processing studies and additional drilling information acquired since the release of the Indicated and Inferred Mineral Resource published in the 2021 Rio Tinto Annual Report. There are no Ore Reserves reported for Winu. Winu continues to advance agreement making with host Traditional Owners, the Martu and Nyangumarta. Planned drilling, fieldwork and study activities continue to strengthen the development pathway ahead of applications for regulatory and other required approvals. QIT Madagascar Minerals The Petriky Mineral Resources form part of the QMM Mineral Resources which are presented in Table D. The previously reported Petriky Mineral Resource was classified as Indicated however it was re-classified to Inferred for the 2022 reporting period. The rationale to down-grade Petriky resources from Indicated to Inferred was a combination of development risk and delays in obtaining sufficient mineralogy and geotechnical data. Government permitting to recommence drilling in the Petriky sector has been delayed, increasing the risk of future resource development of Petriky, which has been identified as one of the alternatives to replace Mandena once depleted. There are no Ore Reserves reported for Petriky; Ore Reserves for QMM are for the Mandena deposit and are presented in the Rio Tinto 2022 Annual Report. EXHIBIT 99.6
Notice to ASX Page 2 of 55 Richards Bay Minerals The Zulti South Ore Reserves form part of the RBM Ore Reserves which are presented in Table E. RBM Ore Reserve tonnes for 2022 include a change in classification for the Zulti South project from Proven Reserves to Probable Reserves. The change results from increased uncertainty in the modifying factors as a result of schedule delays, due to ongoing community and security challenges. The original project timelines have been affected. The project remains on full suspension. Any restart of project activities is dependent on the receipt of internal approvals, after which the classification for the Zulti South Ore Reserves would be reviewed. All Mineral Resources at Zulti South have been converted to Ore Reserves, thus there are no additional Mineral Resources reported.
Notice to ASX Page 3 of 55 Table A Rio Tinto Kennecott Copper Bingham Canyon Open Pit Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit (3) O/P 49 0.50 0.15 2.42 0.019 30 0.42 0.15 2.44 0.015 79 0.47 0.15 2.43 0.018 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo % Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit (3) 14 0.21 0.16 1.19 0.006 93 0.43 0.15 2.24 0.016 100.0 256 0.39 0.20 1.75 0.017 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Mineral Resources are reported on a dry in situ weight basis. 3. Bingham Canyon Open Pit Mineral Resource molybdenum grades interpolated from exploration drilling assays have been factored based on a long reconciliation history to blast hole and mill samples. Table B Rio Tinto Kennecott Copper Bingham Canyon Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 Type of mine(1) Proved Ore Reserves Probable Ore Reserves Total Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit(3) O/P 484 0.40 0.18 2.10 0.037 395 0.35 0.17 1.82 0.029 880 0.38 0.18 1.97 0.033 Average mill recovery % Rio Tinto interest Rio Tinto share Total Ore Reserves recoverable metal as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Cu Au Ag Mo % Mt Cu Moz Au Moz Ag Mt Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Bingham Canyon (US) - Bingham Open Pit(3) 87 69 72 59 100.0 2.890 3.406 40.386 0.172 541 0.44 0.17 2.22 0.029 1. Type of Mine: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Ore Reserves are reported as dry mill feed tonnes. 3. Bingham Canyon Open Pit Ore Reserve molybdenum grades interpolated from exploration drilling assays have been factored based on a long reconciliation history to blast hole and mill samples.
Notice to ASX Page 4 of 55 Table C Winu Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Winu (Australia) O/P - - - - 222 0.45 0.35 2.73 222 0.45 0.35 2.73 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Copper(2) Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Winu (Australia) 499 0.38 0.33 1.98 721 0.40 0.34 2.21 100.0 608 0.40 0.30 2.26 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Copper Mineral Resources are reported on a dry in situ weight basis. Table D QIT Madagascar Minerals Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 Likely mining method(1) Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Total Measured and Indicated Mineral as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Resources as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon QMM (Madagascar) O/P 445 4.3 0.2 398 4.0 0.2 843 4.2 0.2 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Rio Tinto interest Total Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon % Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon QMM (Madagascar) 596 3.9 0.2 1,439 4.1 0.2 80.0 1,470 4.1 0.2 1. Likely mining method: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. Titanium dioxide feedstock Mineral Resources are reported as dry in situ tonnes.
Notice to ASX Page 5 of 55 Table E Richards Bay Minerals Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 Type of mine(1) Proved Ore reserves Probable Ore Reserves Total Ore Reserves as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 as at 31 December 2022 Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon RBM (South Africa) O/P 552 1.6 0.2 732 3.1 0.4 1,284 2.4 0.3 Rio Tinto interest Rio Tinto share Total Ore Reserves Marketable product as at 31 December 2021 Tonnage Grade Titanium dioxide feedstock(2) % Mt Titanium Dioxide Feedstock Mt Zircon Mt % Ti Minerals % Zircon RBM (South Africa) 74.0 10.4 2.5 1,393 2.3 0.3 1. Type of Mine: O/P = open pit/surface. 2. The marketable product (zircon at RBM and zirsil at QMM) is shown after all mining and processing losses. Titanium dioxide feedstock Ore Reserves are reported as dry in situ tonnes.
Notice to ASX Page 6 of 55 Rio Tinto Kennecott - Bingham Canyon The RTK Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves are contained within the Bingham Canyon copper, gold, and molybdenum porphyry deposit and would be mined by a northernly expansion of the open pit located 41 km southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 1). The pre-feasibility study for the mine life extension comprises the addition of the Apex pushback in the north part of the current Bingham Canyon open pit. The pre-feasibility study was completed during 2022 and funds were approved to progress to the feasibility study stage. After the completion of the Apex pushback pre-feasibility study, 64% of total Mineral Resources of Rio Tinto Kennecott have been converted to Ore Reserves. Study work to date supports the expansion of the open pit primarily to the north with some additional deepening of the pit bottom and processing to refined copper, gold, silver and molybdenum concentrates utilising current RTK integrated facilities. The pre-feasibility study, including infill drilling, refined the mineralisation, geology, structure, geotechnical and metallurgical models of this area of the pit. These additional Ore Reserves can be mined under existing agreements and approvals. Additional tailings capacity was identified during the pre-feasibility study, allowing changes to the Apex ultimate wall. The additional tailings capacity provides for additional ore to be processed, allowing for more mining at depth and expanding the Apex cut from 250 Mt to 455 Mt. This additional ore material has lower copper grade but adds higher molybdenum grade to the Ore Reserves. Changes to Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves are shown in Table F and Table G. Figure 1 Property location map – Bingham Canyon
Notice to ASX Page 7 of 55 Table F Changes to Bingham Canyon open pit Mineral Resources Measured Mineral Resources Indicated Mineral Resources Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mineral Resources at 31 Dec 2021 121 0.46 0.24 2.14 0.019 129 0.32 0.16 1.40 0.016 Additions 49 0.50 0.15 2.42 0.019 30 0.42 0.15 2.44 0.015 Depletions 121 0.46 0.24 2.14 0.019 129 0.32 0.16 1.40 0.016 Mineral Resources at 31 Dec 2022 49 0.50 0.15 2.42 0.019 30 0.42 0.15 2.44 0.015 Inferred Mineral Resources Total Mineral Resources Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mineral Resources at 31 Dec 2021 6 0.29 0.14 1.19 0.003 256 0.39 0.20 1.75 0.017 Additions 8 0.16 0.17 1.19 0.008 87 0.44 0.15 2.31 0.017 Depletions 0 0.31 0.41 1.19 0.001 250 0.39 0.20 1.76 0.016 Mineral Resources at 31 Dec 2022 14 0.21 0.16 1.19 0.006 93 0.43 0.15 2.24 0.016 Table G Changes to Bingham Canyon open pit Ore Reserves Proven Ore Reserves Probable Ore Reserves Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Ore Reserves at 31 December 2021 341 0.44 0.17 2.06 0.034 199 0.44 0.19 2.50 0.019 Additions – Apex from Resource 121 0.47 0.24 2.14 0.019 129 0.32 0.16 1.40 0.016 Additions – Changes to Apex design 103 0.18 0.14 1.65 0.090 111 0.25 0.16 1.39 0.071 Depletions - Production 18 0.59 0.20 2.20 0.015 12 0.50 0.18 2.47 0.015 Depletions - Other 63 0.36 0.15 1.22 0.083 32 0.35 0.22 2.64 0.068 Ore Reserves at 31 December 2022 484 0.40 0.18 2.10 0.037 395 0.35 0.17 1.82 0.029 Total Ore Reserves Average mill recovery % Product Mt % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag % Mo Cu Au Ag Mo Mt Cu Moz Au Moz Ag Mt Mo Ore Reserves at 31 December 2021 541 0.44 0.17 2.22 0.029 89 70 74 57 2.062 1.971 27.089 0.087 Additions – Apex from Resource 250 0.39 0.20 1.76 0.017 84 67 69 61 0.820 1.088 9.834 0.027 Additions – Changes to Apex design 214 0.22 0.15 1.51 0.080 84 67 69 61 0.354 0.679 6.903 0.092 Depletions - Production 31 0.55 0.19 2.31 0.015 91 70 75 48 0.155 0.134 1.733 0.000 Depletions - Other 94 0.36 0.17 1.69 0.078 84 67 69 61 0.191 0.97 1.707 0.032 Ore Reserves at 31 December 2022 880 0.38 0.18 1.97 0.033 87 69 72 59 2.890 3.406 40.386 0.170 Summary of information to support Mineral Resources reporting – Bingham Canyon RTK open pit Mineral Resources are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 1 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.8 of the ASX Listing Rules. Geology and geological interpretation The Bingham Canyon deposit is located in the Bingham mining district southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah (Figure 1). The Bingham Canyon deposit is a classic porphyry copper deposit containing economic grades of copper, molybdenum, gold, and silver. Peripheral copper-gold skarns, lead-zinc fissures, and disseminated gold deposits are also associated with this porphyry system. The Bingham Canyon deposit primarily consists of three nested porphyry dike bodies intruded into an earlier equigranular granitic intrusion. The latter hosts the bulk of mineralisation. The igneous bodies were emplaced into a sedimentary sequence consisting of predominantly quartzites with several thick limestone units in the lower portion of the sequence and thin silty limestones throughout the quartzite sequence.
Notice to ASX Page 8 of 55 Drilling techniques; sampling and sub-sampling techniques; and sample analysis method The Bingham Canyon deposit is defined by 180 churn drill holes from 1910 to 1953 and 1,106 diamond core drill holes drilled from 1940 to the present comprising a total of 692,944 m of drilling. The latest pre- feasibility study was supported by 41 diamond drill holes and 18,314.7 m of drilling. All diamond core holes since nearly the inception of core drilling (D009) have been logged in detail for lithology, structure, alteration and mineralisation. In 1980, geotechnical characterization data was systematically collected. Since 1988, all core logging was standardized to a scale of 1:50. In 2005, geologic and geotechnical logging began being captured electronically and/or on paper. After December of 2016 all information has been captured electronically. Assays have been carried out on half core and split churn samples. Sample lengths vary from 0.3 m to 3.6 m, with 3 m being the most common. Assay techniques have varied over time but most recently use a combination of full acid digest with AES/MS finish and fire assay for gold and silver. The pre-feasibility study added 6,835 new individual assay samples from 18,314.7 m of core. Core assayed prior to 1990 was assayed by RTK’s internal laboratories. After 1990 all assays were completed by outside laboratories with documented internal and external quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) procedures maintained to present. Assays and their origin laboratory are stored in the Rio Tinto acQuire database. Original assay certificates are stored on Rio Tinto network servers. The current exploration QA/QC process was established in 1989. The control samples are as follows: • Duplicate samples of the second half of core are inserted every 40th sample. • Matrix matched pulp Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) are inserted every 20th sample. • Blank samples of barren quartzite are inserted every 40th sample. • Sample duplicates from the coarse reject material are assayed every 20th sample. Bingham Canyon has 15 CRMs for copper and molybdenum of varying metal concentrations representing the dominant lithology units present at Bingham Canyon including quartz monzonite porphyry, skarn, monzonite and quartzite. Three samples for gold from RTK’s former Barneys Canyon gold-silver mine are also used. These CRMs are inserted in the assay process for both exploration drill holes and blastholes. Assays are received electronically from the laboratory (ALS Chemex) and loaded into the Exploration acQuire database after being validated. A monthly QA/QC report is distributed for review and any follow up action requests required from the lab to meet validation thresholds. Assay results are checked from the laboratory on a by-hole basis, plotting duplicates, blanks and standards. Estimation methodology The Mineral Resource estimation used as the basis of the 31 December 2022 Mineral Resource statement was completed by Rio Tinto in 2022. Estimation has been carried out by Ordinary Kriging for economic elements. Density assignments are based on rock type and alteration domains. Grades for copper, gold, molybdenite and silver were estimated into parent blocks using Maptek™ Vulcan™ software. The model size is 15 mE x 15 mN x 15 mRL (50 foot cube). The major domains for estimation are lithology, grade zones, and kriging spatial domains (limb zones). The lithology and grade zone models were updated with the latest drill hole information. Assay samples are composited to 8 m lengths for each of the four metals and broken on lithology. Multiple estimation passes are used with varying search distances, composite, and domains selections: • Pass 1 and 2 - Ordinary kriging based on rock type, grade zone and limb zone. • Pass 3 - Blocks that are not estimated after Pass 1 and Pass 2, are populated with the mean (from Pass 1 and Pass 2) for that domain. Cut-off grades and modifying factors Reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction have been assessed through mining designs based on pre-feasibility open pit mining phase designs, optimised Life of Mine (LoM) production scheduling using variable economic margin cut-off grades based on performance of historical metallurgical ore types and operating cost projections and cash flow analysis including estimates for development and sustaining capital.
Notice to ASX Page 9 of 55 Criteria used for Mineral Resources classification The starting point for Mineral Resources classification is an assessment of the assay and drilling quality. Classification is determined by drill spacing and is performed in two steps: • Measured – Average spacing less than 91 m between drill holes. • Indicated – Average spacing between 91 m and 182 m. • Inferred – Average spacing greater than 182 m between drill holes. The second step is a manual refinement to smooth the classification coding and to account for isolated inconsistencies. Summary of information to support Ore Reserves reporting – Bingham Canyon The addition of Ore Reserves from the Apex pushback of the Bingham Canyon deposit is based on the Mineral Resource model for the deposit along with the pre-feasibility study completed in 2022. Ore Reserves are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 1 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.9 of the ASX Listing Rules. Economic assumptions and study outcomes Rio Tinto applies a common process to the generation of commodity price assumptions across the group. This involves generation of long-term price forecasts based on current sales contracts, industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends (this includes the bonus / penalty adjustments for quality). Exchange rates are also based on internal Rio Tinto modelling of expected future country exchange rates. Due to the commercial sensitivity of these assumptions, an explanation of the methodology used to determine these assumptions has been provided, rather than the actual figures. Apex pre-feasibility study mining production schedules were developed using COMET strategic planning software. Mine plan assumptions were based on historically demonstrated performance at RTK along with forward looking maintenance projections. Mine designs were reviewed by RTK geotechnical staff and an external group of technical experts (Mine Technical Review Team (MTRT)). The central case Apex pre-feasibility study mine production schedule resulted in a positive project NPV. Mining method and assumptions The Bingham Canyon Ore Reserve continues to be exploited by open pit mining methods using conventional diesel/electric haul trucks and electric or hydraulic mining shovels. The Apex pushback is a brownfields mine life extension which will utilise the existing infrastructure of RTK. It is projected that heavy mobile equipment (HME) will be retired and replacements purchased to maintain current fleet capacities at the Bingham Canyon Operation. The Apex feasibility study will evaluate options to increase HME capacity to potentially accelerate waste stripping. Processing method and assumptions All milling is done by the Copperton Concentrator’s four grinding lines consisting of three 10.4 m and one 11 m SAG mill each feeding two ball mills. Flotation is comprised of a bulk circuit having rougher, scavenger and cleaner lines feeding the Moly Plant where molybdenum disulphide concentrate is produced and bagged for toll roasting. A 25% copper concentrate is pumped 28 km to the Smelter where it is filtered and stockpiled. The concentrate is smelted in a Flash Smelting Furnace (FSF) and then converted in a Flash Converting Furnace (FCF) operating in a single-line configuration separated by an intermediate matte stockpile. Two parallel furnaces further refine the copper and cast anodes which are railed to the Refinery. Smelter slag is milled and processed to recover metals. The Smelter converts 99.9% of the sulphur emitted from processing the copper concentrate feed into sulphuric acid which is also sold. Heat from the furnaces and the acid plant is used to co-generate about 60% of the Smelter's electric power needs. At the Refinery, the anodes are interleaved with stainless steel cathode blanks in tank cells of acidic copper sulphate solution. Electric current is applied for about 20 days to dissolve the anodes and deposit 99.99% pure copper which is stripped from the reusable cathode and sold. Precious metals and impurities from the cathodes settle to the bottom of the cells. Gold and silver are recovered from the slimes by process of
Notice to ASX Page 10 of 55 autoclaving, filtering, hydrochloric leaching and solvent extraction and cast into bars by an induction furnace. Cut-off grades, estimation methodology and modifying factors The Ore Reserve cut-off is based on a Waste/Ore Ranking (WOR) calculation which considers pricing, recoveries and costs. The cut-off value was determined based on an iterative approach to determine the optimum value to the deposit. RTK mine production plans are developed with the objective of maximizing NPV based on the optimization of WOR cut-off grade and production scheduling decisions. The simultaneous optimization of these two parameters is accomplished through a production scheduling program called COMET, which uses Visual Basic linear programming in Microsoft Excel. An enterprise model capturing the material movements, plant capacity constraints, costs, and revenues from the mine through sales is used to project the cash flows and evaluate a multitude of options, while honouring limits on mining and processing constraints, with the program’s algorithm ultimately leading to convergence on a solution providing the maximum NPV. COMET dynamically recalculates WOR of the binned material based on forecasted period’s cost and revenue to determine the highest value material to send to the mill as part of the optimization of the integrated mining and processing policy. There are no material impacts from other Ore Reserve modifying factors, such as: governmental, tenure, environmental, cultural heritage, social or community. Appropriate agreements and approvals are in place to enable operation of the assets. Criteria used for Ore Reserves classification The following summarizes the conversion of Mineral Resource classification to Ore Reserve classification within the Ore Reserve ultimate pit: • Measured Mineral Resources not contained within the 0.25% MoS2 grade zone are classified as Proved Ore Reserves. • Measured Mineral Resources within the 0.25% MoS2 grade zone are classified as Probable Ore Reserves. • Indicated Mineral Resources are classified as Probable Ore Reserves.
Notice to ASX Page 11 of 55 Winu The Winu Mineral Resource is located within the Patterson province of Western Australia (Figure 2). The updated Mineral Resource (presented in Table C at 0.2% CuEq cut-off) comprises an Indicated Mineral Resource of 222 Mt at 0.56% CuEq, and an Inferred Mineral Resource of 499 Mt at 0.47% CuEq, giving a total Mineral Resource of 721 Mt at 0.50% CuEq (0.40% Cu, 0.34 g/t Au). The Mineral Resource is constrained by a notional pit shell supported by mining studies and an economic assessment. Included in the Mineral Resource is a higher grade component shown in Table H as a sensitivity. This portion of the Mineral Resource is tabulated at 0.45% CuEq cut-off, constrained by the notional resource pit shell. Changes to Mineral Resources at a 0.2% and 0.45% CuEq cut-off are shown in Table I. A starter pit has also been defined as a subset of the total Mineral Resource; the starter pit is designed on a higher grade and shallower body of mineralisation that is the subject of detailed geological and geotechnical assessments and mine design and processing studies. At a 0.45% CuEq cut-off, the Mineral Resource inside the starter pit comprises 114 Mt @ 0.79% CuEq Indicated Resources and 36 Mt @ 0.78% CuEq Inferred Resources for a total of 150 Mt @ 0.79% CuEq, as shown in Table J. Drilling to inform studies of the Winu deposit has continued with a focus on hydrogeology drilling in the last 12 months. The presence of copper, gold and silver mineralisation of a similar geological style and setting at the margins indicates that the Winu deposit remains open in several directions. Figure 2 Property location map - Winu Table H Winu Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 – sensitivity reporting at a 0.45% CuEq cut-off, within the notional resource pit shell Resource classification Mt % CuEq % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Indicated 114 0.79 0.64 0.48 3.98 Inferred 196 0.72 0.58 0.48 3.16 Total 311 0.74 0.60 0.48 3.46
Notice to ASX Page 12 of 55 Table I Changes to Winu Mineral Resources 0.2% CuEq cut-off Mt % Cu g/t Au Mt Cu Moz Au 2022 721 0.40 0.34 2.90 7.78 2021 608 0.40 0.30 2.43 5.86 % change from 2021 19% 0% 12% 19% 33% 0.45% CuEq cut-off Mt % Cu g/t Au Mt Cu Moz Au 2022 311 0.60 0.48 1.87 4.80 2021 269 0.60 0.40 1.61 3.46 % change from 2021 15% 0% 20% 16% 39% Table J Winu Mineral Resources as at 31 December 2022 – sensitivity reporting at a 0.45% CuEq cut-off, within the starter pit Resource classification Mt % CuEq % Cu g/t Au g/t Ag Indicated 114 0.79 0.64 0.48 3.98 Inferred 36 0.78 0.71 0.54 4.00 Total 150 0.79 0.65 0.49 3.98 Summary of information to support Mineral Resources reporting – Winu Mineral Resources are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 2 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.8 of the ASX Listing Rules. Geology and geological interpretation Winu has been interpreted as a structurally controlled vein hosted Cu-Au-Ag (copper-gold-silver) deposit focused on the core of an anticline in Neoproterozoic metasedimentary rocks. There are multiple vein generations and orientations, but the veins are interpreted as being predominantly parallel to the fanned axial planes of the major and parasitic folds. Drilling techniques; sampling and sub-sampling techniques; and sample analysis method Drilling has been carried out using a combination of angled diamond and vertical and angled reverse circulation (RC) drilling methods, with sampling predominantly on a 1 m sample interval but honouring geological boundaries in the diamond drilled core. Assays have been carried out on half core and split RC samples using a combination of sequential leach assays, full acid digest with AES/MS finish and fire assay for gold. RC and diamond drilling programmes in 2020 and 2021 focussed on testing and delineating copper and gold mineralisation in the central Winu zone with data acquisition for geotechnical, geometallurgical, hydrogeological and waste characterisation studies for a possible starter pit. Additional drilling acquired in 2022 has been focussed on hydrology and geotechnical assessment for the starter pit while some additional drill testing of north, south and east mineralisation extensions was also completed. Resource drilling on the Winu deposit completed since the compilation of the Mineral Resource estimate supporting the 31 December 2021 Inferred Resource totals 137 RC and 65 diamond holes for a total increase of 70.5 km drilled length. The total amount of drilling supporting the 31 December 2022 Mineral Resource statement consists of 605 mostly vertical-near vertical RC holes (144.4 km) and 283 mostly angled diamond holes (132.4 km) for a total of 276.8 km, including holes drilled to support geotechnical and geometallurgical studies. Some holes drilled on the licence outside of the area of known mineralisation, such as sterilisation holes on proposed infrastructure footprint, are not used in the Mineral Resource estimate and not included in the meterage reported here. Estimation methodology Grade estimation utilises Ordinary Kriging at panel scale 40 m x 40 m x 5 m with recoverable estimation by Localised Uniform Conditioning based on 10 m x 10 m x 5 m blocks (selective mining unit (SMU)
Notice to ASX Page 13 of 55 scale). The objective of the panel scale estimation is to establish a least biased global estimate, taking into account the drill hole spacing. The objective of the SMU scale estimation is to predict the grade/tonnage distribution at the time of mining. Dry bulk density has been estimated by Ordinary Kriging on 10 m x 10 m x 5 m blocks using approximately 6,840 measurements from drill core. Cut-off grades and modifying factors The Mineral Resource is reported at 0.2% CuEq cut-off inside the notional resource pit shell, inclusive of material shown at a higher cut-off of 0.45% CuEq. Copper equivalents have been calculated using the following formula: CuEq = ((Cu% * Cu price 1% per tonne * Cu recovery) + (Au ppm * Au price per g/t * Au recovery) + (Ag ppm * Ag price per g/t * Ag recovery)) / (Cu price 1% per tonne). Details of recoveries based on test work are shown in Appendix 2 (JORC Table 1). The Mineral Resource is considered to have reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction based on mining and processing studies that have been further developed in 2022. These studies indicate conventional open pit mining and processing routes will be appropriate for the exploitation of the Winu deposit. Criteria used for Mineral Resources classification Resource classification is based initially on the level of confidence assigned to interpretations of geology and mineralisation controls, and an assessment of the quality of fundamental assay and geological data. A specific definition of Indicated Mineral Resource is adopted and is described in Table 1. A quantitative assessment of copper grade uncertainty is made using the results of Conditional Simulation, taking into account proposed mining rates and schedule, and this forms the basis of the classification applied to the Mineral Resource. Inferred Mineral Resources are constrained within a notional resource pit shell to a maximum depth of 740 m with sufficient support for reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction provided by preliminary mining, processing and other studies using Rio Tinto forward-looking price assumptions. Within the notional resource pit shell a portion of the deposit has been assessed for a starter pit option via detailed geological, mining and processing studies. The studies are indicating a starter pit mine life of 25 years. The Mineral Resource in the starter pit is classified predominantly as Indicated Mineral Resource (20 out of 25 planned ex-pit ore production years, not including pre-strip), based on assessments of expected grade variability in the proposed mine sequence at the proposed mining rate. Mineralised material outside of the notional resource pit shell is not included in the 31 December 2022 Mineral Resource statement. In the starter pit, which is predominantly Indicated, the mean distance between drill holes is 60 m and this is sufficient to establish geological and grade continuity and to support grades estimation at a scale appropriate to pit design and annualised scheduling. In the region outside of the starter pit and inside the Resource pit shell, which is entirely Inferred, the mean distance between drill holes is 110 m, sufficient to establish geological and grade continuity of the mineralisation at depth and to support the evaluation of expansion cases. A close-spaced pattern of 14 diamond holes was drilled to test geological and grade continuity at 15 m centres in the east-dipping plane of mineralisation centred on the sulphide breccia units. This set of holes provided sufficient information to support assumptions of short-range grade continuity. In the southeast corner of the known deposit, additional diamond and RC holes were drilled from north to south, or south to north, to test assumptions of the dominant mineralisation trend. Land access limitations have prevented drilling in a northern section of the deposit; it is intended to complete drilling in this area upon the granting of land clearances.
Notice to ASX Page 14 of 55 QIT Madagascar Minerals The Petriky Heavy Mineral Sand (HMS) deposit lies just to the southwest of the Mandena operation in Madagascar (Figure 3). Petriky contains 442 Mt Inferred Mineral Resources at 4.2% Titanium Minerals and 0.8% Zircon, and contains no Ore Reserves. The Petriky Mineral Resource forms part of the broader QIT Madagascar Minerals (QMM) Mineral Resources as presented in Table D. In addition, there are 332 Mt Ore Reserves at 3.4% Titanium Minerals and 0.2% Zircon comprising Probable Ore Reserves of 96 Mt at 2.9% Titanium Minerals and 0.1% Zircon and Proven Ore Reserves of 236 Mt at 3.6% Titanium Minerals and 0.2% Zircon as reported in the Rio Tinto 2022 Annual Report. Figure 3 Property location map - QIT Madagascar Minerals Summary of information to support Mineral Resources reporting – QIT Madagascar Minerals Mineral Resources are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 3 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.8 of the ASX Listing Rules. Geology and geological interpretation The Petriky HMS deposits were formed by late Pleistocene sea level transgression/regression cycles 6 to 35 thousand years ago. Mineralised sands are found in embayments, protected by headlands, which formed under conditions of static sea level and constant supply of sediments resulting in formation of a prograding foredune/beach system. The morphology of Petriky is similar to the nearby Mandena deposit, where the QMM Mineral Separation Plant (MSP) is located. Three distinct geological units have been recognised namely 1) Upper Sand, 2) Transitional Sand and 3) Lower Sand: • The Upper Sand units are characteristically fine-to-medium grained and very well sorted. Individual sand grains are rounded and display frosted surfaces as a result of abrasion due to wind transport.
Notice to ASX Page 15 of 55 They represent the upper portion of the advancing foredune/beach complex; having been formed by aeolian processes. Heavy mineral concentration averages around 7 to 8% while slime content is very low (1 to 2%) and has an average thickness of 5 m. • The Transitional Sands are representative of beach and lower dune facies with a relatively constant thickness of 3 to 6 m. The coarser grained and poorly sorted sand units are characterized by low heavy mineral (1 to 2%) and slime content. These features suggest deposition in a relatively high- energy beach environment. • The Lower Sand forms the base of the prograding foredune/beach system and consists of foreshore sand facies, typified by finely laminated fine to medium grained sands. They contain an average of 4 to 5% heavy minerals and have slightly higher slime content (2 to 3%) than the two other sand units. Some clay lenses 1 to 2 m in thickness have been observed within the unit. Thickness averages between 10 to 12 m but exceeds 20 m in some of the outwash channels incised into underlying clay. Outwash channel facies are generally coarser grained. Drilling techniques; sampling and sub-sampling techniques; and sample analysis method The Petriky deposit was sampled using hand auger (HA) by US Steel in the 1970s and portable vibracore (VIB) by QMM in 1987 to 1988. Samples were collected at 1.5 m intervals down hole with 100% of sample material retrieved for laboratory analyses. A total of 949 HA holes were drilled to the water table only and therefore never tested the full depth of the deposit. Petriky was subsequently drilled to full depth at a drill spacing of 800 m x 100 m using VIB. Additional data was added using shallow HA drilled on a grid density of 200 m x 50 m. After geological logging, samples were sent to a laboratory for drying and sub-sampling. Rotary splitter was used to ensure a representative sub-sample for heavy liquid separation. Total Heavy Mineral (THM) content was determined by Heavy Liquid Separation (HLS), using Tetrabromoethane (TBE). The THM mineralogy for the entire deposit was determined from a composite THM of 37 boreholes using CARPCO electromagnetic separation. Estimation methodology The Petriky resource model comprises a hybrid 2-dimensional grade thickness estimate based on combined HA and VIB borehole composites. THM, and Slimes were estimated using Ordinary Kriging into 50 m x 50 m parent cells orientated parallel to the dominant geomorphological features. Estimation was controlled using a hard boundary for the base. Tonnages were calculated using a formula where Density = 1.57 + 0.01 * %THM based on test work at the nearby Mandena deposit. Cut-off grades and modifying factors Estimates were constrained to geological boundaries and hence are reported at a 0% cut-off grade. Mining is assumed to be via open pit dredging as with the nearby Mandena deposit. Metallurgical factors used in Mandena are also applied to Petriky for valuation purpose as mineralogical and grain size characteristics are similar. Metallurgical factors have not yet been confirmed using Petriky samples. The Mineral Resource is considered to have reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction based on the studies completed at the nearby Mandena deposit. Criteria used for Mineral Resources classification The Petriky Inferred Resource is supported by VIB drill spacing of 800 m x 100 m. Based on experience and results of reconciliation on the current nearby Mandena operation the Competent Person judges the resource estimates to provide a sufficient global estimate to support an Inferred Resource classification. The rationale to down-grade Petriky resources from Indicated to Inferred for 2022 reporting was a combination of development risk and delays in obtaining sufficient mineralogy and geotechnical data. Government permitting to recommence drilling in the Petriky sector has been delayed, increasing the risk of future resource development of Petriky, which has been identified to replace Mandena once depleted.
Notice to ASX Page 16 of 55 Richards Bay Minerals The Zulti South HMS deposit lies just to the southwest of the current Zulti North operation in South Africa (Figure 4). The Zulti South Ore Reserve forms part of the broader Richards Bay Mineral (RBM) Ore Reserves as presented in Table E. All Mineral Resources at Zulti South have been converted to Ore Reserves, thus there are no additional Mineral Resources reported. Figure 4 Property location map – Richards Bay Minerals Summary of information to support Mineral Resources reporting – Richards Bay Minerals Mineral Resources are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 4 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.8 of the ASX Listing Rules. Geology and geological interpretation The Zulti South HMS deposit represents an unconsolidated beach placer deposit found within a belt of undulating aeolian dunes aligned roughly parallel to the coast, of Pliocene – Pleistocene and Holocene age. At present only the Holocene dunes are mined by RBM. Material mined by RBM is from the Sibayi (<10 ka) and KwaMbonambi (57 to 6 ka) Formations, which are the youngest units of the Maputaland Group, a thin veneer set on the Zululand Coastal Plain, formed in response to sea-level changes and uplift during the Neogene (25-2 Ma) and Quaternary (2 Ma to present) periods. The geology of the deposit is well understood, and the geological interpretation is sound. Data used for geological interpretations includes geological logging descriptions and assay data. The main geological domaining control used is the resource base. This is based on modelling a surface defined by a high slimes (greater than 12%) / low THM (less than 2%) contact. Using assay (slimes, THM and EHM) and geology (slimes & hardness) attributes, intersection points were chosen according to the criteria above, and snapped to the drill hole traces. Cross-sections were then drawn
Notice to ASX Page 17 of 55 along the drill lines using these points. The cross-sections were then wire-framed to create a resource base surface. Grade is affected by the depositional history and resulting stratigraphy, but grade and geology generally show good continuity. Variability is greatest down hole where most changes happen within the first 5 m. Horizontal continuity is better with most change happening in a distance from 100 to 200 m. Drilling techniques; sampling and sub-sampling techniques; and sample analysis method Sonic drilling is the preferred method of drilling for geological and resource definition. It utilises either a 4” x 6” or 3” x 5” system in which a 4-inch or 3-inch core barrel is used for sampling. The core barrel is overridden by a 6-inch or 5-inch casing, to hold the borehole vertically open from the top dune surface to the bottom of the borehole, typically at ±5 m below ore sand – base clay boundary. Typical horizontal grid spacing for sampling is 200 m N x 100 m E Sonic. Between 1970 and 1989 40 RC drill holes were completed at Zulti South, followed by successive drilling campaigns until 2005. In total, 3049 RC drill holes were completed at Zulti South. Typical horizontal grid spacing for RC drilling is 200 m N x 50 m E grid. RC holes are drilled vertically using AQ (~48 mm outer diameter/ 27 mm inner diameter) rods. RC samples are collected over 3 m sample lengths from the collar of the drill hole, then 1 m sample lengths are collected within 10 m of the base of the drill hole for better basal definition. Several flaws have been noted with RC drilling in unconsolidated to semi consolidated material, The most pertinent is the underestimation of grade by up to 50%. In addition, smearing, selective sampling/recovery and winnowing of material occurs, especially below the water table and with increasing depth. As a result, RC data is not used for resource estimation. After logging, the complete field samples are delivered to the in-house laboratory for analysis. The sample is oven dried then processed with a rotary splitter to collect 6 ~700 g representative sub-samples. Attrition of each~700 g sub-sample over a -45 µm sieve is carried out with the +45 µm material dried and used to calculate slimes percentage. A heavy liquid, usually tetrabromoethane (TBE), is used to separate Heavy Minerals (HM) from Quartz. HM are separated with a Carpco magnetic separator into its main components based on magnetic susceptibility. These separate HM components are then separately pulverised, and pellets are moulded for XRF analysis. The sample size and sampling methodology is considered appropriate for the material being sampled. Estimation methodology From 2013, only Sonic data was used for resource estimation. The data were composited into 2 m lengths from the top of the drill hole. Weakly magnetic ilmenite (unrecoverable), economic ilmenite, ‘Junk’ material, Magnetite, highly magnetic material, non magnetic fraction, rutile, zircon, slimes (fines smaller than 45 µm) and THM were estimated using Ordinary Kriging into 100 m x 50 m x 2 m parent blocks in Surpac with search neighbourhood criteria based on variograms. The resource base was the main geological domaining control. Two domains were thus identified: Above and Below resource base. Variation between the composites and the estimated kriged attributes, as well as variation between the previous and current resource model updates, was within acceptable limits. Cut-off grades and modifying factors No cut-off parameters were used; the Mineral Resource is reported within the geological unit. Zulti South consists of several ore zones of varying geometrical properties. Grade variations within the Zulti South orebody are apparent with grade in general declining from south to north as well as from the inland side of the deposit to the seaward side. Margin ranking plots of the orebody revealed that the highest value ore grade is located in the central inland portion of the orebody. A phased approach to mining will be adopted to allow the most appropriate and beneficial exploitation of the Zulti South orebody. The mining method for Zulti South has been established as dry mining by front end loaders.
Notice to ASX Page 18 of 55 The Mineral Resource is considered to have reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction based on the studies completed to date. Criteria used for Mineral Resources classification The Zulti South ore body is classified as Measured and Indicated Mineral Resources only. Both the drill spacing and volume of resource per metre drilled are used as the basis for classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories as follows: • Measured: ≤100 m x 200 m: ≥50 holes/km2 or <20 000 m3/metre drilled. • Indicated: 100 m x 200 m to 200 m x 400 m: 12.5 holes/ km2 - 50 holes/ km2 or 20 000 m3 – 80000 m3/metre drilled. Summary of information to support Ore Reserves reporting – Richards Bay Minerals Ore Reserves are supported by the information set out in the Appendix 4 to this release and located at Resources & reserves (riotinto.com) in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in the JORC Code. The following summary information is provided in accordance with rule 5.9 of the ASX Listing Rules. Economic assumptions and study outcomes The value proposition for Zulti South orebody lies in the opportunity to fill the MSP and Smelter capacity at the RBM operations. Integration of the Zulti South project with the current RBM operations will maximise MSP capacity to exploit buoyant zircon and rutile markets. The Ore Reserve estimate for the Zulti South project is based on the completed feasibility study of 2019. Rio Tinto applies a common process to the generation of commodity prices across the group. This involves generation of long-term price curves based on current sales contracts, industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. In this process, a price curve rather than a single price point is used to develop estimates of mine returns over the life of the project. The detail of this process and of the price point curves is commercially sensitive and is not disclosed. Economic evaluation using Rio Tinto long-term prices demonstrates a positive net present value for the Zulti South Ore Reserves under range of price, cost and productivity scenarios. Mining method and assumptions The mining method for Zulti South has been established as dry mining by front end loaders. Only ore will be mined as there is no overburden or host formation that is excavated. As such the main function of geological control will be to monitor under or over digging the mining base. There are no ore classes to manage (i.e., no selective mining once the SMU is established. The process plant design allows for a wide range of ore head feed grades to be processed efficiently. The first several years of planned mining have sufficient drilling coverage, which effectively informs the LOM reserve plan. Infill drilling may be required to inform the short-term planning, however there is no expected material impact as the drill hole density is adequate to production schedules. Processing method and assumptions The Heavy Mineral Concentrate (HMC) is achieved through a process of feeding a hopper with ore sand mixed with water, the slurry is pumped to a fixed land-based concentrator plant for further treatment via a series of spirals and gravity circuits. The primary stage of dealing with deleterious elements uses a two-stage magnet circuit, thereafter which the primary concentrate is achieved. The HMC from the mine operation will be transported from the mine stockpile to the RBM smelter complex HMC handling stockpile using the positive displacement (PD) pumping system. From here the established RBM processing technique is employed and the HMC from the Zulti South project is part of the feedstock material for MSP and downstream processes. Cut-off grades, estimation methodology and modifying factors No effective cut-off grade is applied on the Ore Reserves at Zulti South. The grade control will be achieved by in pit monitoring of the mining base. No target plant feed grade is established or required, and grade control will be to avoid over and under digging. The extensive test work that has been conducted to verify
Notice to ASX Page 19 of 55 the appropriateness of metallurgical process on the Zulti South mineralisation utilises a well-tested technology within the RBM process. The mining equipment selection for Zulti South is a proven and already existing method. All the environmental permits required for the project have been issued and approved. The Zulti South ore body comprises three leases, known as On Reserve 10, Kraal Hill 1 and Kraal Hill 2, and is located south of Richards Bay. Criteria used for Ore Reserves classification Ore Reserves are classified according to the Mineral Resource classification where initially all Measured Resources are converted to Proven Reserves, and all Indicated Resources converted to Probable Reserves. The conversion from Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves is done on consideration of operational and economic constraints, which includes hydrological parameters, geotechnical parameters, mining methods, mining limits, metallurgical properties, environmental factors and above all economic feasibility of mining the resource. RBM Ore Reserve tonnes for 2022 include a change in classification for the Zulti South project from Proven Reserves to Probable Reserves. The change results from increased uncertainty in the modifying factors as a result of schedule delays, due to ongoing community and security challenges. The original project timelines have been affected. The project remains on full suspension. Any restart of project activities is dependent upon internal approvals after which the classification for the Zulti South project Ore Reserves would be reviewed.
Notice to ASX Page 20 of 55 Competent Persons’ statements Rio Tinto Kennecott The information in this report that relates to RTK Mineral Resources is based on information compiled under the supervision of Kim Schroeder and Pancho Rodriguez, who are Members of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). Kim Schroeder and Pancho Rodriguez have sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Persons as defined in the JORC Code. Kim Schroeder and Pancho Rodriguez are full-time employees of Rio Tinto and each of them consents to the inclusion in this report of Mineral Resources based on the information that they have prepared in the form and context in which it appears. The information in this report that relates to RTK Ore Reserves is based on information compiled under the supervision of Brady Pett, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). Brady Pett has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. Brady Pett is a full-time employee of Rio and consents to the inclusion in this report of Ore Reserves based on the information that he has prepared in the form and context in which it appears. Winu The information in this report that relates to Winu Mineral Resources is based on information compiled under the supervision of James Pocoe, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). James Pocoe has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which he is undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. James Pocoe is a full-time employee of Rio Tinto and consents to the inclusion in this report of Mineral Resources based on the information that he has prepared in the form and context in which it appears. QIT Madagascar Minerals The information in this report that relates to QIT Madagascar Minerals Mineral Resources is based on information compiled under the supervision of Adriaan Louw, who is a Member of the South African Council for Natural Scientific Professionals (SACNASP). Adriaan has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. Adriaan is a full-time employee of Rio Tinto and consents to the inclusion in this report of Mineral Resources based on the information that he has prepared in the form and context in which it appears. Richards Bay Minerals The information in this report that relates to RBM Mineral Resources is based on information compiled under the supervision of Anton Cawthorn-Blazeby, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). Anton Cawthorn-Blazeby has sufficient experience that is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. Anton Cawthorn-Blazeby is a full-time employee of Rio Tinto and consents to the inclusion in this report of Mineral Resources based on the information that he has prepared in the form and context in which it appears. The information in this report that relates to RBM Ore Reserves is based on information compiled under the supervision of Sinetemba Mnunu, who is a Member of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy (MAusIMM). Sinetemba Mnunu has sufficient experience which is relevant to the style of mineralisation and type of deposit under consideration and to the activity to which they are undertaking to qualify as a Competent Person as defined in the JORC Code. Sinetemba Mnunu is a full-time employee of Rio Tinto and consents to the inclusion in this report of Ore Reserves based on the information that he has prepared in the form and context in which it appears.
Notice to ASX Page 21 of 55 Contacts Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com Media Relations, UK Matthew Klar M +44 7796 630 637 David Outhwaite M +44 7787 597 493 Media Relations, Americas Simon Letendre M +1 514 796 4973 Malika Cherry M +1 418 592 7293 Investor Relations, UK Menno Sanderse M +44 7825 195 178 David Ovington M +44 7920 010 978 Clare Peever M +44 7788 967 877 Media Relations, Australia Matt Chambers M +61 433 525 739 Jesse Riseborough M +61 436 653 412 Alyesha Anderson M +61 434 868 118 Investor Relations, Australia Tom Gallop M +61 439 353 948 Amar Jambaa M +61 472 865 948 Rio Tinto plc 6 St James’s Square London SW1Y 4AD United Kingdom T +44 20 7781 2000 Registered in England No. 719885 Rio Tinto Limited Level 43, 120 Collins Street Melbourne 3000 Australia T +61 3 9283 3333 Registered in Australia ABN 96 004 458 404 This announcement is authorised for release to the market by Steve Allen, Rio Tinto’s Group Company Secretary. riotinto.com
Appendix 1 Notice to ASX Page 22 of 55 Rio Tinto Kennecott - Bingham Canyon JORC Table 1 The following table provides a summary of important assessment and reporting criteria used for the reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in The Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 Edition (The JORC Code). Criteria in each section apply to all preceding and succeeding sections. Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria Commentary Sampling techniques • Sampling techniques related to Mineral Resource estimation have been either churn or diamond drill core. Since the 1950s, all drilling has been diamond core, either as PQ, NQ, or HQ in size. • Sample intervals can range from 0.3 to 3.6 m, with 3 m being the standard length. Core is sawn in half with half the core assayed for Cu, Mo, Ag, and Au. The average core sample is 10 kg, which is then split to 1000 g for pulverization and a 100 g pulp is generated for assay (30 g for fire assay, 5 g for AA). Drilling techniques • Drilling data summary: Diamond Churn Year Number of holes Metres Number of holes Metres 1906-1979 246 197,369 180 49,464 1980-1999 233 103,000 2000-2009 356 201,123 2010-2018 464 193,007 2018-2021 262 83,777 Total 1561 778,276 180 49,464 • The deposit is defined by a program of churn drilling (6%) from 1910 to 1953 and diamond core drilling (94%) drilled from 1945 to 2021. Size of diamond core is as follows: AX/BX – 12%, NX/NQ – 28%, HQ – 54%, PQ – 6%. • Since the end of churn drilling by 1980, the drilling methodology has not changed. Drill sample recovery • Since 1980, the interval length and amount of core recovered has been recorded as part of the standard geotechnical data collection. Drilling methodology has been improved to maximize core recovery. Drilling methods have resulted in 90% of the core with greater than 80% core recovery. • The sample recovery methodology has not changed since 2016 when low recovery between drill runs have been assigned to a specific footage, when possible. No bias has been observed between low and full recovery zones. Logging • Since the 1970s, standardised RTK logging systems have been used for all drilling which includes collection of lithology, alteration, structure, veining and mineralisation. • Since 1980, the core has been photographed and geotechnically logged; this represents 74% of cored drilled. • In 2007 34% of the holes drilled were also logged using an acoustic televiewer (ATV) for structure orientation where were had ATV data could be collected. Since 2008, all drill holes permissible for entry of the instrument are ATV l, amounting to 62% of the total holes though only in portions of the holes where the data could be collected. • The logging methodology has not changed materially since 1980. Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • Pre 1980, core was hand split. Since 1980, core has been sawn in half. One half is sent for assay; the other half is stored at the RTK operation. • Samples are sent to a commercial lab for preparation and assay. Samples are crushed to minus 2 mm and a 1000 g sample split is pulverized to generate 4 sample pulps. These pulps are used for a Au assay, a Cu, MoS2 and Ag assay, and a composite multi-element assay and the fourth is returned to RTK. The sample reject sample material (<2 mm) is returned to RTK. • Sampling procedures have been reviewed and audited by external sampling experts, most recently in 2010 (AMEC) with no material findings.
Notice to ASX Page 23 of 55 • The sub-sampling methodology has not changed since 1980 when core sawing began. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • Current QA/QC procedures have been in place since 1990. The acQuire data management database system has been used since 2000. • Duplicate samples of the second half of core are generated for every 40th sample. • Matrix matched pulp CRM are inserted every 20th sample. • A sample duplicated for the coarse reject material is assayed every 20th sample. For every 20 coarse reject pulp assays, a matrix matched standard is inserted. • Cu, MoS2 and Ag are assayed by HNO3-HClO4-HF-HCl digestion and ICP-AES analysis. Au is assayed by fire assay fusion with an AAS finish for one assay-ton. • The assay methodology has not changed since 2015. Prior to 2015, Cu, MoS2 and Ag detection was by AAS, since 2015 detection for these metals has been by ICP-AES. Au assaying has been consistent through this period, by 30 g fire assay. • Analysis of the performance of certified standards, duplicates, blanks and third-party check assaying has indicated an acceptable level of accuracy and precision with no significant bias or contamination. Verification of sampling and assaying • For all intercepts above certain thresholds (2% Cu, 0.4%, MoS2, 2.83 g/t Au, 2.83 g/t Ag) an additional sample pulp is generated and assayed from the coarse reject material. • Mineral Resource and Ore Reserves standard operating procedures (SOP) documents are used for data handling, processing, storage and validation processes. • There is no adjustment to drill hole assays. There is a lab ranking for samples assayed by more than one lab and the most appropriate assay is stored as the primary assay. • The sample validation methodology remains unchanged since at least 1994. Location of data points • Since 1998, GPS survey is used to locate drill hole collars. Between 1940 and 1998, traditional survey instruments were used to determine collar locations. A local grid system (Bingham Mine grid) is used throughout the mine. The local grid has a counter-clockwise rotation of 31.98 degrees from true north. • Down hole surveys are currently completed by two to three methods: • Since the 1960s, a single shot or multi shot tool is used to survey all drill holes at 61 m intervals. • Beginning in 2006, selected holes were also surveyed with a magnetometer accompanying an Acoustic Televiewer (ATV) instrument. Since 2008 most holes are also surveyed by ATV. • Since 1995, a gyro survey tool is used to complete a survey for the entire drill hole length after the drill hole is completed. All surveys are reviewed and generally the gyro method is selected unless the other method(s) indicate that they gyro survey is erroneous. In the latter case the next most accurate survey method is selected and loaded into the database. • Pit topography is kept updated by local surveys that track daily mining advances. Data spacing and distribution • Drill spacing is approximately 90 m to 100 m. • Assay intervals are composited to 8 m for model estimations. • The data spacing and distribution is deemed sufficient by the Competent Person to establish geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource classification that has been applied. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • Both vertical and angled drilling are used to delineate mineralisation. Porphyry mineralisation is disseminated and does not display a strong preferred orientation or structural control. • Drill hole orientations are designed to best delineate mineralisation, though collar placement is dependent on mine accessibility and must be oriented accordingly. Sample security • Laboratory samples are cut and placed onto crates or pallets and transported by locked trucks to a commercial lab for sample preparation and assay. • A Bolt Seal Chain of Custody form is filled out on-site and includes date, bolt seal number, driver, and any relief drivers. A copy of the Bill of Lading (BOL) and chain of custody form are made and sent with the driver. • Upon receipt of cargo, the lab manager confirms the date and time received, whether the bolt seal is unbroken, and bolt seal number. The lab receiver signs the Chain of Custody and emails a copy to RTK. • Individual samples are weighed before shipment and by the receiving commercial lab. Sample weights are cross checked and verified by RTK. • Retention of the one half of core and assay pulps are retained in a secure core warehouse in Salt Lake City, Utah Audits or reviews • The following reviews have been completed on sampling:
Notice to ASX Page 24 of 55 o External resource model audit by CRM-SA LLC (2022). o Rio Tinto Corporate Assurance Internal Audit of Resources and Reserves (2015). o Review on the Copper Reconciliation Process at Bingham Canyon Mine (2011). o Sampling procedures have been reviewed and audited by external sampling experts, most recently in 2010 (AMEC). o Review of Sampling, Sample Preparation and the Central Analytical Laboratory (2009). • No material findings were made, and these reviews concluded that the fundamental data collection techniques are appropriate. Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results Criteria Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • The Bingham Canyon Mine is wholly owned by Rio Tinto Kennecott Copper (RTK’s legal name is Kennecott Utah Copper LLC). • RTK has the authority to mine the Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves identified in this document under existing agreements. RTK also acquired several mineral leases and unpatented lode mining claims located in Tooele, Salt Lake and Utah Counties from Kennecott Exploration Company in 2021. Exploration done by other parties • No exploration by other parties has been done in the core area of Bingham Canyon. • Various companies since 1870 have worked around the core of the RTK holdings. As properties were acquired, exploration information was obtained and incorporated into the ore body knowledge. • Since 2009, Rio Tinto Exploration has performed brownfield exploration in and near the deposit. Geology • The Bingham Canyon deposit is a classic porphyry copper deposit containing economic values of copper, molybdenum, gold, silver, and historic lead and zinc production. Peripheral copper- gold skarns, lead-zinc fissures, and disseminated and placer gold deposits are also associated with this copper porphyry system. The most recent publication devoted to this deposit is contained in the Society of Economic Geologist, Inc, 2012, Special Publ. # 16, pp. 127-146. The deposit has been extensively studied both economically and academically over the past 100 years and is considered as a deposit that defines copper porphyry systems. Drill hole Information • A summary of the drill hole data used for Mineral Resource estimation is provided in Section 1 of this table. Data aggregation methods • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Relationship between mineralisation, widths and intercept lengths • Down hole intercepts are reported as true width due to disseminated mineralisation that has no preferred orientation. Diagrams • RTK location and facilities are shown in Figure 1 in the body of this release. • Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7 below show a plan view of the drill holes, an example cross section through the deposit with the addition highlighted, and a plan view of the additional mining cut respectively.
Notice to ASX Page 25 of 55 Figure 5 Current pit drill hole intersections including those contained within Apex Ore Reserve Figure 6 Cross section A-A’ through the Bingham Canyon orebody showing copper mineralisation
Notice to ASX Page 26 of 55 Figure 7 Apex mining cut added to Ore Reserves Balanced reporting • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Other substantive exploration data • No additional exploration data to report. Further work • The Apex pushback is currently in feasibility stage of study. Studies continue to evaluate the potential to mine the extensive porphyry and skarn mineralisation beyond currently reported Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve ultimate pit. Section 3: Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources Criteria Commentary Database integrity • All drilling data is securely stored in acQuire, a geoscientific information management system managed by a dedicated team within RTK. The system is backed up daily. • Estimation data is digitally compared to the data extracted for the previous model to check data integrity. • All collar, survey, assay and geology data loaded to the database are manually verified against original documents. Validation is documented with signoff documents and included as part of the annual Mineral Resource model documentation. • The database access is controlled and managed by the Geology department. • The database includes data validation for text-based and numeric fields. Site visits • Mineral Resource Competent Persons are located on site. Geological interpretation • There is high confidence in the geologic interpretation. Past mining has created over 1.3 km of vertical geologic exposures. Geologic mapping has been collected since 1926. • Drilling and pit mapping is used to build the geologic model. • Grade estimation is controlled by domains defined based on six geology domains and four grade zone domains for each metal. It also uses seven limb zones for Cu, Au, and Ag. For MoS2, six limb zones are used. Blast hole assay values, where available, are used to help define the grade zone domains.
Notice to ASX Page 27 of 55 Dimensions • The deposit is contained within a 4.5 km x 4.5 km area with a maximum thickness of 900 m and average overburden cover of 800 m. Estimation and modelling techniques • For variography estimation domains of grade zone, limb zones (mineralisation trends) and rock type are recombined as necessary to provide spatial continuity analyses based on statistical similarity; the typical approach is to recombine grade zones and limb zones, leaving rock type as the consistent limiting variable. Domain boundaries except for the limestone rock type are treated as soft, meaning that composites from adjacent grade zones can be used in estimation. • Copper, molybdenite, gold and silver are estimated by a pass of Ordinary Kriging (OK) followed by a “fill-in” pass of simple kriging (SK) that uses a localised, declustered mean. Blocks that are not estimated after this secondary pass are populated with the mean estimated (from pass 1 and 2) for that domain. • Search ellipses were determined by calculating the range at specified percentages of the variogram sill and using the orientation of the anisotropic ellipse. For the OK pass, 95% of the sill is used. An SK pass is used at the range of the sill, beyond which any estimation will be using uncorrelated data and hence is assigned the average estimated grade. • The data had been composited to 8 m for Mineral Resource estimation to reduce grade variability and reflect the massive style of mineralisation. • Outlier analysis was completed on the grade zone/rock type breakdown to determine the most appropriate (spatially and statistically) thresholds. Outliers are preferentially controlled by a “High Yield Restriction” ellipse. The range at 60% of the sill is used for high grade restriction, beyond which a sample cannot be used for a block’s estimation. • Grade behaviour across modelled geology contacts is assessed to inform how estimation domains are grouped for variogram selection and for estimation. • Estimation is into parent blocks of 15 mE × 15 mN × 15 mRL (50 foot cube). • Blastholes are also used to define the four grade zones for each metal but not for estimation. • Talc, arsenic, clay, bismuth and sulphur are also estimated for mine planning purposes. • Historically, a bias has been observed between Mo grades estimated from exploration sample assays and mill sample assays. An adjustment is applied to resource model grades based on historical reconciliations. The adjustment for 2022 is (Mo*1.668 -0.0033)/0.8255 when Mo grades are greater than 0.017%. • The following validation was carried out on the 2022 model and processes used for the 2022 resource modelling and shows that the modelling process validates well against the input data and historical production. All spatial and geostatistical validation is performed against a declustered model (nearest neighbour estimation) and includes: o Swath plot analysis to check for trends in data/estimates and evaluate smoothing. o Histogram comparison to check on variance of data versus estimation (smoothing). o Cumulative frequency comparison to evaluate smoothness of the model, variance, and bias. o Grade-tonnage curves to assess metal-at-risk. o QQ plots to evaluate bias in models versus the declustered database. o Validation is focused on four separate volumes: Within the Ore Reserve pit shell. A “proxy” slice volume; an ore volume designed to mimic the present pushbacks but within historic mining to provide a contextual as- mined/backwards-looking comparison. To be evaluated against a blast- block-average model to establish predictive capability relative to the more closely spaced blast hole data model. Monthly reconciliation polygons processed from actual mining. These values are compared against monthly concentrator reporting to evaluate the accuracy of the models within ore shapes. New Mineral Resource pit shell. Moisture • All Mineral Resource tonnages are estimated and reported on a dry basis. Cut-off parameters • Optimised Life of Mine production scheduling of phased mining designs using variable economic marginal cut-off grades based on performance of historical metallurgical ore types, product metals, operating cost projections and metal prices produces an average approximately equal to a 0.25 CuEq%. • Metal prices used are provided by Rio Tinto Economics and are generated based on industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. A single long- term price point is used in the definition of ore and waste and in the financial evaluations
Notice to ASX Page 28 of 55 underpinning the resources statement. The detail of this process and of the price points selected are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. • Operating costs are informed by current operations. • It is the company’s opinion that all the elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered by RTK’s milling, smelting and refining facilities and sold. • Average grades for the individual metals included in the metal equivalent calculation are shown in the Mineral Resource tabulations. • Copper equivalents have been calculated using the formula CuEq% = Cu% + (((Au g/t * Au price per gram * Au_recovery) + (Mo% * Mo price per tonne * Mo_recovery) + (Ag g/t * Ag price per gram * Ag_recovery)) / (Cu price per tonne * Cu_recovery). Mining factors or assumptions • The estimate assumes the continuation of open pit mining using the existing mining fleet. • Reasonable prospects for eventual economic extraction have been assessed through mining designs based on Order of Magnitude open pit mining phase designs, optimised Life of Mine (LoM) production scheduling using variable economic marginal cut-off grades based on performance of historical metallurgical ore types and operating cost projections and cash flow analysis including estimates for development and sustaining capital. • Based on historical performance, no recovery and dilution factors are applied in the estimation. Metallurgical factors or assumptions • The metallurgical processes have been developed and optimized based on the long operating history of the deposit. • All process performance parameters (recoveries, concentrate grades including deleterious elements) are based on historical metallurgical test performance of 44 ore types. • Several decades of mineralogy characterisation work concludes that the deposit continues to be of a similar nature to the existing operation. • Average metallurgical recoveries for the resource additions used to calculate CuEq%: %Cu %Au %Mo %Ag 89 70 71 74 Environmental factors or assumptions • The Bingham Canyon mine is an historical operation managed under Utah regulatory approval. All approvals and permits necessary to mine the Mineral Resources have been obtained and are expected to be maintained. Bulk density • Specific gravity/bulk density is determined by using the displacement method using sealed core, volumetric of dry core samples, and gridded rock sampling across the pit. • Average density values for each rock type are assigned to the resource model. • Yearly mining reconciliation show calculated tonnage from volume surveys to be within 5% of mine production. • Density estimates were updated in 2022 with 51 additional samples. Classification • Mineral Resources are classified after consideration of understanding of the genetic model, assay and drilling quality and confidence in estimation parameters. Classification criteria based on drill spacing is done in two steps: o Measured – Average spacing less than 91 m between drill holes. o Indicated – Average spacing between 91 m and 182 m. o Inferred – Average spacing greater than 182 m between drill holes. • The second step is a refinement of the classification done by: o Creating shells for each classification. o Reinterpreting and manually creating classification contours at each bench elevation. o Coding the block model based on the contours. • The Competent Persons are satisfied that the stated Mineral Resource classification reflects the relevant factors of the deposit. Audits or reviews • Mineral Resource audits/reviews that have been complete in the past seven years: o External resource model audit by CRM-SA LLC (2022). o Internal database audit of 2021 model completed February 2022. o Fundamental Data – Extraction and Quality review of the resource database (2017). o Long Range Model (Resource model) Cu EDA (2017). o Rio Tinto Corporate Assurance Internal Audit of Resources and Reserves (2015). o Copper Group Peer Review (2015). o Rio Tinto internal review of RTK’s Integrated Studies Investment Committee requests for the South Pushback (2014 & 2015). o Review of the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve procedures (2013).
Notice to ASX Page 29 of 55 o External review of molybdenum grade adjustments (2014). • No material issues were raised in the reviews. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • Bingham Canyon open pit mine has been in operation since 1906. The Mineral Resource data collection and estimation techniques used are supported by reconciliation of actual production since 1989. • Reconciliation of actual production with the Mineral Resource estimates for the existing operational are generally within 10% for tonnage and copper grades. Section 4: Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves Criteria Commentary Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves • The Ore Reserve model was based on the 2022 Mineral Resource model. • Mineral Resources are reported additional to Ore Reserves. Site visits • The Competent Person is located near the mine site and regularly visit the mine and plant sites. Study status • The 2022 estimate is based on the pit slope design from the Apex pre-feasibility study including the most current results of ongoing updates to geotechnical assessments and mine plans and considering all material Modifying Factors. Cut-off parameters • Optimised Life of Mine production scheduling of phased mining designs is carried out using variable economic marginal cut-off grades based on performance of historical metallurgical ore types, product metals, operating cost projections and metal prices • Metal prices used are provided by Rio Tinto Economics and are generated based on industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. A single long term price point is used in the definition of ore and waste and in the financial evaluations underpinning the resources statement. The detail of this process and of the price points selected are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. • Operating costs are informed by current operations. • It is the company’s opinion that all the elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered by RTK’s milling, smelting and refining facilities and sold. • Copper equivalents have been calculated using the formula CuEq% = Cu% + (((Au g/t * Au price per gram * Au_recovery) + (Mo% * Mo price per tonne * Mo_recovery) + (Ag g/t * Ag price per gram * Ag_recovery)) / (Cu price per tonne * Cu_recovery). Mining factors or assumptions • The Bingham Canyon Ore Reserve continues to be exploited by open pit mining methods using conventional diesel/electric haul trucks and electric or hydraulic mining shovels. • The estimate assumes the continuation of open pit mining using the existing mining fleet. • As the deposit is well disseminated, ore boundaries are generally diffused; hence no recovery and dilution factors are applied in the estimation. This is supported by historical performance. • The Ore Reserve production schedule was derived with Inferred Mineral Resources (~1% of total) using an economically optimized mining sequence based on detailed phase designs and cut-off policy determined by constrained linear programming algorithms with the objective to maximise NPV. • Other than sustaining equipment replacements, mining infrastructure required to produce the Ore Reserve currently exists. Metallurgical factors or assumptions • The metallurgical processes have been developed and optimized based on the long operating history of the deposit. • All milling is done by the Copperton Concentrator’s four grinding lines consisting of three 10.4 m and one 11 m SAG mill each feeding two ball mills. Flotation is comprised of a bulk circuit having rougher, scavenger and cleaner lines feeding the Moly Plant where molybdenum disulphide concentrate is produced and bagged for toll roasting. A 25% copper concentrate is pumped 28 km to the Smelter where it is filtered and stockpiled. • The concentrate is smelted in a Flash Smelting Furnace (FSF) and then converted in a Flash Converting Furnace (FCF) operating in a single-line configuration separated by an intermediate matte stockpile. Two parallel furnaces further refine the copper and cast anodes which are railed to the Refinery. Smelter slag is milled and processed to recover metals. The Smelter converts 99.9% of the sulphur emitted from processing the copper concentrate feed into sulphuric acid which is also sold. Heat from the furnaces and the acid plant is used to co-generate about 60% of the Smelter's electric power needs.
Notice to ASX Page 30 of 55 • At the Refinery, the anodes are interleaved with stainless steel cathode blanks in tank cells of acidic copper sulphate solution. Electric current is applied for about 20 days to dissolve the anodes and deposit 99.99% pure copper which is stripped from the reusable cathode and sold. Precious metals and impurities from the cathodes settle to the bottom of the cells. Gold and silver are recovered from the slimes by process of autoclaving, filtering, hydrochloric leaching and solvent extraction and cast into bars by an induction furnace • All process performance parameters (recoveries, concentrate grades including deleterious elements) are based on historical performance of 44 ore types. • Several decades of mineralogy characterization work concludes that the deposit continues to be of similar nature. Environmental • Expansion of the existing Markham waste dump complex will be required for Apex waste material storage. Topsoil will be salvaged for closure and reclamation purposes before waste rock is dumped. • All approvals and permits necessary to mine the Ore Reserves have been obtained. Infrastructure • No significant changes to the existing infrastructure are required to mine the Apex Ore Reserves. • The mine’s power network, 44kV and associated power poles, will require relocation prior to major mining activities beginning. • The east tailings impoundment will be expanded to buttress the east abutment. • Other services will continue to be provided by the existing infrastructure. • The in-pit crusher was relocated ex-pit in April 2021 with an overland conveyor to deliver ore to the Copperton Concentrator. Costs • Development capital costs are based on the Apex pre-feasibility study. Sustaining capital costs are based on estimates derived for each operating plant. Both estimates utilise historical plant data where available. • Estimates of prices for consumables are based on historical pricing and global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. • Transportation and treatment charges for existing facilities are based on historical and projected pre-feasibility study estimates. • There are no royalty obligations. The estimate includes an allowance for Utah state severance tax cost of 2.5% of revenue. Revenue factors • Revenue projections are based on projected mill head grades, process recovery losses and product prices. • Bingham Canyon applies consensus pricing in the determination of Ore Reserves and Mineral Resources. This involves generation of long-term price points based on industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. A single long-term price point is used in the definition of ore and waste and in the financial evaluations underpinning the reserves and resources statement. The detail of this process and of the price points selected are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. Market assessment • All Ore Reserve products, other than molybdenum, are sold on open markets with no long-term contract commitments. Molybdenum is sold through contracts with roaster facilities. Economic • Economic inputs such as carbon pricing, inflation and discount rates are also generated internally at Rio Tinto. The detail of this process is commercially sensitive and not disclosed. • Economic evaluation of using Rio Tinto long-term prices demonstrates a positive NPV for the Bingham Canyon Ore Reserves under range of price, cost and productivity scenarios. Social • The mining tenure is wholly owned, and all permits necessary to mine the Ore Reserve have been obtained. Other • Semi-quantitative risk assessments have been conducted throughout the various technical studies and for each operating plant. Classification • Mineralisation tends to be reasonably well disseminated for copper, but molybdenum varies from disseminated to highly variable veins in higher grade areas. This difference occurs when grades are 0.25% MoS2 or greater. • Measured Mineral Resources not contained within the 0.25% MoS2 grade zone are classified as Proved Ore Reserves. • Measured Mineral Resources within the 0.25% MoS2 grade zone are classified as Probable Ore Reserves. • Indicated Mineral Resources are classified as Probable Ore Reserves.
Notice to ASX Page 31 of 55 Audits or reviews • An external review was completed by the Rio Tinto Corporate Assurance Group in 2015 and all finding mitigating actions were completed in 2016. • An independent Mineral Resource and Ore Reserves audit was last completed in 2010 and resulted in low-level findings regarding documentation of procedures. • An external review of the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimating processes and documentation was conducted in 2013 and concluded that the fundamental processes are appropriate. All audit findings have been fully addressed. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • Historically, reconciliation of actual annual production with the Ore Reserve estimate is generally within 5% for tonnage and copper and gold grades. Prior to 2014, molybdenum could exceed 10% high but a regression analysis and adjustment to the molybdenum grade has resulted in reconciliation performance similar to copper and gold. Silver grade estimates can be in excess of 10% below mined grade due to the nature of mineralisation and drill spacing. • These results are indicative of a robust Ore Reserve estimation process. • Accuracy and confidence of modifying factors are generally consistent with a deposit with a long operating history or with pre-feasibility level studies
Appendix 2 Notice to ASX Page 32 of 55 Winu JORC Table 1 The following table provides a summary of important assessment and reporting criteria used for the reporting of Mineral Resources in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in The Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 Edition (The JORC Code). Criteria in each section apply to all preceding and succeeding sections. Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria Commentary Sampling techniques • Samples used in the Mineral Resource estimate were obtained using either reverse circulation (RC) or diamond (DD) drilling. • RC drilling samples were collected from a static cone splitter on a cyclone at 2 m or 1 m intervals depending on drill hole purpose. The samples consisted of 12% and 8% respectively of the drilled metre with an average sample weight of 3.64 kg. • Most pre-collars for diamond drill holes were destructively drilled with either tri-cone rock rollers or mud rotary PCD techniques to a depth determined by the local geology in which Quaternary and Tertiary sand cover is penetrated, enabling safe installation of casing through the sand profile. Once through the sand cover, standard diamond coring techniques commence. • Several diamond holes were pre-collared utilising RC rigs. • All diamond core drilling is drilled using 3 m triple tube assemblies. • All drilling has been carried out under Rio Tinto supervision by experienced drilling contractors. • Core is cut using an automated core-cutter and a half core sample was collected on intervals ranging from 0.1 m to 1.3 m length. Drilling techniques • RC drilling is from surface using reverse circulation with face sampling bit. RC holes are predominantly east to west at a -85 to -75 degree dip and are cased between 50 m and 70 m. • Diamond drilling is from surface, commencing with either tri-cone rock rollers or mud rotary PCD through sand cover, enabling safe installation of casing through the sand profile. The drill holes are generally cased to 30 m. • Once through the sand cover, triple tube diamond coring techniques are utilised. Reduction from PQ to HQ is at 160 m on average, with depth varying from hole to hole. Most diamond drilling is inclined at approximately -60 degrees; some west to east scissor holes and north- south oriented diamond holes have also been drilled. • Diamond core was oriented using an ACT III RD tool. At the end of each run, the low side of the core was marked by the driller and this was used at the site for marking the whole drill core run with a reference line. Drill sample recovery • RC primary and duplicate samples were weighed upon collection at the rig and all RC samples were weighed upon arrival at the ALS Perth sample preparation facility. • Beyond the depth that RC samples cannot be recovered dry, two additional 6 m rods were drilled. Drilling of the hole was stopped if these samples were wet. • Some wet RC samples drilled prior to 2020 were excluded from the resource database as recorded sample mass was considered too low for the drilled interval, and the representivity of those samples could not be assured. Changes made to RC sampling processes in early 2020 resulted in representative sampling throughout the hole length. • Core recovery was measured and recorded continuously from the start of core drilling to the end of the hole for each drill hole. The end of each run was marked by a core block which provided the depth, core length drilled and core recovered from block to block. • Core sample intervals were selected predominantly at 1 m length, with modification by the geologist according to mineral/vein/contact. Intervals did not consider drilling recovery except when core loss was greater than 0.4 m. • Sampling recovery, independent of drilling recovery, is not detailed in the logging procedure, however it will be included in the next procedure edition. Logging • The logging of the RC chips was completed after sieving and washing of representative material collected from the cyclone. • Detailed descriptions of core were logged qualitatively for lithological composition and texture, structures, veining and alteration. Visual percentage estimates were made for some minerals, including Cu-oxides and Fe-, Mo-, Zn-, and Bi-sulphides. • Structural measurements (orientations of structures such as fault contact, fault fabric, bedding, veins and stratigraphic contacts recorded) as well as geotechnical summary logging was completed. Holes with specific geotechnical purpose had comprehensive geotechnical logging completed, with associated orientations measured. All DD holes were logged before sampling. • All recovered core was logged in detail. • The core was photographed both dry and wet inside the core trays. • All logging information was uploaded into an acQuire database.
Notice to ASX Page 33 of 55 Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • RC samples split by static cone splitter on a cyclone were sent to an ALS Limited laboratory. • PQ3 (83 mm) and HQ3 (61.1 mm) diamond core was sawn into two, and half was collected in a bag and submitted for analysis, the other half was kept in the tray and stored. The diamond half core was sent to ALS Limited laboratory in Perth. • At the laboratory, all samples were dried and crushed to 70% passing 2 mm and then split using a rotary splitter to produce a 750 g sub-sample. The crushed sub-sample was pulverised with 85% passing 75 µm using a LM2 mill and a 100 g pulp was then subsampled for ICP and 30 to 50 g for fire assay. • A portion of the 2 mm sized material was used for VNIR/SWIR spectral readings, which were sent to aiSIRIS International for interpretation. • Preparation techniques and samples sizes are considered appropriate for the style of mineralisation. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • 51 elements were analysed using 4-acid digestion followed by ICP-OES/MS measurements, including qualitative Au, Pt and Pd. • For Au, a 30 g sample was used for analysis by fire assay with AAS finish. • Portable XRF analysis on pulp for Cr, Nb, S, Si, Ta, Ti, Y and Zr was performed with a Delta and Vanta Olympus instrument. • Quality control samples consisted of field duplicates (3 per 100), crush duplicates (1 per 55), pulp duplicates (1 per 55), blanks (3 per 100) and certified reference materials (CRM; 3 per 100). All the results were checked in the acQuire database before being used, and the analysed batches regularly reviewed to ensure they performance within acceptable accuracy and precision limits for the style of mineralisation. Failures during this quality control process triggered re-analysis of the batch prior to acceptance into the database. • Long term CRM performance is consistent across relevant grade ranges for payable metals, showing acceptable levels of accuracy. • A systematic analysis of duplicate samples was carried out at each stage of sampling including field, crush and pulp duplicates. The results from the duplicates indicate an acceptable level of precision for this type of mineralisation and the classification of the resource. The results from blanks did not indicate contamination during the laboratory procedure. The quality control process indicates acceptable levels of precision. Verification of sampling and assaying • All sample intervals were visually verified using high quality core photography and some selected samples were taken inside the mineralised interval for optical and petrographic microscopy by qualified petrographers. • No adjustments were made to the assay data that were electronically uploaded from the laboratory to the database. • The drill core logging data was managed by a computerised system and strict validation steps were followed. • The data are stored in a secured database with restricted access. • Several studies have identified small bias and precision differences between RC and DD where paired data exist. The Competent Person considers the bias to be in an acceptable range. • Documentation of primary data, data entry procedures, data verification and data storage protocols have all been validated by a third-party audit. Location of data points • Drill hole collar locations were surveyed after drilling utilising a handheld Garmin GPS with accuracy of 5 m, and on a campaign basis by an independent survey contractor using a Leica Viva GS15 GNSS base and rover system operating in RTK mode to a stated accuracy of +/- 20 mm. • The data for the collars are provided in the Geocentric Datum of Australia (GDA94 zone 51). • Downhole surveys were completed every 10, 25 or 50 m using a Reflex EZ Gyro or Reflex SPRINT-IQ. Some RC drill holes could not be completely surveyed due to downhole blockages. • The topography is relatively flat with average elevation of 240 m. The basis for the topography surface used in the model is a Lidar survey completed at 1 m centres in 2019. A 5 m x 5 m gridded surface was imported into Vulcan software and used to limit the top of the resource model. Data spacing and distribution • Combined RC and diamond hole spacing after 2022 drilling is irregular with distances between holes ranging from 15 to 150 m with an average of approximately 60 m inside the starter pit shell and 110 m outside the starter shell and inside the nominal resource shell. • A pattern of 14 diamond holes at 15 m spacing north-south and east-west was completed as a part of the drilling included in this report. This close-spaced drilling targeted a representative section of the main mineralised corridor and supports the interpretation of important contacts between supergene and hypogene units and informs the choice of variogram model used in the kriging and recoverable estimation methodology. • The current drilling provides sufficient information to support classification at Indicated Mineral Resource status for a significant portion of the starter pit. • All material outside the starter pit and inside the larger nominal Resource pit shell is classified at Inferred status. • The mineralisation remains open to the north and east and at depth.
Notice to ASX Page 34 of 55 Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • The majority of the drilling is orientated to the west, perpendicular to the orientation of the trend of the highest grade Cu mineralisation which strikes north-northwest and dips moderately (56 degrees) to the east-northeast (080 degrees). • It is recognised that there are multiple mineralisation events and possible overlapping styles of mineralisation. Approximately 35% of drill holes have been oriented other than west, to address any sampling bias, particularly in locations where north-northwest is not the dominant mineralised orientation. Sample security • Samples in calico bags were stored on site in enclosed Bulka-bags before being transported via road via Port Hedland to an ALS Limited laboratory in Perth. • Unique sample numbers were generated directly from the database. • Each sample was given a barcode at the laboratory and the laboratory reconciled the received sample list with physical samples. Barcode readers were used at the different stages of the analytical process. • The laboratory uses a LIMS system that further maintains the integrity of the results. • All sample pulps are stored in a secure warehouse facility. Audits or reviews • The database containing the Winu data was independently checked by a third party in August 2019 and shown to be accurate. • No independent database reviews were conducted in 2022. Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results Criteria Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • All Rio Tinto tenements are managed in accordance with legislated obligations including minimum expenditure. The Winu project is located within Exploration Licence E45/4833, which is 100% owned by Rio Tinto Exploration and expires on 12 of October 2027. Exploration done by other parties • No exploration had been carried out in the immediate Winu area prior to Rio Tinto work which commenced in 2016. Geology • The prospect is located on the Anketell Shelf of the Yeneena Basin, a Neoproterozoic sequence of metasedimentary rocks and granitoids (basement) that were truncated by an angular unconformity before being entirely covered by Phanerozoic sediments (mostly Permian) that range from 50 to 100 m thick in the Winu area. The basement sediments have been folded and faulted both syn and post deposition in numerous tectonic events, and the mineralisation at Winu is located proximal to the hinge of the Winu anticline. • The main lithologies intercepted by the current drilling at Winu include metasedimentary rocks (quartzites, metasandstones, and metasiltstones), unmetamorphosed sedimentary cover rocks (conglomerates, gritstones, sandstones and mudstones) and mafic intrusions. Host rocks to Cu- Au mineralisation are fine to medium-grained sub-arkosic metasandstones and biotite-rich metasiltstones. • The mineralisation is predominantly vein and breccia controlled chalcopyrite and chalcocite with associated pyrite, pyrrhotite, molybdenite, scheelite, bismuthinite and wolframite. Several generations of veins and breccias are identified and characterised by different mineralogical assemblages and textures. The mineralisation associated with the main hydrothermal event is veins with quartz-potassium feldspar-sulphide-dolomite and dominantly potassium feldspar, muscovite, biotite and/or chlorite wall rock alteration. • Primary sulphide mineralisation is overlain by a supergene blanket containing secondary Cu minerals as well as native Cu in places. Minor secondary Cu minerals are present in the hypogene where oxidation of mineralisation has occurred through preferential weathering within structures and areas of high fracture frequency of rock as conduits. Drill hole Information • Summary of drilling used for the Winu Mineral Resource estimate: Drill type Number of holes Total metres RC 605 144,385 DD 283 132,384 Total 888 276,769 Data aggregation methods • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Relationship between mineralisation, widths and intercept lengths • Previous public releases have reported intersections as apparent widths. • No individual drilling results are included in this release. Diagrams • Figure 2 in the body of this release shows the property location.
Notice to ASX Page 35 of 55 • Figure 8 shows a plan view of the drill hole collars and Figure 9 and Figure 10 show two example cross sections through the deposit. Figure 8 Drill hole collar location plan for all Winu holes used in the 31 December 2022 Mineral Resource evaluation with cross section line locations indicated
Notice to ASX Page 36 of 55 Figure 9 Cross section 1 through the Winu orebody showing the geological model and copper assay intercepts
Notice to ASX Page 37 of 55 Figure 10 Cross section 2 through the Winu orebody showing the geological model and copper assay intercepts Balanced reporting • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Other substantive exploration data • Hyperspectral and high-resolution core imagery was collected using a CoreScan Hyperspectral Core Imager. Historical Winu core from 2018 and 2019 was imaged as half core. Holes drilled in 2020 or later were whole core imaged prior to sample cutting. • Magnetic susceptibility was measured for each sample using KT-10 (kappameter) instrument. • Geophysical surveys were carried out over the deposit area including airborne electromagnetics, ground gravity, induced polarisation/resistivity, passive seismic, and downhole density, gamma, conductivity, resistivity, induced polarisation, magnetic susceptibility, BMR, sonic and optical and acoustic televiewer. • Geometallurgical characterisation was conducted on numerous holes since the project commenced and has informed an early understanding of the potential metal recovery. This work continued throughout 2022. • LiDAR imagery was acquired to help in better planning and reporting of the exploration programme. Further work • Rio Tinto will continue to evaluate and interpret the results from all historical work programmes at Winu. • Drilling is ongoing to define the extents of the mineralisation. The results presented here indicate the mineralisation is not closed off by drilling to date. • Metallurgical test work is ongoing. • Geotechnical drilling and logging is ongoing. • Installation of water bores and water monitoring points is ongoing. • Rio Tinto has conducted exploration within the broader Paterson Province on its wholly owned licences and joint venture licences during 2022.
Notice to ASX Page 38 of 55 Section 3: Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources Criteria Commentary Database integrity • All drilling data is stored in the Rio Tinto Copper Winu Project acQuire drill hole database. • All data previously stored in the Rio Tinto Exploration acQuire drill hole database was migrated to the Rio Tinto Copper database in 2021 in a process managed by Rio Tinto IS&T. The migration included all aspects of ore body knowledge data sets and applications. • The system is backed up daily to physical and cloud servers. • All newly acquired data was transferred electronically and is checked prior to upload to the database. • In-built validation tools were used in the acQuire database and data loggers were used to minimise keystroke errors, flag potential errors and validate against internal library codes. Data found to be in error was investigated and corrected where possible. Data that was not corrected was removed from the data set used for resource modelling and estimation. Routine checks of raw assay data against the database were implemented. • Drill hole collars were visually validated and compared to planned locations. Downhole trends and sectional trends were validated and outliers checked. Statistical analysis of assay results by geology domains were checked for trends and outliers. Ongoing comparison with earlier work was undertaken. • The drill hole database used for the resource estimation was validated. Methods included checking of QA/QC data, extreme values, zero values, negative values, possible miscoded data based on location within a geology domain and assay value, sample overlaps, and inconsistencies in length of drill hole surveyed, length of drill hole logged and sampled and sample size at laboratory. Site visits • The Competent Person worked closely with the Winu site and Perth-based project teams since 2020 and is familiar with drill data acquisition procedures and QA/QC system, geological logging, geological data and its interpretation, and geological model development. • The Competent Person visited the Winu site in December 2021. The site visit allowed the Competent Person to gain familiarity with and confidence in field procedures, in particular those impacting drilling, sampling and logging data acquisition. Geological interpretation • Data supporting the geology interpretation includes drill cores, RC chips, geological logs, borehole geophysical logs, ground and airborne geophysical surveys, core imaging, borehole imaging, and chemical analyses. • The orebody is not yet exposed by mining. • Sequences of cover, supergene zones and hypogene zones are well defined at the scale of the drill grid. Details of geology are discussed in Section 2 of this table. • The geological genesis model for Winu is that the primary mineralisation is contained in sets of veins with various orientations potentially related to granite intrusion in the structural setting of the 550 Ma Paterson Orogenic event causing deformation to the host rocks. Paterson deformation resulted in a prominent fold structure at Winu. • At deposit scale, Cu and Au grade continuity within the broad mineralised central zone of the deposit is well supported by available drilling data. Several breccia units have been identified in the centre of the deposit and highlight the highest Cu grades. These units are mappable between drill holes along strike and down dip. Minor late fault offsets are interpreted although not explicitly modelled). Individual veins are narrower and show less persistence along strike and down dip and cannot be confidently mapped between drill holes. • A supergene zone consisting of Cu oxides, leached cap and mixed secondary and primary sulphides has been modelled with available data including sequential Cu analyses and mineralogy. Differentiation of units in the supergene zone is primarily reflective of differing metal recovery (geometallurgical) characteristics. Primary mineralisation is remobilised into the supergene zones that are discordant to the axial planar fabric. • Geological differentiation within the hypogene zone is limited to identified sulphide breccia units and proximal quartz-sulphide veins that are associated with most of the Cu, Au and Ag. mineralisation. Several narrow marker units have been identified in the metasediments as well as a pre-mineral mafic sill, and several post-mineral mafic dykes. • Some stratigraphy-parallel veins have been identified, as well as sets of veins which appear to be strata-bound, perpendicular to stratigraphy and contained within zones of stratigraphy which shows preferential characteristics for hosting veining. It is currently acknowledged that these veins do not make up the primary mineralisation when in proximity to the sulphide breccia but could add value distal to the breccia. • In the southeast corner of the proposed starter pit and extending into the notional resource pit shell, Au-dominant (low Cu) mineralisation hosted in east-west trending near vertical quartz veins have been intersected in RC and diamond drilling. This is a different style of mineralisation to that seen in the main central mineralisation zone and more drilling is required to test grade and extent and to understand the geological controls. Geological work is planned to review the continuity of veining within zones of stratigraphy which could host more volumetrically significant mineralised veins rather than strike or dip continuous.
Notice to ASX Page 39 of 55 • The geology has been modelled in 3D by implicit modelling to suit the specific geometries and spatial continuity for lithology and geometallurgical units. The modelled units are used to control estimation. • The purpose of the recent model update was to increase the reliability of the geological models to adequately reflect the current geological knowledge of the project. Dimensions • The drilled extent of continuous anomalous (>0.2%) Cu mineralisation strikes approximately north-northwest to south-southeast with a strike extent of 3,000 m. This feature has a width ranging from approximately 130 m in the southern end, 100 m in the northern end, and up to 400 m in the centre of the hypogene mineralisation. Supergene Cu mineralisation is up to 700 m wide. Copper mineralisation occurs from approximately 80 m to approximately 740 m below surface. • A zone of Au-dominant mineralised veins in the southeast corner of the known mineralisation has an approximately east-west orientation with strike extent of 1000 m and up to 150 m true thickness. Estimation and modelling techniques • Cu, Au, Ag, Bi and S grades are estimated by a combined method consisting firstly of Ordinary Kriging (OK) onto 40 x 40 x 5 m panels followed by Uniform Conditioning by kriged panel grade (UC) and finally a localisation (LUC) onto blocks of 10 x 10 x 5 m. • A suite of additional elements including As, C, soluble Cu, Na2O, K2O, Al2O3, CaO, Fe2O3, Sb, MgO, SiO2, MnO, Pb, Zn for ore and waste characterisation are estimated onto 10 x 10 x 5 m blocks by either LUC or directly by OK. • Raw RC and diamond assay samples, mostly at 1 m, are length weighted to regular 2 m composites prior to data analysis and estimation. • The supergene zone is divided into several discrete domains on the basis of sequential Cu and mineralogy data and the domains are used to constrain grades estimation. • A low grade Cu grade shell is used to limit grades estimation within the hypogene zone. The shell is defined at a low (0.2%) Cu grade and is modelled as an Indicator by kriging onto blocks. A probability threshold of 0.5 was applied to the kriged indicator on blocks. • In the southeast corner of the deposit, a low grade Au shell is modelled to constrain estimation of Au and Bi. The shell is defined at 0.1 ppm Au and is modelled as an Indicator by kriging onto blocks. A probability threshold of 0.25 was applied to the kriged indicator on blocks. • Exploratory data analysis was conducted to evaluate domain boundary conditions, establish variogram models, and define interpolation parameters. • The distribution of Cu and Au grades within each domain is typically skewed to the right. A small number of high grade samples are deemed to be unrepresentative outliers and those values were trimmed back to better-supported grade values prior to use in estimation. The sensitivity of the trimming of outlier values has decreased with each iteration of the estimate with the addition of drilling data. • No other modifications are made to the composite data used for analysis and estimation. • The raw Cu, Au, Ag, Bi and S values were transformed to Normal distributions for data analysis and to choose variogram models. The Normal variogram models were back-transformed to raw grade scale prior to use in estimation. • Data analysis, kriging and recoverable resource estimation are completed using Isatis geostatistical software. Final block models are prepared using Vulcan software. • Grade estimation was completed in two passes, with the majority of blocks inside starter pit and notional resource pit shell estimated in the first pass. Searches were orientated to the primary interpreted mineralisation trend. The first search utilised distances of 350 x 250 x 20 m in the major, semi major, and minor orientations for hypogene and secondary sulphide domains. For the oxide domains search utilised were 200 x 200 x 32 m in the major, semi major, and minor orientations, respectively. • Validation of grade, metal and tonnage estimates is by visualisation along with statistical comparison to input data, geological models and previous estimates. Block estimates are consistent with sample values and observed geology. Local differences between previous and current estimates are consistent with changes to geological model and/or additional drilling. • Grade and metal estimates by LUC on 10 x 10 x 5 m blocks are compared to 40 x 40 x 5 m kriged panel scale estimates to confirm global unbiasedness, and to global change of support estimates to confirm the distributions are appropriately modelled. Moisture • All tonnages and grades are presented on a dry basis. Cut-off parameters • The cut-off parameters used as the basis of this Mineral Resource are on a CuEq. A CuEq unit is defined as: ((Cu_pct *Cu (price 1%/tonne) * Cu recovery) + (Au_ppm * Au($/t) * Au recovery) + (Ag_ppm * Ag ($/t) * Ag recovery)) / (Cu (price 1%/tonne)). • All elements included in the metal equivalent calculation have a reasonable potential to be recovered and sold. • Metal prices applied are provided by Rio Tinto Economics and are generated based on industry capacity analysis, global commodity consumption and economic growth trends. A single long term price point is used in the definition of ore and waste and in the financial evaluations underpinning the resources statement. The detail of this process and of the price points
Notice to ASX Page 40 of 55 selected are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. • Average recoveries for each of the supergene and hypogene domains are derived from metallurgical test work and detailed mineralogy studies using drill core acquired from purpose- drilled metallurgical and resource drill holes. Average recoveries are shown in the table below. Mining factors or assumptions • Surface mining is the most likely method to be used in the extraction of this orebody. • Mining studies have advanced through 2022 and form the basis of the reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction test applied to the Mineral Resource. Metallurgical factors or assumptions • Metallurgical studies have advanced through 2022. The basis for predictions of metallurgical performance is the ongoing comminution and flotation test work conducted on samples composited from geometallurgical zones from numerous geometallurgical and resource diamond holes. • The studies confirm that the mineralisation is amenable to processing through conventional crushing, grinding, and flotation circuits. • The current assumption is that there will be a specific conventional processing pathway for Au. Environmental factors or assumptions • Closure studies continue to progress in preparation of approvals submission. • Environmental geochemistry assessments have been conducted in accordance with industry standards. The majority of waste is expected to be non acid-forming, however some potentially acid-forming waste rock and tailings will be present. A management strategy has been developed to minimise the risk for acid and metalliferous drainage. This strategy includes the encapsulation of potentially acid-forming waste rock and de-sulphurisation of tailings. A desktop and basic survey have been undertaken for subterranean fauna. The assessment indicates it is unlikely that subterranean fauna occurs in most geological units of the study area. The assessment was supported by a sampling program which recorded no troglobitic or stygobitic specimens. Additional survey effort will be undertaken as additional water bores are established. • Flora and fauna surveys have been conducted across the project area, with additional surveys planned as required. Bulk density • Specific gravity measurements were taken on 20 cm lengths of solid core every 10 or 20 m, representing different lithology and mineralised intervals. The measurement used the hydrostatic/gravimetric method (Archimedes Principle of buoyancy). • Some variability exists between material types in the supergene zone. Dry bulk density values have low variability in the hypogene zone. • Dry bulk density is estimated directly onto 10 x 10 x 5 m blocks by Ordinary Co-Kriging using dry bulk density as primary data and downhole geophysics derived density measurements as secondary data. Classification • The Competent Person considers that the classification reflects the style of mineralisation and confidence in the understanding of the mineralisation controls and drill hole sampling quality. • The adopted definition of Indicated Resources is +/-15% variation in metal terms with a 90% confidence interval on an annual basis, inside the starter pit. • A quantitative assessment of Cu grade uncertainty was made using the results of Conditional Simulation, taking into account proposed mining rates and schedule. This forms the basis for Indicated classification for a portion of the Mineral Resource. • Only mineralisation that is considered to have reasonable prospects of eventual economic extraction has been reported as Inferred or Indicated Mineral Resource. • Material outside the starter pit and inside the notional resource pit shell is classified Inferred. • Mineralised material outside of the notional resource pit shell is excluded from the Mineral Resource. Audits or reviews • The 2022 estimation workflow used to produce the current Mineral Resource estimate is mature and stable. The estimation workflow was refined on the basis of several
Notice to ASX Page 41 of 55 recommendations from the 2020 audit and subsequent analysis in 2021 and 2022. • The current workflow was internally peer reviewed in December 2022; the review confirmed that the estimation methodology is appropriate for the style of mineralisation and for the evaluation of open pit mining options, and that the estimates reflect the underlying drill hole assay grades. An external audit of the recoverable resource estimation methodology and results was conducted in 2020. The audit found that the estimation methodology was fit for purpose; no fatal flaws were identified. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • The precision of Cu grades estimation was determined using the results of a geostatistical simulation of Cu grades within planned annual mining increments inside the proposed starter pit. • The quantified uncertainty of Cu grade estimates is inherent in the classification scheme described above. • Confidence in geological boundaries has not been quantified in the same way. The Competent Person has taken into consideration the maturity of the geological model in determining that the continuity of geological features associated with Cu and Au mineralisation is sufficient to support the classification of the Mineral Resource.
Appendix 4 Notice to ASX Page 42 of 55 QIT Madagascar Minerals JORC Table 1 The following table provides a summary of important assessment and reporting criteria used for the reporting of Mineral Resources in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in The Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 Edition (The JORC Code). Criteria in each section apply to all preceding and succeeding sections. Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria Commentary Sampling techniques • The Petriky deposit was sampled using hand auger (HA) by US Steel in the 1970s and portable vibracore (VIB) by QMM in 1987 to 1988. Samples were collected at 1.5 m intervals with 100% of all samples retrieved for laboratory analyses. Drilling techniques • A total of 949 HA holes were drilled to the water table only and therefore never tested the full depth of the deposit. Drill depth averaged 5.6 m. • VIB extended to the full depth of the deposit with an average depth of 19.5 m. • HA and VIB essentially covers the same areas. • In both campaigns samples were collected at 1.5 m intervals. Drill sample recovery • Every drill team was led by a geologist who described and recorded sample intervals. The head driller kept a drill log to record drill depth. Information was also recorded on logging sheets. • Sample mass was recorded at drill site and at the sample preparation after the interval was dried. The recorded mass of each dry interval was then compared with an expected theoretical mass, calculated from the dimensions of the drilling tools (volume of the interval) and average density. • No bias has been observed between sample recovery and grade. Logging • Samples were logged and described by experienced geologists. • All drill samples were logged at 1.5 m intervals. • Records includes lithology, descriptive features and estimates of grade and clay for comparative purpose with laboratory assays. Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • All drill samples were collected in calico bags from the drill site. • After logging samples were dried in a laboratory. • Rotary splitter was used to ensure a representative sub-sample for heavy liquid separation. • Sample preparation protocols were validated during subsequent feasibility studies of Mandena. • The Competent Person considers that the sample sizes are appropriate to the material being sampled. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • Assays were conducted in-house following procedures developed jointly by the QIT research department and Carpco, a mineral processing engineering consultant. • Total Heavy Mineral (THM) content was determined by Heavy Liquid Separation (HLS), using Tetrabromoethane (TBE). • THM mass recovery was controlled by float checks, which re-float the light minerals to the HLS, re- measuring the possible sinking mass. • The THM mineralogy for the entire deposit was determined from a composite THM of 37 boreholes using CARPCO electromagnetic separation. • Similar procedures were documented by US Steel in their report. However, as US Steel used a lower density separation liquid, the THM % was adjusted by regression analysis of paired data. Verification of sampling and assaying • No formal QAQC programme covered the 1988 programme or prior to that. • As the Mandena and Petriky programs were conducted contemporaneously, the sampling and laboratory methods used in 1988 were validated during the Mandena feasibility study. • Twinned THM assays were used to validate the drilling and showed good correlation with no indication of a bias. • Validations were performed with Sonic drilling over 20 original Vibracore drill sites. Each site was re-drilled with Vibracore and 10 were twinned with both Vibracore and Sonic. • In-house standards were introduced in the sample sequence at the rate of 1 every 25 during the validation process. • Duplicate samples were inserted at 1 duplicate for every 25 routine samples. • Duplicates samples from 10 Vibracore-Sonic drill sites were also analysed at an external laboratory. • Results of standards analysis were consistent and showed acceptable levels of accuracy with no indication of a bias • The average grade difference between routine and duplicate samples showed average variation of 4.3% which is an acceptable level of precision for this style of mineralisation. Similar results were obtained from THM grade in twinned holes. • Statistical analysis concluded that there was no evidence of any significant bias between original
Notice to ASX Page 43 of 55 Vibracore drill results and the Sonic validation drilling. • Data captured in the data base was monitored by Geostat Int and validated on site by the head geologist. • Data was transferred and validated in an acQuire database with built in data validation tools (drilling, sampling and assays) and QA/QC (sampling and assays). Location of data points • Collars were surveyed with traditional equipment and techniques (theodolites, levelling rods and total stations). • The collar coordinates were recorded in the original files and reported in the local Laborde coordinate system. In order to convert Laborde data to UTM, a high precision benchmark survey using Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS equipment was conducted. • Horizontal survey precision was set to sub-centimetre accuracy and to 1.7 cm vertically. Grid system used is UTM, zone 38 South WGS 84 datum. • As boreholes are shallow, no down hole surveys were conducted. Data spacing and distribution • Petriky was drilled to full depth at a drill spacing of 800 m x 100 m using VIB. • Additional data was added using shallow HA drilled on a grid density of 200 m x 50 m. • Mineralogical data is based on composites from only 37 boreholes and not considered to be representative of the resource on local scale. • Data spacing and distribution is sufficient to define an Inferred Resources. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • Drilling orientated along geomorphological features which run parallel to the Laborde's coordinate system. • No orientation based sample bias has been identified. Sample security • Samples collected at the drill site were delivered to the laboratory by the responsible geologist. • Sample lists were checked by the laboratory. Audits or reviews • An external Resource & Reserve audit was concluded in 2021 for QMM. • Overall audit assessment was rated as “Good”. • There were no audits findings related to sampling techniques and data acquisition. Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results Criteria Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • Under decree # 130/2007 dated 4 January 2007 the four Exploration permits (known as ‘Permis de Recherche de Fort-Dauphin’ as per Article 7 of the Framework Agreement) previously held under the name of the Joint Venture partner “OMNIS” were transferred to QIT Madagascar Minerals SA (QMM) and consolidated into mining permit “type E” # 651 • The Fort-Dauphin mining permits covers 562.5 km2, the exact 90 cells of the exploration permit. • The permit is valid for 30 years as of 12 December 1996. • Renewal for 10-year periods are granted at QMM`s request. Exploration done by other parties • Original exploration data of US Steel’s 1972 to 1974 campaigns were acquired in 1986 by QMM. • US Steel drilled a total of 949 hand auger drill holes on a grid density of 200 m x 50 m. • Holes were drilled to the water table only therefore never tested the full depth of the deposit. • Drill depth averaged 5.6 m. • The THM grade data was used to define a thin high grade upper layer accounting for 24 % of the resource estimate. Geology • The deposit is a heavy mineral sand placer formed by middle-to late Pleistocene sea transgression/regression cycles 35,000 to 6,000 years ago. • The morphology of Petriky is similar to the nearby Mandena deposit. • Sands are contained in an embayment that extends inland. A well-developed lagoon system borders the dune systems and is enclosed by a coastal barrier dune. • As in Mandena, the same stratigraphic units are recognized in Petriky: o The Upper sand has an averages grade of 7.9 % THM and average thickness of 5 m. o The lower zone, including the transitional zone are much thicker and lower grade. o Total combined thickness of 20 m on average and grade of 3.8 % THM. Drill hole Information • The database contains 263 VIB boreholes and 949 HA in the Petriky sector of the Fort-Dauphin deposit. Data aggregation methods • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Relationship between mineralisation • The deposits are mineral sand bodies drilled with vertical drill holes. Width and length measured in drill holes are true intercepts.
Notice to ASX Page 44 of 55 widths and intercept lengths Diagrams • Figure 3 in the body of this release shows the property location. • Figure 11 and Figure 12 show the drill hole plan and the stratigraphic column for the deposit. Figure 11 Petriky drill hole location map
Notice to ASX Page 45 of 55 Figure 12 Typical stratigraphic profile of Fort Dauphin mineral sand deposits Balanced reporting • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Other substantive exploration data • Mineralogical variability, metallurgical or bulk testing has not been conducted on the Petriky sands. Further work • Future exploration plans have been developed to increase the definition of the Petriky deposit to 400 m x 100 m drill spacing with additional mineralogical characterisation and lab scale metallurgical test. Section 3: Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources Criteria Commentary Database integrity • Validation is done at the acQuire import stage. • Data validation procedures used searches for empty fields, out of range data, and visual validation on cross sections. Site visits • Regular site visits to the Fort Dauphin deposits are undertaken by the Competent Person. • Results of QA/QC and procedures are discussed with geological and laboratory teams, drill programmes and procedures reviewed. Geological interpretation • Geological units are defined on cross sections based on lithological and assay results. • Base of mineralisation is defined by lithological observation and where THM is less than 52% and Slimes is more than 10%. • The geological domains comprise 3 mineralised domains: o Lower Sand. o Transitional Sand. o Upper Sand. • As in Mandena, the Upper Sand has a higher THM grade, average 7.9% The Lower Sand and Transitional Sand are much thicker.
Notice to ASX Page 46 of 55 • Total combined average thickness of 20 m and average THM grade of 3.8%. Dimensions • The Mineral Resource is contained within continuous mineralised sand extending to natural borders (water bodies, edge of bedrock or minimal mineralised thickness of 3 m). • Mineralised sand overlies a well-defined clay or lateritic bedrock base. • Dimensions for Petriky are 9.5 km x 1.8 km x 20 m. Estimation and modelling techniques • The Petriky resource model is a hybrid 2-dimensional grade thickness estimate based on combined HA and VIB borehole composites. • Historic estimates were based only on HA data and lower density heavy liquid (Bromoform, 2.85) as opposed to TBE (2.96) to determine THM content. • A correction derived from the comparison of % THM of the top layer intercepts in paired HA-VIB holes was applied to the older HA data, reducing the average % THM of that layer by 7% in Petriky. • THM, and Slimes were estimated using Ordinary Kriging into 50 m x 50 m parent cells orientated parallel to the Laborde's coordinate system. Estimation was controlled using a hard boundary for the base slimes base. • Search ellipses are based on variogram anisotropy and drill hole grids and range from 600 x 500 m to 4000 x 800 m for HA and VIB composites respectively. • Maximum number of composites used within the search ellipse is 30 and minimum of 1. • Average topographic elevation in each cell was derived from available topographic control points using inverse distance (power of ID is not known) estimation and a 200 m search radius. • No top or bottom cut was employed. • No cut-off grades were applied, however the base was modelled where THM drops below 2% and slimes above 10%. • Estimates were validated statistically and visually. Moisture • All tonnages are estimated on a dry basis. Cut-off parameters • All estimates are constrained to geological boundaries and hence are at a 0% cut-off grade. Mining factors or assumptions • Mining is assumed to be via open pit dredging as with the nearby Mandena deposit. Metallurgical factors or assumptions • Metallurgical factors used in Mandena are also applied to Petriky for valuation purpose as mineralogical and grain size characteristics are similar. Metallurgical factors have not yet been confirmed using Petriky samples. Environmental factors or assumptions • The “Nouvelle Aire Protegé” (NAP) conservation zone declared at Petriky has been excluded from the Mineral Resource. • No specific Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) has been completed for mining activities at Petriky, however baseline work has been undertaken during the initial QMM study phase and updated via QMM’s ongoing presence. • An EIA has been prepared and submitted for the next phase of Petriky exploration. Bulk density • No bulk density work has been undertaken at Petriky to date. • The tonnages were calculated using the same density formula as originally applied to the nearby Mandena deposit where density = 1.57+0.01*%THM, resulting in an average calculated density of 1.62 g/cm3. Classification • The total Mineral Resource is classified as an Inferred Resource and is estimated at 442 Mt sand containing 22.5 Mt of heavy minerals at a grade of 5.1% THM. • The previously reported Petriky Mineral Resource was classified as Indicated however it was re- classified to Inferred for the 2022 reporting period. • The rationale to down-grade Petriky resources from Indicated to Inferred was a combination of development risk and delays in obtaining sufficient mineralogy and geotechnical data. • Based on experience and results of reconciliation on the current nearby Mandena operation the Competent Person judges the classification as appropriate for the deposit. Audits or reviews • An external Resource & Reserve audit was concluded in 2021 for QMM. • Overall audit assessment was rated as “Good”. • 2 low rated findings were identified for resources: o To have more regular Mineral Resource updates. o Risk associated with access to Petriky for drilling. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • Resource estimates on Petriky provide a reasonable global estimate to support an Inferred Resource. • A more precise local estimate is required as more detailed mineralogical and geological data becomes available.
Notice to ASX Page 47 of 55 Richards Bay Minerals JORC Table 1 The following table provides a summary of important assessment and reporting criteria used for the reporting of Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves in accordance with the Table 1 checklist in The Australasian Code for the Reporting of Exploration Results, Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves, 2012 Edition (The JORC Code). Criteria in each section apply to all preceding and succeeding sections. Section 1: Sampling Techniques and Data Criteria Commentary Sampling techniques • Sonic drill core samples are delivered to a dedicated core yard; core is prepared by marking metre intervals measured from the core recovery. Core recovery is measured as a compaction ratio as core sand is transferred form core barrel to plastic sausage bags at the drill site. The core is photographed and sampled in its entirety at 1 m intervals typically weighing 5 to 16 kg. During early exploration in 2005 to 2006 two half metre (0.5 m) intervals per borehole were sampled at times at the ore sand – base clay boundary. • RC samples are collected over 3 m sample lengths from the collar of the drill hole, then 1 m sample lengths are collected within 10 m of the base of the drill hole for better basal definition. • Samples are sent to an in-house laboratory where a set sampling technique is followed, and applicable Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are used (refer to sections Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation; Quality of assay data and laboratory tests). Drilling techniques • Sonic drilling is the preferred method of drilling for geological and resource definition. It utilises either a 4” x 6” or 3” x 5” system in which a 4-inch or 3-inch core barrel is used for sampling. The core barrel is overridden by a 6-inch or 5-inch casing to hold the borehole vertically open from the top dune surface to the bottom of the borehole, typically at ±5 m below ore sand – base clay boundary. • Sonic drill samples are analogous to that of diamond drill samples. The difference is that Sonic drilling is used for loose material, where a high frequency wave is transmitted through a drill string in addition to the normal rotary motion to ensure optimum sample recovery. • Relatively undisturbed continuous representative core samples are captured for each run. Each run is measured at the drill site (run transferred to plastic sausage bags) to determine the weight in kilograms by trained drilling crew. • Typical horizontal grid spacing for sampling is 200 m x 100 m Sonic. • RC (also known as Air Core) holes are drilled vertically using AQ (~48 mm outer diameter/ 27 mm inner diameter) rods at an operating pressure of 500 kPa. • Several flaws have been noted with RC drilling in unconsolidated to semi consolidated material, The most pertinent is the underestimation of grade by up to 50%, • In addition, smearing, selective sampling/recovery and winnowing of material occurs, especially below the water table and with increasing depth. • Between 1970 and 1989 40 RC drill holes were completed at Zulti South, followed by successive drilling campaigns until 2005. In total, 3049 RC drill holes were completed at Zulti South. • RC drill holes were used for resource estimation purposes until the 2006 update, which also used sonic data to create a hybrid resource model. • The 2013 resource update, which used sonic data exclusively, superseded the RC / Sonic hybrid model. • All subsequent resource model updates have used sonic data exclusively Drill sample recovery • Sonic core recovery is measured by a competent trained geologist as a compaction ratio ((tape measure cm/run length) x 100) represented as a percentage. Weight per metre is correlated to the field measured total run weight. Generally lower recoveries can be expected at the top of the borehole due to the nature of the loose sand material and improve with depth. • One and half metre runs are taken as a precautionary measure for very loose ground where recovery is very poor. • Due to the nature of the orebody no poor recoveries were experienced. Logging • All Sonic and RC drill core is logged by a competent trained geologist based on the standardised logging procedures, SOPs. • A small sample is kept for each metre in plastic chip trays as a logging record. • Logging is quantitative, describing attributes relevant for sand characterization following a set of SOPs. Sub-sampling techniques and sample preparation • After logging, the complete field samples are delivered to the in-house laboratory for analysis. • At the receiving station the complete field samples are scanned and electronically weighed to confirm the field weight. • A set sampling technique is followed and applicable SOPs are used (refer to Quality of assay data and laboratory tests). This involves: o Oven dry the field sample
Notice to ASX Page 48 of 55 o Use a rotary splitter to collect 6 ~700 g representative sub-samples o Attrition the ~700 g sub-sample over -45 µm sieve o +45 µm dried and calculate slimes percentage o A heavy liquid, usually tetrabromoethane (TBE), is used to separate Heavy Minerals (HM) from Quartz o HM is separated with a Carpco magnetic separator to its main components based on magnetic susceptibility o These separate HM components are then separately pulverised, and pellets are moulded for XRF analysis. • At the end of each analysis process two representative ~700 g samples are returned to the drilling store facility for safekeeping and re-analysis, if there are any noticeable deviations or for QA/QC purposes. The other representative 700 g sample is kept at the laboratory store facility. • The sample size and sampling methodology is considered appropriate for the material being sampled. Quality of assay data and laboratory tests • The quality of assay data and laboratory tests is based on Standard Analytical Methods (SAMs) and SOPs used at the laboratory. Validation criteria are built into the Laboratory Information Management system (LIMS). • Pairs of duplicate samples from each batch are analysed. These paired duplicate results are analysed and plotted using the Mean Paired Difference per pair. • Re-analysis of quartz float samples after TBE extraction of the HM to ensure complete extraction is done as a check. To pass, remaining THM content needs to be < 0.2% • Carpco control samples of known magnetic susceptibility and mass are passed through the separator before each shift. • TBE density checks are carried out on a regular basis. • For XRF work, controls are run at the beginning of each shift. Charts plot the graphs based on SPC rules. XRF3 model ARL9900 XP for the calibration factors applied. • Standards, blanks, duplicates, and external laboratory checks are used. 1993 QAQC samples of all types were submitted between 2012 and 2015 against a total of 17 700 assay samples used for estimation, thus 11%. • Acceptable levels of accuracy (i.e., lack of bias) and precision have been established. Graphs are used to identify outliers. Verification of sampling and assaying • The important intersection at RBM is the Resource Base. This is where there is a sharp increase in slimes and a corresponding drop in grade. This intersection is checked by internal employees from the Resource Modelling and Mine Planning sections. • Borehole twinning has been used for various reasons, but mostly to compare RC Total Heavy Minerals (THM) with Sonic THM, since RC drilling is known to show increasing bias downhole with THM results. • There appears to be a systematic bias between sonic and RC samples, with the degree of bias for heavy minerals increasing with increasing THM grade, and the degree of bias for slimes decreasing with increasing slimes grade. Selected RC holes were chosen for twinning to check the discrepancy in the results when compared with the more accurate Sonic drill method. This process also helps in increasing the level of confidence in the assays for the pre 2013 resource models which incorporated RC drilling with a transformation applied. • Comparison of RC and sonic data using Quantile-quantile (Q-Q) plots informed the process of creating transformation factors for the RC data. • Q-Q plots are created by sorting the respective samples sets in ascending order and computing the grade at each percentile of each distribution. The percentiles are then plotted on a standard scatterplot. • A polynomial function was fitted to each plot to derive a transformation which was applied to the RC data, in order to correct for the grade bias. • The transformation applied to the data varied according to the unit, as well as the attribute and grade thereof. An upgrade factor of 1.06 for ilmenite, rutile and zircon was used in the February 2012 block model. • Since 2013 only Sonic holes were used for resource model updates which precluded the need for transformation factors. • All data is stored in an acQuire database. For each resource update a new database is created. Primary data is not changed, but if there is a need for it to be changed after validations, then this is changed by a Database Manager only and recorded in the system that there is a change in the primary data. Data entry is done in the acQuire database system and the procedures are on the department SharePoint site (electronic). Data verification is done using built in validation checks that are part of the acQuire database system. • Any adjustments in the database are communicated through an office memo for all the users. ‘- 97’ values are used to indicate insufficient sample to continue with the XRF analysis and ‘-99’ values are used to indicate samples that have not been analysed. Location of data points • Drill hole collars are surveyed using differential GPS. Accuracy is 1 cm horizontal and 2 cm vertical. This is accurate enough for Mineral Resource estimation. • The grid is a modified Clarke 1880 ellipsoid using the Cape Datum.
Notice to ASX Page 49 of 55 • A LiDAR survey was done for topographic control. The average accuracy in the Z direction is 0.11 m (2013 Survey check against 75 drill holes). Data spacing and distribution • Typically, RC drill holes were drilled on a 200 m N x 50 m E grid. • Samples were taken every 3 m down hole. • Typically, Sonic drill holes are drilled on a 200 m N x 100 m E grid. • Samples are taken every metre down hole. • The data spacing and distribution is sufficient to establish the degree of geological and grade continuity appropriate for the Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve estimation procedure(s) and classifications applied. This is verified by using reconciliations at the Zulti North operations. • For estimation purposes the samples are composited into 2 m sample lengths. Orientation of data in relation to geological structure • All drilling is vertical and orientated along the long axis of the deposit and the general direction of mining. It is therefore deemed representative. • Mineralised structures broadly follow the long axis of the deposit. Directional variogram analysis confirms this trend although some domains can be at an angle to the deposit but do not seem to vary by more than 30 degrees to the deposit orientation. No significant sampling bias is expected. Sample security • Samples are tracked from the drill site to the core shed to the laboratory by tracking sheets and signed off by the relevant field geologist. • Retained samples are stored in a core shed and a record is kept of available samples. Audits or reviews • There was an Internal Rio Tinto Resource and Reserve Audit completed in October 2014. RBM achieved a Satisfactory Rating, with four low rated findings. • The most recent Rio Tinto Resource and Reserve Audit was conducted in June 2022, using Golder & Associates as external reviewers. The report was rated Satisfactory with two low level findings; actions are in place to address these. Section 2: Reporting of Exploration Results Criteria Commentary Mineral tenement and land tenure status • Zulti South leases were held by Zululand Titanium (Pty) Ltd in terms of the Mineral Lease No K154/90 and Protocol No. 496/93. On 9 May 2012 RBM executed new order mining rights at the Department of Mineral Resources, which is valid for 28 years. This conversion extends for the current Zulti North deposit as well as the Zulti South Deposit, subject to fulfilling the Social and Labour plan. • RBM is situated approximately 200 km north of Durban and 20 km northeast of Richards Bay on the east coast of South Africa. The two main ore bodies are known as the Zulti North and Zulti South leases as well as the depleted Tisand lease, which is the repository for the Minerals Separation Plant’s stockpiled tailings resource. • The Zulti South ore body comprises three leases, known as On Reserve 10, Kraal Hill 1 and Kraal Hill 2, and is located south of Richards Bay and to the north of the town of Mtunzini • Richards Bay Minerals (RBM) is the trading name for Richards Bay Mining (Pty) Limited and Richards Bay Titanium (Pty) Limited. • Ownership of RBM is summarized as Rio Tinto (74%), Blue Horison (24%) - a consortium of investors and our Host Communities Mbonambi, Sokhulu, Mkhwanazi and Dube and 2% RBM employees. • Current discussions and negotiations with the Ingonyama Trust are in process regarding surface rights in the Zulti South area. The potential impact of a failure to obtain agreement is a delay in the start of the project. Exploration done by other parties • Not applicable, all work has been carried out by RBM. Geology • The Zulti South heavy mineral sands deposit represents an unconsolidated beach placer deposit found within a belt of undulating aeolian dunes aligned roughly parallel to the coast, of Pliocene – Pleistocene and Holocene age. At present only the Holocene dunes are mined by RBM. Material mined by RBM is from the Sibayi (<10 ka) and KwaMbonambi (57 to 6 ka) Formations, which are the youngest units of the Maputaland Group, a thin veneer set on the Zululand Coastal Plain, formed in response to sea-level changes and uplift during the Neogene (25-2 Ma) and Quaternary (2 Ma to present) periods. Drill hole Information • Table of drill holes RC Collars Sonic Collars 3049 777 Data aggregation methods • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported.
Notice to ASX Page 50 of 55 Relationship between mineralisation , widths and intercept lengths • Nearly all the lease areas are mineralised between the topographic surface and the slimes base. • There is no dip in the overall geometry of the mineralisation. All drill holes dip by 90 degrees which is fitting for the style of mineralisation. • The mineralisation width can vary from 1 m to >150 m. Diagrams • Figure 4 in the body of this release shows the property location. • Figure 13 and Figure 14 show the drill hole plan and a typical cross section through the deposit. Figure 13 Zulti South drill hole location map Figure 14 Typical cross section through Zulti South block model showing mineralisation boundaries and EHM grade Balanced reporting • Not applicable as no Exploration Results are being reported. Other substantive exploration data • Other exploration data is collected including: o grain size o hardness o colour o lithology o estimated THM percentage o estimated slimes content o water table intersection o bulk sample data o geotechnical data o groundwater data. • This information is captured in acQuire where appropriate. Further work • Infill resource drilling is required once mining commences.
Notice to ASX Page 51 of 55 Section 3: Estimation and Reporting of Mineral Resources Criteria Commentary Database integrity • For each resource update a new database is created. Any adjustments in the database will be communicated through an office memo for all the users. ‘-97’ values are used to indicate insufficient sample to continue with the XRF analysis and ‘-99’ values are used to indicate samples that have not been analysed. • Where there are ‘-97’ values indicating below detection limit, half detection limit values (0.05%) for all attributes are assigned to these samples for estimation purposes. ‘-99‘ values indicating missing samples are retained in the database and are treated as absent for estimation. • Where slimes content was too great to allow analysis, a value of 35% was assigned in the database This allowed these samples to be flagged, while being close to the maximum expected value found within the acQuire database validation rules. Site visits • The Competent Person for Mineral Resources is based on site. Geological interpretation • The geology of the deposit is well understood, and the geological interpretation is sound. Academic studies were completed by several people to understand the deposit. • Data used for geological interpretations includes geological logging descriptions and assay data. • The main geological domaining control used is the resource base. • This is based on modelling a surface defined by a high slimes (greater than 12%) / low THM (less than 2%) contact. • Using the following assay (slimes, THM and EHM) and geology (slimes & hardness) attributes, intersection points were chosen according to the criteria above, and snapped to the drill hole traces. Cross-sections were then drawn along the drill lines using these points. The cross-sections were then wire-framed to create a resource base surface. • Grade is affected by the depositional history and resulting stratigraphy, but grade and geology generally show good continuity. Variability is greatest down hole where most changes happen within the first 5 m. Horizontal continuity is better with most change happening in a distance from 100 to 200 m. Dimensions • The Zulti South deposit is approx. 20 km in extent along the strike and varies in width from 0.5 to 3 km. Vertical extent varies from 1 to 80 m plus. Estimation and modelling techniques • The data are composited into 2 m lengths from the top of the drill hole. Fractional lengths are included if the fraction at the bottom of the drill hole represents more than 1 m (50% of composite length) • The following attributes are estimated during resource updates: o Ilm_Mag_Other – weakly magnetic ilmenite (unrecoverable) o Ilm_Mags – economic ilmenite o Mag_Other – ‘Junk’ material o Magn – Magnetite o Mags – Highly magnetic material o Non_Mags – Non Magnetic fraction o Non_Mags_TIO2_NM - Rutile o Non_Mags_Zircon_NM - Zircon o Slimes – fines smaller than 45 µm o Total Heavy Mineral content (THM). • The estimation technique used is Ordinary Kriging with anisotropy based on variograms. Ordinary Kriging is an appropriate method of estimation for this type of deposit. The appropriateness of kriging was confirmed during peer reviews and audits. • Search neighbourhood criteria are based on variography and are as follows: o Maximum number of samples per hole: 4 o Maximum number of informing samples: 25 o Max search distance: 5000 m horizontal and 100 m vertical. • The modelling software package used was Surpac, which has a built-in geostatistics capability. • No assumptions were made regarding recovery of by-products. • Estimations of deleterious elements or other non-grade variables of economic significance were included. These are: o Ilmenite Mag Other o Mag Other o Magnetite o Mags o Non Mags o Slimes • The block size generally represents half the drill spacing horizontally and twice the sample spacing vertically (100 m x 50 m x 2 m). Lower confidence areas however exist where the horizontal block size represents a quarter of the drill spacing.
Notice to ASX Page 52 of 55 • No assumptions regarding modelling of selective mining units were used. • The resource base was the main geological domaining control. Two domains were thus identified: Above and Below resource base. • Outlier grades were identified by built in acQuire database validation checks. • One sample was removed as the extremely high THM grade pointed to the assay result being an analytical error. This was verified by checking the adjacent samples. • Swath plots were used to compare the estimated kriged attributes to the composites used for the update, as well as comparisons between the current and previous resource model updates. • Variation between the composites and the estimated kriged attributes, as well as variation between the previous and current resource model updates, was within acceptable limits. Moisture • Tonnages are estimated on a dry basis. Cut-off parameters • No cut-off parameters were used; the Mineral Resource is reported within the geological unit. Mining factors or assumptions • Zulti South consists of several ore zones of varying geometrical properties. Grade variations within the Zulti South orebody are apparent with grade in general declining from South to North as well as from the inland side of the deposit to the seaward side. • Margin ranking plots of the orebody revealed that the highest value ore grade is located in the central inland portion of the orebody. • A phased approach to mining was adopted to allow the most appropriate and beneficial exploitation of the Zulti South orebody. The approach allows the most appropriate mining method to be used for the various ore geometries that are present at Zulti South. • Dry mining was selected as the mining method due to the high grade and thinness of the ore body. Inland ore close to the selected permanent land-based concentrator position will be mined first. Mining will progress away from the concentrator, initially mining the high grade inland ore. Metallurgical factors or assumptions • Mined sand is pumped through to the concentrating plant which consists of two units, a surge bin and concentrator. The concentrating plant utilises gravity separation with spirals to recover the valuable heavy minerals. Magnetite is magnetically separated from the heavy mineral concentrate (HMC) and is discarded with the tails before the HMC is pumped to stockpile. • Further product separation is completed at the Mineral Separation Plant Environmental factors or assumptions • RBM is dedicated to achieving a high standard of environmental management throughout its business and operations. This includes the mining and beneficiation of heavy minerals and the marketing of its products. The company is committed to preventing pollution and minimising any adverse impacts its activities may have on the environment. • The company strives to achieve this by: o Maintaining a comprehensive environmental management system with sub-systems and procedures that effectively identify, monitor, and control its potential risks. o Evaluating the environmental impacts associated with its activities, products, and services - and taking effective action to minimise significant risks. o Seeking continuous improvement through setting and reviewing objectives and targets, assessing and reporting environmental performance and ensuring best practice is applied to the local situation. o Communicating openly with interested and affected parties about environmental issues and contributing to the development of better environmental practices o Establishing programmes to conserve natural resources, minimise waste, protect and rehabilitate the environment, and promote and support local development initiatives. o Ensuring that parties conducting work on or behalf of RBM are themselves committed to the protection of the environment with sound systems and practices. o Conducting regular environmental audits and maintaining ISO 14001 certification. • The environmental efforts at RBM are focussed on achieving compliance with legal requirements stipulated in the EMPR (Environmental Management Programme Report), shareholder standards and / or identified best practices. The company is subject to routine internal and external environmental management systems audits, conducted by ISO certification bodies and Rio Tinto representatives. Bulk density • The bulk density was determined by initially measuring specific gravity (SG) using mini-bulk samples from auger drill holes. The excavated sand was stored in bags. Sampling started 2 m below the surface down to a maximum depth of 33 m. Three holes were drilled. The moisture was determined, and the bags were weighed. Sand replacement calculations were done for 1 m increments. • Additional work directed towards determining the bulk density for Zulti North and Zulti South included density analysis of 63 split spoon samples from Zulti South, 16 trench samples from Zulti South, sand replacement samples, laboratory test work at QMM using Zulti North samples., and 8 sand replacement samples from Zulti North. • A PhD thesis, The Mineability of Richards Bay Minerals Dune Sands, by Dr WP Ansell, used 57 undisturbed sonic samples from Zulti North, analysing the dry density of the RBM sand. This study was key to developing the relationship between porosity, burial depth, and density. • Dry density is used for estimation. The main attribute that affects dry density is the total heavy
Notice to ASX Page 53 of 55 mineral (THM) content. Porosity, burial depth, and slimes content also influence the density • A formula is used to calculate bulk density from the SG measurements. The formula is: SG = (0.0265 x (100 – THM) + 0.04082 x THM) x (0.578 x depth x 0.0165) x (1 + (slimes x 0.0054)) This formula takes THM content, porosity, burial depth, and slimes content into account. Classification • Mineral Resources are classified as Measured and Indicated only. Both the drill spacing and volume of resource per metre drilled are used as the basis for classification of the Mineral Resources into varying confidence categories. The categories are as follows: o Measured: ≤100 m x 200 m: ≥50 holes/km2 or <20 000 m3/metre drilled. o Indicated: 100 m x 200 m to 200 m x 400 m: 12.5 holes/ km2 - 50 holes/ km2 or 20 000 m3 – 80 000 m3/metre drilled. o Inferred: > 200 m x 400 m; <12.5 holes/ km2 or >80 000 m3/metre drilled. • The result appropriately reflects the Competent Person’s view of the deposit. Audits or reviews • There was an Internal Rio Tinto Resource and Reserve Audit completed in October 2014. RBM achieved a Satisfactory Rating, with four low rated findings. • The most recent Rio Tinto Resource and Reserve Audit was conducted in June 2022, using Golder & Associates as external reviewers. The report was rated Satisfactory with 2 low level findings; actions are in place to address these. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • The methodology of combining drill spacing, as well as consideration of the sample to volume ratios, has proven to be effective for this style of mineralisation, considering the luxury of 36 years of mining in which reconciliation can be compared to for the nearby Zulti North deposit. The optimum ratio is based on areas that reconcile to a factor of 1.0 to the overlying Sonic drilling model at Zulti North mining operations. Section 4: Estimation and Reporting of Ore Reserves Criteria Commentary Mineral Resource estimate for conversion to Ore Reserves • The Mineral Resource underpinning the Ore Reserve constitutes a block model with a block size of 100 m x 50 m x 2 m. • The conversion from Mineral Resource to Ore Reserve is done on consideration of operational and economic constraints, which includes hydrological parameters, geotechnical parameters, mining methods, mining limits, metallurgical properties, environmental factors and above all economic feasibility of mining the resource. • Mineral Resources are classified as Measured and Indicated and have all been converted to Probable Reserves. Site visits • The Competent Person for Ore Reserves is based on site. Study status • The latest feasibility study was completed in February 2019. Cut-off parameters • The concept of cut-off grade is not necessarily relevant to RBM mineralised sand ore bodies. The marginal economic cut-off grade for Zulti South was calculated to guide the generation of Ore Reserves to HMC from in-situ sand as input in metallurgical design parameters. • 100% of the Mineral Resource is above this cut-off grade, thus effectively no cut-off grade was applied. Mining factors or assumptions • Ore will be mined by free digging using front end loaders. • Various methods including dredge mining were considered and found to be inappropriate or not cost effective. • No pre-stripping is required as there is no overburden on the deposit. Bush clearing and topsoil reclamation will be done and is allowed for in costs. • Pit slopes are established by allowing the sand to fail to its natural angle of repose of 33 degrees as it is removed by digging. • Grade control will be achieved by in pit monitoring of the mining base. No target plant feed grade is established or required, and grade control will be to avoid over and under digging. • Based on the mining method, digging blocks of 200 m x 100 m are used. • Mining direction and capacity was optimised using the 2016 Zulti South resource model and the RBM financial model. There is not expected to be a material impact due to resource model update. • Mining losses are 3%, oversize losses 5% and mining losses below the water table 10%. • To allow in pit disposal of tailings a minimum first pass mining width of 600 m is required. • No Inferred Mineral Resources are included in the mine plan. • The mining method requires the following infrastructure: access roads, raw water supply, electrical supply, on lease electrical distribution, ore and HMC slurry pumping facilities, sand tailings disposal infrastructure, surface water management, dry mining unit, concentrator, thickeners, and water reticulation dams.
Notice to ASX Page 54 of 55 Metallurgical factors or assumptions • Metallurgical process is based on the existing process at Zulti North (RBM) mine plant, Mineral Separation Plant (MSP); extensive test work has been conducted to verify the appropriateness of metallurgical process on the Zulti South mineralisation. • The metallurgical process utilises well tested technology within the RBM process (gravity separation/spirals, magnetic separation, and electrostatic separation). • Design improvements have been made within the mine plant where a vertical double spiral is utilised. • Test work was conducted both at the RBM Pilot Plant and at the spirals supplier test facility in Australia. The onsite (RBM) test work included HMC generation that was used for MSP simulation that produced Roaster Feed Stock, Rutile and Zircon. • Allowances were made such that the amount of Calcium bearing Almandine and magnetite are limited in the HMC produced; these minerals have negative impact on the performance of the entire processing and smelting value chain. • Bulk samples were taken in three different areas within the orebody. These samples were run on the pilot plant to generate HMC which was then used for the MSP process, i.e., Feed Preparation to generate Roaster Feed Stock and Feed Preparation Concentrate, the Feed Preparation Concentrates were used to simulate Dry Mills where Rutile and Zircon are produced. The samples are deemed to be representative of the orebody (start-up site area). Environmental • Environmental studies have been completed and the requisite permits applied for granted. These permits are under continuous review by the legal and environmental teams to ensure their validity and continuous renewal where applicable: o EMP update o Environmental authorisation for mining infrastructure and clearing of indigenous dune forest o Surface rights lease o Water use license o Landowner agreements o Provincial planning development application. Infrastructure • Infrastructure will mostly be developed on lease where land is available. • Water and electricity will be supplied via a services corridor from the uMhlathuze weir and the RBM main site respectively. The required offtake agreements for water and electricity exists with the required authorities • Local labour is available in the area and skills to operate will be a mixture of new locally trained employees balanced with skilled employees from the existing operations. • Significant local road infrastructure exists up to the town of eSikhaleni. The area road network leading to the lease construction areas are to be upgraded where required and maintained in good order during the construction phase and operations thereafter. Costs • Capital costs on the feasibility study were estimated on the bases of engineering studies conducted. • Development and sustaining capital costs are sourced from the RBM operations financial model in accordance with the 5-year plan. These estimated costs utilise historical plant data available and incorporate major expansion projects brought in per project planning through the life of mine • Operating costs are based on the Zulti North existing operating plants’ costs of comparative capacity. • Closure costs are discounted at the prescribed closure cost discount rate, following internal guidance. • Allowances have been made for royalties in terms of the 2008 Royalty Act of South Africa. Revenue factors • The derivation of assumptions made of metal or commodity price(s), for the principal minerals and co- products are derived from Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium (RTIT) market studies, existing contracts, and customer mix, in accordance with the latest internal Rio Tinto internal pricing guidelines. The detail of this process and of the price points selected are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. Market assessment • The demand, supply is based on RTIT market studies and supplemented by a specialized consultant. • Sale volume and prices are adjusted according to market demand and production adjusted to maintain low stock volumes. • RTIT has a long-established customer base and maintains technical support to customers to meet product specification. Economic • Economic inputs such as carbon pricing, inflation, exchange rate, discount rate and escalation are generated internally by Rio Tinto. The detail of this process and its outputs are commercially sensitive and are not disclosed. • Economic evaluation using Rio Tinto long-term prices demonstrates a positive net present value for the Zulti South Ore Reserves under a range of price, cost, and productivity scenarios. Social • RBM operates within the constraints of an approved Social and Labour Plan. • Four communities in which RBM operates collectively have a 24% shareholding.
Notice to ASX Page 55 of 55 Other • A detailed risk register, specifically pertaining to Mineral Resource and Ore Reserve risks, is maintained, and updated periodically for all RBM Mineral Resources and Ore Reserves. • The last risk review was conducted on 11 August 2022. • Action plans are in place to mitigate the effect of the identified risks. Classification • Ore Reserves have historically been classified according to the resource classification where all Measured Resources were converted to Proven Reserves, and all Indicated Resources converted to Probable Reserves • RBM Ore Reserve tonnes for 2022 include a change in classification for the Zulti South Proven Reserves to Probable Reserves. The change results from increased uncertainty in the modifying factors as a result of schedule delays, due to community and social complexity. The original project timelines have been affected, and a new schedule is being developed. The restart will be commenced through internal approvals at which time the classification for the Zulti South Ore Reserves will be reviewed. Audits or reviews • The most recent Rio Tinto Resource and Reserve Audit was conducted in June 2022, using Golder & Associates as external reviewers. The report was rated Satisfactory with 2 low level findings. Discussion of relative accuracy/ confidence • Confidence in the Ore Reserve estimation is measured by quarterly reconciliations with production data and is within acceptable limits as defined by JORC for Zulti North. No production data is available for Zulti South; however, the same methodologies, as for Zulti North, are applied.
ex07d22dividendnotif
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 1 / 6 Announcement Summary Entity name RIO TINTO LIMITED Security on which the Distribution will be paid RIO - ORDINARY FULLY PAID Announcement Type New announcement Date of this announcement 22/2/2023 Distribution Amount AUD 3.26490000 Ex Date 9/3/2023 Record Date 10/3/2023 Payment Date 20/4/2023 DRP election date Tuesday March 28, 2023 17:00:00 Additional Information The 2022 final dividend of AUD 3.2649 per share is fully franked at the applicable corporate rate of 30%. Refer to below for full details of the announcement EXHIBIT 99.7
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 2 / 6 Announcement Details Part 1 - Entity and announcement details 1.1 Name of +Entity RIO TINTO LIMITED 1.2 Registered Number Type ABN Registration Number 96004458404 1.3 ASX issuer code RIO 1.4 The announcement is 1.5 Date of this announcement 22/2/2023 1.6 ASX +Security Code RIO ASX +Security Description ORDINARY FULLY PAID Part 2A - All dividends/distributions basic details 2A.1 Type of dividend/distribution 2A.2 The Dividend/distribution: relates to a period of six months 2A.3 The dividend/distribution relates to the financial reporting or payment period ending ended/ending (date) 31/12/2022 2A.4 +Record Date 10/3/2023 2A.5 Ex Date 9/3/2023 Ordinary New announcement
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 3 / 6 2A.6 Payment Date 20/4/2023 2A.7 Are any of the below approvals required for the dividend/distribution before business day 0 of the timetable? Security holder approval Court approval Lodgement of court order with +ASIC ACCC approval FIRB approval Another approval/condition external to the entity required before business day 0 of the timetable for the dividend/distribution. 2A.8 Currency in which the dividend/distribution is made ("primary currency") AUD - Australian Dollar 2A.9 Total dividend/distribution payment amount per +security (in primary currency) for all dividends/distributions notified in this form AUD 3.26490000 2A.10 Does the entity have arrangements relating to the currency in which the dividend/distribution is paid to securityholders that it wishes to disclose to the market? 2A.11 Does the entity have a securities plan for dividends/distributions on this +security? 2A.11a If the +entity has a DRP, is the DRP applicable to this dividend/distribution? 2A.11a(i) DRP Status in respect of this dividend/distribution Full DRP 2A.12 Does the +entity have tax component information apart from franking? Part 2B - Currency Information 2B.1 Does the entity default to payment in certain currencies dependent upon certain attributes such as the banking instruction or registered address of the +securityholder? (For example NZD to residents of New Zealand and/or USD to residents of the U.S.A.). 2B.2 Please provide a description of your currency arrangements All dividends will be paid by direct credit. Where a securityholder has nominated an Australian, United Kingdom or New Zealand financial institution account for receipt of payments, payment will be made by direct credit in AUD, GBP or NZD as applicable. Payments in GBP and NZD will be converted from AUD at the exchange rates applicable on 13 April 2023 and announced to the ASX the following day. Computershare Investor Services Pty Ltd, Rio Tinto Limited's share registry offers a currency election facility (Global Wire Facility) in a range of currencies. Securityholders may elect to receive their Yes No Yes We have a Dividend/Distribution Reinvestment Plan (DRP) Yes No
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 4 / 6 dividend in a currency of their choice via the Global Wire Facility. Terms and conditions of the Global Wire Facility can be accessed at: au.www.investorcentre.com/ 2B.2a Other currency/currencies in which the dividend/distribution will be paid: Currency Payment currency equivalent amount per security GBP - Pound Sterling GBP NZD - New Zealand Dollar NZD 2B.2b Please provide the exchange rates used for non-primary currency payments 2B.2c If payment currency equivalent and exchange rates not known, date for information to be released 14/4/2023 Estimated or Actual? 2B.3 Can the securityholder choose to receive a currency different to the currency they would receive under the default arrangements? Part 3A - Ordinary dividend/distribution 3A.1 Is the ordinary dividend/distribution estimated at this time? 3A.1a Ordinary dividend/distribution estimated amount per +security AUD 3A.1b Ordinary Dividend/distribution amount per security AUD 3.26490000 3A.2 Is the ordinary dividend/distribution franked? 3A.2a Is the ordinary dividend/distribution fully franked? 3A.3 Percentage of ordinary dividend/distribution that is franked 100.0000 % 3A.3a Applicable corporate tax rate for franking credit (%) 30.0000 % 3A.4 Ordinary dividend/distribution franked amount per +security AUD 3.26490000 3A.5 Percentage amount of dividend which is unfranked 0.0000 % 3A.6 Ordinary dividend/distribution unfranked amount per +security excluding conduit foreign income amount AUD 0.00000000 3A.7 Ordinary dividend/distribution conduit foreign income amount per security AUD 0.00000000 YesYes No No Actual
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 5 / 6 Part 4A - +Dividend reinvestment plan (DRP) 4A.1 What is the default option if +security holders do not indicate whether they want to participate in the DRP? 4A.2 Last date and time for lodgement of election notices to share registry under DRP Tuesday March 28, 2023 17:00:00 4A.3 DRP discount rate 0.0000 % 4A.4 Period of calculation of reinvestment price Start Date End Date 4A.5 DRP price calculation methodology Shares will be purchased on-market on or as soon as practicable after the dividend payment date. It may be necessary to carry out several market transactions to acquire the number of shares required and the DRP price will be the average of the deal prices of those transactions. DRP price will be announced to the market. 4A.6 DRP Price (including any discount): AUD 4A.7 DRP +securities +issue date 4A.8 Will DRP +securities be a new issue? 4A.9 Is there a minimum dollar amount or number of +securities required for DRP participation? 4A.10 Is there a maximum dollar amount or number of +securities required for DRP participation? 4A.11 Are there any other conditions applying to DRP participation? 4A.12 Link to a copy of the DRP plan rules under Rio Tinto Limited tab.https://www.riotinto.com/invest/shareholder-information/dividends 4A.13 Further information about the DRP Part 5 - Further information 5.1 Please provide any further information applicable to this dividend/distribution No No No No Do not participate in DRP (i.e. cash payment)
Notification of dividend / distribution Notification of dividend / distribution 6 / 6 5.2 Additional information for inclusion in the Announcement Summary The 2022 final dividend of AUD 3.2649 per share is fully franked at the applicable corporate rate of 30%.
ex08d22climatechangerpt1
Notice to ASX 22 February 2023 Our approach to climate change 2022 Attached is the Rio Tinto climate report, ‘Our approach to climate change 2022’, including our Climate Action Plan. This is also available at www.riotinto.com/climatereport. In addition, the Sustainability Fact Book 2022 and Sustainability Glossary 2022 will shortly be available at www.riotinto.com/sustainabilityreporting and the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022 and the Industry Associations Disclosure 2022 will be available at www.riotinto.com/climatereport. EXHIBIT 99.8
Notice to ASX/LSE Page 2 of 2 Contacts Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com Media Relations, UK Matthew Klar M +44 7796 630 637 David Outhwaite M +44 7787 597 493 Media Relations, Americas Simon Letendre M +1 514 796 4973 Malika Cherry M +1 418 592 7293 Investor Relations, UK Menno Sanderse M +44 7825 195 178 David Ovington M +44 7920 010 978 Clare Peever M +44 7788 967 877 Media Relations, Australia Matt Chambers M +61 433 525 739 Jesse Riseborough M +61 436 653 412 Alyesha Anderson M +61 434 868 118 Investor Relations, Australia Tom Gallop M +61 439 353 948 Amar Jambaa M +61 472 865 948 Rio Tinto plc 6 St James’s Square London SW1Y 4AD United Kingdom T +44 20 7781 2000 Registered in England No. 719885 Rio Tinto Limited Level 43, 120 Collins Street Melbourne 3000 Australia T +61 3 9283 3333 Registered in Australia ABN 96 004 458 404 This announcement is authorised for release to the market by Steve Allen, Rio Tinto’s Group Company Secretary. riotinto.com
Climate Change Report 2022
Contents Chief Executive’s statement 2 Our business at a glance 4 Climate Action Plan - 2022 progress and 2023 update 6 Our strategy and approach to climate change 8 Producing materials essential for the low-carbon transition 10 Reducing the carbon footprint of our operations 14 Partnering to reduce the carbon footprint of our value chains 22 Enhancing our resilience to physical climate risk 28 Climate policy engagement 32 Climate governance 33 Just transition 34 Climate disclosure 35 Emissions and energy data 37 Assurance statement by KPMG 40 Cover | Employee at IOC tailings in Labrador City, NL Canada Our operations are located on land and waters that have belonged to Indigenous peoples for thousands of years. We respect their ongoing deep connection to Country and recognise their vast knowledge of the land, water and environment. We pay respects to Elders, both past and present, and acknowledge the important role Indigenous peoples play within our business and our communities. Visit riotinto.com to find out more
2022 highlights High-grade iron ore – Simandou: Signed a non-binding term sheet with our partners to progress the co-development of infrastructure. The project will deliver high-grade iron ore, suitable for the DRI-EAF2 steelmaking process. Green steel – Blast furnace optimisation: Extended our collaboration with over 20 customers, such as Baowu, POSCO, Nippon Steel Corporation and Shougang, with potential carbon emissions reductions of up to 30%. – BioIronTM: Successfully piloted an innovative, low-carbon iron-making process on Pilbara iron ore. – Hydrogen-based DRI1: Collaborated with BlueScope and Salzgitter Flachstahl to test direct reduction of our products using green hydrogen and develop cleaner processing options. Iron Ore – Pilbara: Planned investment of $600 million in 230MW of solar power facilities and 200MWh of storage. This is in addition to the 34MW solar facility installed at Gudai-Darri. – Pilbara: Developed partnerships with Scania, Caterpillar, Volvo and Komatsu to deploy more efficient autonomous haulage solutions and battery-powered trucks. – Marine biofuels: Joined a trial with BP. – Arvida: Invested in a new aluminium recycling facility and plans to replace our closing smelter with an expansion of the AP60 smelter to produce low-carbon aluminium. – Alma: Committed $188 million to expand production of higher-value low-carbon billets. – Laterrière Plant: Commissioned a new aluminium remelt furnace. – ELYSISTM: Conducted commercial testing of direct emissions-free smelting technology with 450kA cells under construction. – Low-carbon material: Partnered with organisations including Volvo, Ford and AB InBev (Corona Canada). Aluminium – Queensland smelter repowering: Commenced evaluation of proposals to repower our aluminium assets with up to 4GW of wind and solar, backed up by energy firming and storage solutions. – Queensland Alumina: Progressed to a pre-feasibility study for a double digestion project to reduce emissions and operational expenditure. – Oyu Tolgoi: Acquired full ownership of Turquoise Hill Resources Ltd (TRQ) for $3.1 billion, increasing our direct project ownership to 66%. – Rincon: Acquired Rincon for $825 million and approved funding of $194 million for early works to develop an accelerated starter plant with planned expansion. – NutonTM: Joined strategic partnerships to test leaching technology on legacy copper waste and sulphide orebodies. – Critical minerals from waste: Began extracting tellurium concentrate at Kennecott. Achieved first production of scandium oxide and demonstration of an innovative spodumene (lithium) concentration process at our Critical Minerals and Technology Centre (RTIT Quebec Operations). Copper and Minerals – Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium (RTIT) Quebec Operations: Committed $537 million (C$737 million) in partnership with the Government of Canada to decarbonise RTIT Quebec Operations and boost critical minerals processing. – Richards Bay Minerals: Partnered with Voltalia for solar power (20-year power purchase agreement). – Renewable diesel: Launched a pilot at Boron, with trials also planned for Kennecott. Grow in materials enabling the energy transition Develop products and technologies that help our customers decarbonise Accelerate the decarbonisation of our assets 1. Direct Reduced Iron. 2. Direct Reduced Iron – Electric Arc Furnace. 1Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Chief Executive’s statement Our purpose is to find better ways to provide the materials the world needs. Meeting the incremental demand of the energy transition, and ensuring local supplies of critical minerals globally, deepens our relevance to the world and ensures our long-term profitability. We are creating real momentum, and seeing early results gives me conviction that we have the right objectives, the right team, and the right strategy. Our Scope 1 and 2 emissions targets of 15% reductions by 2025 and 50% by 2030 are aligned with 1.5°C – the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement – and are really challenging. In contrast to many of our peers, about 80% of our emissions are driven by processing and producing metals and minerals, which are high temperature, hard-to-abate activities. The remaining 20% are from our mining operations. The low-carbon transition is complex: developing new technologies and implementing major projects to decarbonise our business will take time. We estimate that we will invest $7.5 billion in capital between 2022 and 2030 to deliver our decarbonisation strategy. So we need to be disciplined about our capital investment and make a commercial case for each mitigation project. Our experience shows that we cannot solve this simply by allocating capital. We also need to attract the right talent, deploy new technology at scale, secure approvals from regulators and partner respectfully with local communities and Indigenous peoples. In addition, higher carbon prices and other government incentives are needed to drive the production and consumption of low-carbon metals and minerals. In 2022, our Scope 1 and 2 emissions were 30.3Mt CO2e (31.0Mt in 2021), a reduction of 7% below our 2018 baseline. This is primarily the result of switching to renewable power at Kennecott and Escondida in prior years, as well as lower than planned production from the Kitimat and Boyne aluminium smelters in 2022. We did not advance the actual implementation of our abatement projects as fast as we would have liked last year, so our capital expenditure on decarbonisation projects was $94 million, lower than we anticipated when we set our targets. Challenges have included late delivery of equipment, resourcing constraints impacting study progress, construction and commissioning delays, and project readiness. 6+1 abatement programmes In response, we established six abatement programmes, with dedicated people, to focus on the decarbonisation challenges that cut across our product groups: repowering our Pacific Aluminium Operations, renewables, ELYSISTM, alumina process heat, minerals processing and diesel transition. We are building capability and gaining a deeper understanding of our decarbonisation challenge (both constraints and opportunities), and our related operational expenditure increased to approximately $140 million in 2022. As a result, we are better placed to deliver the complex and large-scale structural changes to our energy system needed to achieve our 2030 target. Given the long lead times for some of these projects, we established one additional programme to increase our investments in nature-based solutions projects and now expect these to make a more significant contribution to our targets. If done well, these projects can play a substantial role in addressing carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, while also providing benefits to local communities. Our people working on these “6+1” abatement programmes, and our substantial investments in technology, will drive the innovation and transformation needed to accelerate our low carbon transition and ensure the long-term resilience of our business. Scope 3 partnerships Our Scope 3 emissions were 584Mt CO2e in 2022 – over 1% of the global total. These are primarily from our customers in Asia, processing our iron ore into steel and bauxite into aluminium, so our level of control is limited. The best way to tackle these emissions is to work in partnerships to develop the technologies needed to produce low-carbon metals and minerals. Last year we increased our engagement with our customers, governments, universities and others. It is encouraging that the initial testing phase of our BioIronTM process showed great promise and demonstrated that using microwave energy and sustainable biomass as a reductant is well suited to Pilbara ores. And we are continuing to scale up the ELYSISTM technology – the world’s first carbon-free aluminium smelting process – towards the demonstration of even larger commercial-size cells. In the past year, I have spent time engaging with a diverse range of stakeholders on the need to work together and address climate change with urgency. Given the structural changes we must make to our energy system, 2030 is just around the corner. Our success relies on our ability to strengthen our resilience to the physical, societal and economic effects of climate change and the energy transition, while building partnerships and capabilities that enable us to secure new opportunities. Jakob Stausholm Chief Executive Over a year ago, we put the low-carbon transition at the heart of our new strategy, setting a clear pathway to deliver long-term value as well as ambitious targets to decarbonise our business. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com2
“ We will only invest in quality assets which will give robust returns under a range of economic, geopolitical and carbon scenarios, creating a resilient portfolio with significant upside to the energy transition. We are applying similar thinking to our approach to decarbonisation.” 3Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com
Our business at a glance Consolidated sales revenue by destination Consolidated sales revenue by product Our key assets are located in close proximity to our major markets: 54.3% 8.8% 6.5% 7.4% 15.9% 7.1% $55.6bn 59.0% 4.8% 5.6% 5.8% 24.8% $55.6bn Iron ore $32,801bn Copper $3,196bnGreater China Japan Aluminium2 $13,790bn Other $3,098bn Minerals $2,669bnAsia1 Europe US Other Iron ore3 Aluminium Copper Minerals3 Mines 17 4 3 6 Smelters, refineries and processing plants4 0 18 1 4 Mt CO2 Scope 1 and 2 emissions 3.1Mt 21.1Mt 1.5Mt 4.0Mt Rio Tinto share of production Iron ore 272.9Mt (2021: 266.8Mt) Bauxite 54.6Mt (2021: 54.3Mt) Aluminium 3,009kt (2021: 3,151kt) Mined copper 521.1kt (2021: 493.5kt) Titanium dioxide slag 1,200kt (2021: 1,014kt) Underlying EBITDA $18.6bn (2021: $27.6bn) $3.7bn (2021: $4.4bn) $2.4bn (2021: $4.0bn) $2.4bn (2021: $2.6bn) 1. Excluding Greater China and Japan. Greater China includes China and Taiwan. 2. Aluminium includes bauxite and alumina. 3. Our Iron Ore product group includes our 17 iron ore mines in the Pilbara and three salt operations (Dampier, Port Hedland and Lake MacLeod). Our Minerals product group includes the Iron Ore Company of Canada (IOC). 4. Covering processing plants engaged in the material transformation of input products with total Scope 1 and 2 emissions greater than 100,000 tonnes CO2. The integrated processing facilities at RTIT Quebec Operations are counted once. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com4
Materials for low-carbon transition Global data Rio Tinto data Demand by sector Construction & infrastructure Power/electrical Auto (transport) Machinery & equipment Consumer durables Other 14% 55% 19% 10% 2% 9% 27% 23% 16% 8% 17% 16% 10% 35% 15% 24% Finished steel 1,700Mt Aluminium 96Mt Copper 31Mt Iron ore/steel Aluminium Copper Total emissions 1,020Mt CO2e 10.4 tCO2e/t Total emissions 3,150Mt CO2e 1.7 tCO2e/t Total emissions 109Mt CO2e 3.5 tCO2e/t 29Mt 14Mt CO2e 0.5 tCO2e/t Al Secondary aluminium 650Mt 325Mt CO2e 0.5 tCO2e/t steel Scrap-based steel1 10.6Mt 5.3Mt CO2e 0.5 tCO2e/t Cu Secondary copper 12,000Mt Total material moved 10,000Mt Total material moved 1,000Mt Total material moved 134Mt2 7.5Mt 180Mt CO2e 1.3 tCO2e2/t Al2O3 5.6Mt CO2e 0.7 tCO2e/t Al2O3 Alumina2t 69Mt 3.0Mt 820Mt CO2e 12 tCO2e/t Al 14.5Mt CO2e 4.8 tCO2e/t Al Primary aluminium 1,250Mt 2,750Mt CO2e 2.2 tCO2e/t steel Ore-based steel1 21Mt 0.2Mt 34Mt CO2e 1.6 tCO2e/t Cu 0.2Mt CO2e 0.9 tCO2e/t Cu Primary refined copper1t 1t 365Mt @50% Al2O3 55Mt @49% Al2O3 4.7Mt CO2e 0.02 tCO2e/t ore 0.9Mt CO2e 0.02 tCO2e/t ore Bauxite 4,300Mt @0.6% Cu 120Mt @0.6% Cu 70Mt CO2e 3.1 tCO2e/t Cu 1.3Mt CO2e 2.3 tCO2e/t Cu Copper ore3 2,450Mt @62% Fe 283Mt @61% Fe 70Mt CO2e 0.03 tCO2e/t ore 3.7Mt CO2e4 0.01 tCO2e/t ore Iron ore Product Emissions Product Emissions Product Emissions 200t 600t15t 5t 1t 2t 8t 1. Ore- and scrap-based steel are notional categories based on Rio Tinto estimates of raw material inputs for different steel production pathways. 2. Smelter grade Alumina only. 3. Copper ore product before processing. 4. Rio Tinto total iron ore emissions include equity-basis emissions from our Pilbara operations and from IOC. Sources: Rio Tinto analysis and estimates, CRU, Skarn Associates, Wood Mackenzie, International Aluminium Institute. 5Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Our Climate Action Plan – 2022 progress and 2023 update In 2022, our shareholders supported our Climate Action Plan (CAP) in a non-binding advisory vote on the company’s ambitions, emissions targets and actions to achieve them. We will continue to publish our progress on climate change annually in line with the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD). The Board is fully aligned with this action plan and believes it will deliver value for our shareholders, our customers and wider society. The table below summarises progress in 2022 and our action plan in 2023. 1. Scope 1 and 2 emissions targets and roadmap We have committed to reach net zero by 2050 and have set ambitious interim targets relative to our 2018 equity emissions baseline: to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 15% by 2025 and to reduce GHG emissions by 50% by 2030.1 Progress in 2022 – Repowering Pacific Aluminium operations: we issued a request for proposal for more than 4GW of wind and solar projects to support repowering of the Boyne smelter. Tomago issued expression of interest seeking renewable projects to support repowering of the smelter (a non-managed joint venture). – Renewables: we installed the first 34MW of solar capacity at Gudai-Darri and announced that we are planning to invest $600 million for solar, storage and transmission to deliver a further 230MW of solar power and 200MWh storage in the Pilbara from 2023-2026. We started construction for the first phase of our 30MW project at Kennecott and commenced direct market engagement for our US footprint (Boron, Resolution, Kennecott) for around 1GW of renewables. We issued expression of interest for an islanded 35MW microgrid at Amrun and signed a Solar PV 130MW power purchase agreement (PPA) for Richards Bay Minerals (RBM) with Voltalia. Construction of a 20MW hybrid project continued at QIT Madagascar Minerals. – ELYSISTM: production from our pilot cell continued, as did construction of larger commercial scale cells at Alma. – Alumina process heat: we developed our approach to decarbonising our refineries. Order of magnitude studies for electric steam generation and electrical infrastructure requirements are in progress. A feasibility study has been completed for the hydrogen calcination project. An order of magnitude study for double digestion has been completed with approval to proceed with the pre-feasibility study. – Minerals processing: $537 million (C$737) partnership with the Government of Canada to decarbonise RTIT Quebec Operations and boost critical minerals processing. – Diesel transition: we have progressed biofuel trials at Boron and Kennecott. We began trialling an underground battery electric loader and haul truck at Kennecott. We delivered our first road-sized haul truck into the Pilbara for testing. – Nature-based solutions (NbS): we completed pre-feasibility studies for NbS projects at five high-potential landscapes. Actions in 2023 – Repowering Pacific Aluminium Operations: progress renewable supply options for the Boyne and Tomago aluminium smelters. – Renewables: approve and commence construction of 100MW solar PV for the Pilbara. Progress studies on the next 130MW solar PV for the Pilbara. Sign PPA for Amrun microgrid and start construction in 2023/24. Sign a Wind PPA at RBM. Sign commercial agreements for our US operations (Kennecott, Resolution and Boron). – ELYSISTM: commission 450kA ELYSISTM cells currently under construction at Alma. – Alumina process heat: develop the decarbonisation energy transition strategy for the Yarwun and Queensland Alumina (QAL) refineries. Complete feasibility studies for electric steam generation and thermal storage options at QAL and Yarwun, and seek approval for electric boilers at Vaudreuil. Advance studies on double digestion, hydrogen and electric calcination. Commence construction of hydrogen calcination industrialisation demonstration at Yarwun. – Minerals processing: commission Blue Smelting demonstration plant at RTIT, Quebec, to test ilmenite pre-reduction process. Commence industrial trials of biochar at RTIT Quebec Operations and RBM, and investigate options to develop a sustainable supply chain. Commission plasma burner pilot at IOC. – Diesel transition: progress plans to convert the entire fleet at Boron to renewable diesel ahead of the requirement to do this in California in 2024. Develop a viable trolley assist option for the existing haul fleet to enable substantial reduction in diesel use while on trolley. – Nature-based solutions: conduct feasibility studies for the development of five carbon offset projects. 1. Our net zero commitment applies to our Scope 1 and 2 emissions only. For planning purposes, we define short-term as up to two years, medium-term as 2-10 years and long-term as beyond 10 years. For our analysis of physical climate risks, we define short-term as 2030, medium-term as 2050 and long-term as 2100. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com6
- Scope 3 emissions goals and customer engagement Our approach to addressing Scope 3 emissions is to engage with our customers on climate change and work with them to develop and scale up technologies to decarbonise steel and aluminium production. Progress in 2022 Steel value chain – Engaged with nearly all our direct iron ore sales customers (representing two thirds of our total iron-ore related Scope 3 emissions). This has led to decarbonisation collaboration and projects with customers accounting for 59% of our direct iron ore sales. – Partnerships on track. We advanced 49 projects, together with over 30 partners. Aluminium value chain – Initiated engagement with customers representing nearly all of our bauxite sales. Shipping – 30% reduction in emissions intensity achieved (relative to 2008 baseline). On track to exceed target through energy saving initiatives and use of transitional fuels (biofuel/LNG). – Accelerating development of end-state fuels (green methanol and green ammonia) via partnerships. – Completed installation of energy savings devices on first vessels capable of 10-12% emissions reductions. Actions in 2023 Steel value chain – Progress work on a microwave lump drying pilot plant with Baowu. – Develop BioIronTM at a larger scale, via a specially designed continuous pilot plant. – Complete concept studies with BlueScope and determine the next phase of processing Pilbara ores with hydrogen and a melter. Aluminium value chain – Agreement to hold workshops on decarbonisation confirmed with three major customers representing over half of our sales. Further engagement with other bauxite customers will depend on the level of interest. Shipping – Review biofuels plan following completion of 12-month trial. Progress partnerships on end-state fuels. – Advance programme to install energy savings devices on our vessels during dry-docking. – Incorporate (over 2023-24) nine LNG dual-fuel chartered vessels into our fleet. – Advance iron ore green corridor development in partnership with the Global Maritime Forum. 3. Capital allocation alignment with our 1.5°C decarbonisation strategy We estimated that we will invest $7.5 billion in capital between 2022 and 2030 to deliver our decarbonisation strategy (approximately $1.5 billion over the period 2022 to 2024). We also expected our incremental operating expenditure to support the CAP to be in the order of $200 million per year, including research and development initiatives. For example, we planned to spend about $50 million on our iron and steel decarbonisation initiatives in 2022. Progress in 2022 – Our capital expenditure on decarbonisation projects in 2022 was $94 million compared to an originally estimated spend of $500 million. Our incremental operational expenditure to support the CAP including spend on steel decarbonisation initiatives, was approximately $140 million. – Operational expenditure on steel decarbonisation initiatives was $24 million in 2022. Resourcing constraints, COVID-19 lockdowns and the need to develop the business case for some technologies has delayed some projects. Actions in 2023 – Depending on project planning, approvals and implementation, we estimate that our capital expenditure on decarbonisation will increase over the three years to 2025 and total $1.5 billion. Our incremental operational expenditure in 2023 is estimated to be $200 million for the six abatement programmes and offset development. 4. Climate policy engagement We continue to encourage our industry associations to align their advocacy with the goals of the Paris Agreement. We review the climate advocacy of our industry associations each year, and we publish our review on our website and consider it when we decide whether to renew our memberships. Progress in 2022 – We published our review of industry associations in February 2022 and conducted an interim and year-end review of their advocacy. We engaged with four industry associations to discuss their climate advocacy. Actions in 2023 – In 2023, we will publish our review of industry associations and maintain our engagement with them on climate advocacy. 5. Climate governance In the short-term incentive plan (STIP), safety, environment, social and governance matters, including climate change, are now assigned an explicit performance weighting of 35%, of which 20% relates to safety and 15% to ESG. The “E” component is 5% of the STIP and relates entirely to climate change performance objectives. Progress in 2022 – In 2022, the business approved or delivered Scope 1 and 2 abatement projects that would contribute 0.29Mt CO2 of abatement towards the 2025 target against a target of 0.8Mt. – Achieved specific milestones relating to steel decarbonisation, zero-carbon aluminium and shipping. Actions in 2023 – Climate change performance objectives are assigned an explicit performance weighting of 10% in the STIP in 2023. We will assess progress of moving carbon abatement projects through the various stages of development all the way to execution to meet our decarbonisation ambition. 6. Just transition We are committed to supporting a just transition to a low-carbon economy that is socially inclusive and provides decent work and livelihoods. Progress in 2022 – In 2022, we established an Executive Comittee- sponsored cross-functional just transition working group, undertook an assessment of our current just transition maturity, and developed a tool to profile risks and opportunities at our assets. Actions in 2023 – In 2023, our priorities include assessing just transition- related risks and opportunities across our assets; defining just transition principles; awareness-raising across the business; and continued engagement with civil society organisations, host communities, employees and others. 7. TCFD disclosure We support the TCFD recommendations and are committed to aligning our disclosures with the Climate Action 100+ (CA100+) Net Zero Company Benchmark in 2023 reporting. Progress in 2022 – Climate-related disclosures on governance, strategy, risk management, and metrics and targets were integrated into the 2021 Annual Report. Our CAP aligns with the CA100+ Net Zero Company Benchmark. Actions in 2023 – We will continue to publish our progress on climate change annually in line with the recommendations of the TCFD. 7Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
We have positioned the low-carbon transition at the heart of our business strategy to strengthen our long-term resilience and pursue new growth opportunities. In addition to setting ambitious 1.5°C-aligned emissions targets for our operations, our strategy aims to help decarbonise our value chains and provide the materials essential for the energy transition. Our strategy and approach to climate change Our approach To capture new growth opportunities in materials with strong low-carbon transition-related demand: – Our ambition is to increase disciplined capital growth of up to $3.0 billion annually by 2024 to 2025. – We will seek to grow further in copper and battery materials and bring additional tonnes of high-grade iron ore and low-carbon aluminium to market. To work with our customers to tackle full value chain emissions: – We will increase research and development of cleaner products. – We will partner with our customers to help them meet their Scope 1 and 2 emissions goals. To strengthen our alignment with the Paris Agreement and our long-term ambition of achieving net zero emissions by 2050: – We aim to reduce our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 15% by 2025 and by 50% by 2030. – We expect to invest an estimated $7.5 billion in decarbonisation projects, predominantly in the second half of the decade. Grow production of materials enabling the energy transition Develop products and technologies that help our customers decarbonise Accelerate the decarbonisation of our assets Global scenarios Our scenario approach is reviewed every year as part of our Group strategy engagement with the Board. We have recently updated our scenario framework to focus on two prevailing macro-level business concerns: the speed of global economic growth and the trajectory of climate action, each heavily influenced by global geopolitics and governance. Our two core scenarios (Competitive Leadership and Fragmented Leadership) are used to generate a central reference case for commodity forecasts and valuations. Additional scenarios (including our Paris-aligned Aspirational Leadership scenario) are used to further evaluate the positive and negative effects of the energy transition across our portfolio and stress test investment decisions. We determine the approximate temperature outcome in 2100 by comparing the emissions pathways to 2050 in each of our scenarios with those set out in the Shared Socio-economic Pathways (SSP) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We do not undertake climate modelling ourselves, but we are consistent with the estimates for temperature and cumulative temperature between 2020 to 2050 in the SSPs. The emissions pathway of Aspirational Leadership is most closely aligned with the IPCC’s shared socio-economic pathway 1 (SSP1-1.9) with emissions reaching net zero by 2050, which limits warming to 1.5°C. Competitive Leadership is most closely aligned with SSP1-2.6 (approximately 2°C of warming) and Fragmented Leadership is aligned with emission scenarios SSP2-4.5 (temperatures exceeding 2.5°C by 2100). We also use the IPCC’s highest emissions scenario (SSP5-8.5) when assessing the physical risks of climate change. So, when assessing risks and opportunities to the business we use a 1.5°C-aligned scenario to assess a fast low-carbon transition and we use the highest emissions and high temperature outcome scenario (SSP5-8.5) to assess physical climate risks. While there are many uncertainties about how a changing climate may negatively affect gross domestic product (GDP) growth, physical impacts of climate change are integrated into the GDP growth assumptions in our three scenarios. These are most significant in Fragmented Leadership and least significant in Aspirational Leadership. The steel sector Our strategy and approach to climate change are informed by a deep analysis of the interplay of global megatrends, explored through the lens of plausible global scenarios. These set the context for our industry and underpin our commodity price outlooks, portfolio and capital allocation choices, and how we operate as a business. We recognise our success relies on our ability to strengthen our resilience to the physical, societal and economic effects of climate change and the energy transition while building partnerships and capabilities that enable us to secure new opportunities. Our strategy has three pillars, each backed by a series of commitments and ambitions. Our approach is supported by strong governance, with a focus on creating streamlined processes and building capabilities, including in green materials processing, renewable energy deployment and nature-based solutions, which are expected to enable us to reach net zero emissions from our operations by 2050. The three pillars of our strategy inform our Climate Action Plan, which aligns with the CA100+ Net Zero Company Benchmark and was approved by our shareholders at our 2022 AGMs. transition scenarios in the value chain section of this report are presented to highlight the roles and timing of different low-carbon steelmaking technologies and to develop projections of our potential future Scope 3 emissions from processing our iron ore. At the UN Climate Summit in late 2022 (COP27), there was broad recognition that the pace of decarbonisation across the global economy is too slow to limit warming to 1.5°C and that current climate policies in many countries are not yet aligned with their stated ambitions. Consequently, neither of our two core scenarios are consistent with the expectation of climate policies required to accelerate the global transition to meet the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement. Although our operational emissions reduction targets align with the goals of the Paris Agreement, our two core scenarios do not. Therefore, we also assess our sensitivity and the economic performance of our business against our Aspirational Leadership scenario, which reflects our view of meeting the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement. Our approach to climate change is intrinsically linked with our four objectives: to be best operator, to achieve impeccable ESG credentials, to excel in development and to strengthen our social licence. Delivering on our climate commitments will rely on these capabilities and will also help build our reputation as a partner of choice for new growth opportunities created by the energy transition. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com8
Table 1: Key scenario metrics Aspirational Leadership 1.5°C Competitive Leadership ~2°C Fragmented Leadership >2.5°C 2030 outcome 2021-2050 CAGR 2030 outcome 2021-2050 CAGR 2030 outcome 2021-2050 CAGR Global average carbon prices1 in 2030, (2021 US$/t CO2 eq) 59 9.3% 42 8.0% 42 2.9% Global emissions, Gt CO2 eq 39.5 -11%2 49.9 -3.5% 48.3 -0.8% Global energy demand, mtoe 10,480 0.3% 10,985 0.5% 10,307 0.2% Global GDP growth (PPP), % 4.4% 3.9% 4.3% 3.8% 2.9% 2.2% Energy intensity of global GDP, toe/$ 1000 2015 PPP 0.07 -3.4% 0.08 -3.2% 0.08 -2.3% Carbon intensity of total energy, gCO2/MJ 42.1 -12.7% 46.5 -5.0% 46.4 -1.9% Global energy from electricity, mtoe 2,880 3.9% 2,936 3.9% 2,668 1.8% Global wind and solar capacity, GW 9,845 10.6% 7,476 10.0% 5,732 7.1% Electric vehicle (EV) sales (%)3 68.1% 10.6% 63.9% 10.4% 38.8% 9.5% 1. Carbon prices are used as a proxy for a broader range of climate policies. 2. 11% p.a. decline in CO2 emissions based on 2021-49 period in net zero pathway (by 2050). Emissions in 2030 are highest in Competitive Leadership due to high GDP growth. 3. 2021-50 CAGR based on global electric vehicle sales. Group scenario global GHG pathways compared to IPCC scenarios (temperature outcomes in 2100) Fragmented Leadership is characterised by limited progress on policy reform with volatile low growth. The business environment is defined by weak final demand and greater uncertainty, and requires close ties with governments to manage risk. It is a world defined by geopolitical and domestic tensions, spurred by populist agendas that offer leaders little opportunity to build consensus around reform and environmental agendas. Nations eventually achieve their 2030 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) as agreed in Paris in 2015 but abandon further progress toward long-term carbon goals as outlined at COP26 in Glasgow. Climate policy is insufficiently ambitious to incentivise significant mitigation in industrial sectors resulting in flat global emissions post-2030; consequently global warming exceeds 2.5°C and the physical impacts of climate change limit GDP growth in this scenario. Competitive Leadership reflects a world of high growth and strong climate action post-2030, with change driven by policy and competitive innovation. A proactive reform environment encourages stronger business innovation, higher investment and improved productivity. This allows global GDP to continue growing at close to recent historical levels with a growing contribution from India and other developing countries. The increasing prevalence of major climate events after 2030, and ongoing pressure from civil society organisations and businesses to provide policy certainty, continue to galvanise national and international climate action. As a result, nations drive against historical precedent toward achieving their Glasgow Climate Pact commitments, resulting in global GHG emissions falling from 54 Gt CO2e today to 21 Gt in 2050. Aspirational Leadership reflects a world of high growth, significant social change and accelerated climate action with all countries setting new NDCs that collectively achieve net zero emissions by mid-century. Domestic politics is driven by demands for economic prosperity, social justice and environmental action. Despite geopolitical differences, major economies tend to work together through multilateral frameworks and proactively work towards limiting temperature change to 1.5°C. This results in developed economies and China leading from the front, implementing large increases in carbon pricing, sharply lowering the material intensity of their economies and providing strong financial support to low-income economies. The Aspirational Leadership sensitivity is designed to reach net zero by 2050, and to help us better understand the world on a 1.5°C pathway and what this would mean for our business. Different IPCC scenarios represented in light grey lines specific to temperature range across different scenarios -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 Aspirational Leadership (1.5° C scenarios) Competitive Leadership (1.9° C to 2.1° C scenarios) Fragmented Leadership (2.6° C to 3.0° C scenarios) G t C O 2e 9Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Price range across scenarios Upper Lower Finished steel Iron ore: 65% fines Demand Price ranges 0.5 1.5 2025-29 2030-39 2040-50+ 280 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 2020 2030 2040 2050 % Producing materials essential for the low-carbon transition The energy transition is a key driver of commodity demand today and will continue to be so over the next two decades. This will come on top of the demand growth from continued urbanisation and industrialisation (particularly in emerging economies) and it will trigger a new phase of demand growth in developed economies, which have faced saturating demand over the past two decades. – In all scenarios, China’s steel demand growth is forecast to slow as its economy matures. This is offset by construction growth in India and Southeast Asian countries. Steel demand is strongly driven by urbanisation and GDP growth and less exposed to the green energy transition than copper and aluminium. Wind turbines have a higher steel intensity than conventional generation, but the shift to electric vehicles will reduce steel demand in the automotive sector in favour of aluminium. Even by 2050, we expect that more than half of future crude steel production will remain based on iron ore (compared to about two-thirds today). – In Fragmented Leadership, global iron ore demand remains broadly flat. The absence of challenging carbon targets keeps premiums for high-grade ores around their historical norms. Prices for both 62% Fe fines and high-grade 65% Fe fines are subdued. – In Aspirational and Competitive Leadership scenarios, stronger underlying GDP and construction demand growth support prices and offset the rising use of scrap materials. In both of these scenarios, the transition to low-carbon steelmaking will be accompanied by an increase in premiums for high-grade iron ores (eg 65% Fe fines) as current low-carbon steelmaking technologies are relatively inefficient at processing unwanted contaminants in iron ore. This is more material in Aspirational Leadership due to the higher carbon penalties imposed. Price differentials for low quality iron ores are also likely to widen. The commodities we produce have a vital role to play in the low-carbon transition. Copper demand will rise with the renewable electrification of energy, and lithium will be a fundamental ingredient in batteries and grid-firming energy storage solutions. Demand for aluminium will grow for uses like energy- efficient lightweight electric vehicles. Steel demand is primarily driven by urbanisation and industrialisation – it correlates with GDP growth and is less exposed to the low-carbon transition than other commodities. It will be essential in a range of applications, from high-speed rail networks to wind and solar support structures, and green hydrogen production facilities. The production of green steel will also bolster demand for high-grade iron ore. While the low-carbon transition is expected to create additional demand for our commodities, the outlook for demand varies significantly between our scenarios as a function of GDP growth, technology uptake, and scrap supply and use. Different demand trajectories, combined with industry supply responses and global carbon policy evolution, determine the market prices for our three major commodities and implications for our Group-level and asset valuations, as shown below. Price range across scenarios Upper Lower Iron ore: 62% fines 2025-29 2030-39 2040-50+ 0.5 1.5 Key Aspirational Leadership Competitive Leadership Fragmented Leadership Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com10
Price range across scenarios Price range across scenarios Upper Upper Lower Lower – In Aspirational Leadership and Competitive Leadership, traditional and energy transition demand in the transport and electricity sectors doubles demand for aluminium semi-fabricated products over the next three decades. This supports aluminium prices over all time horizons. As higher global carbon penalties materialise, the overall industry cost structure will move upwards, further supporting prices in these two scenarios. – In Fragmented Leadership, constrained economic growth and limited climate action suppress growth in aluminium demand to more moderate levels. – Share of secondary recycled material rises from 28% today to ~45% by 2050. – Copper demand rises by 65-150% by 2050 across the three scenarios. Copper benefits from the rapid adoption of electric vehicles and growth in solar and wind generation, which all have higher copper intensities than conventional technologies. These are key demand drivers in Aspirational and Competitive Leadership scenarios. – Copper prices are expected to be higher than historical norms over the next two decades. This is most pronounced in Aspirational and Competitive Leadership scenarios due to higher demand requirements. – In the 2040s, prices decline in real terms due to moderating demand growth and greater use of scrap material, which rises from 31% today to ~40% by 2050 across the scenarios. Implications for Rio Tinto’s portfolio and operations We aim to invest in quality assets that give robust returns under our scenarios, creating a resilient portfolio with a significant upside to the energy transition. We have continued to invest in our copper portfolio through traditional assets such as Oyu Tolgoi and Kennecott, as well as early-stage application of our Nuton copper leaching technology. In aluminium, we continue to develop emissions-free smelting technology with ELYSISTM trials, as well as working to reduce the emissions of our existing capacity (see the section on Scope 1 and 2 below). In iron ore, Simandou will become a major supplier of high-grade iron ore that can be used in DRI-EAF steel processing and complement our existing product mix. In other commodities, we are evaluating a range of opportunities to produce lithium (including at Rincon and Boron), as well as making demonstrable progress on various critical mineral developments that are essential for the energy transition. This alignment with the low-carbon transition is reflected in the financial resilience of our portfolio across all scenarios considered. Our estimate for Group value in the Aspirational Leadership scenario lies between those for Fragmented and Competitive Leadership. This reflects higher estimated valuations for our copper and aluminium businesses in Aspirational Leadership, based on the above price profiles, offset by higher expected carbon penalties across our operating jurisdictions, and lower prices for lower-grade iron ore products. The same pattern holds for EBITDA margins at Group level. Aluminium Copper Demand Demand Price ranges Price ranges 2025-29 2030-39 2040-50+ 0.5 1.5 2025-29 2030-39 2040-50+ 0.5 1.5 280 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 2020 2030 2040 2050 % 280 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 2020 2030 2040 2050 % Note: Real 2022 prices. We do not publish our commodity price forecasts as this would weaken our position in commercial negotiations and might give rise to concerns from regulators and market participants. 11Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Our portfolio risks and opportunities in the low-carbon transition Iron ore Copper Aluminium Strong GDP growth and accelerated EV penetration and global electrification (backed by renewable electricity) support demand growth and margins across the portfolio Strong GDP growth and EV penetration support demand with value upside for hydro-based smelters (more pronounced in Aspirational Leadership) Lower demand growth and poor carbon policy reduce margins and upside for low-carbon smelting and refining (Kennecott and Escondida) China slowdown and increasing self-sufficiency reduce demand for seaborne bauxite Pressure to meet rapid demand growth supports growth projects (and Nuton) if they satisfy environmental and social requirements Environmental and social approval hurdles for new projects including Resolution Copper and La Granja Higher carbon penalties support ELYSISTM, hydro-based smelting assets in Quebec and repowering projects in Australia Geopolitical tensions could reduce joint venture partnership opportunities and create potential engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) and logistical issues Slowing demand and low carbon penalties greatly reduce value upside of ELYSISTM and hydro-based smelters Competition to secure large-scale firmed renewable electricity to repower coal-based Pacific Aluminium Operations Aspirational Leadership Competitive Leadership Fragmented Leadership Lower medium-run demand versus Competitive Leadership due to higher scrap-use affecting Pilbara products (recovers post 2040) Strong global GDP growth and continued urbanisation support iron ore demand including for Pilbara products Slowdown in China and global GDP growth erode demand, creating margin pressure across the portfolio Minerals Accelerated uptake of EVs and battery storage solutions supports growth projects (Rincon and Tamarack joint venture) Reduced battery material growth opportunities but resilience from operating high-grade TiO2 and borates assets Strong outlook for battery materials but international competition for greenfield and mergers and acquisitions opportunities limit growth options Increasing ESG scrutiny of new projects and more stringent regulations Carbon penalties for downstream processing of TiO2 and battery materials Supply disruption risks and volatility bolster demand for precious metal and critical mineral by-products Large increases in carbon pricing and penalties drive demand for high-grade iron ore supporting Simandou and IOC Stronger customer preference for Simandou and IOC ores for lower-carbon traditional and emerging steelmaking Small and regional increases in carbon prices help preserve longer-term margins for low-cost, Tier 1 Pilbara ores Key: risks & opportunities table Higher opportunity Higher riskModerate opportunity Moderate risk Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com12 Producing materials essential for the low-carbon transition continued
Classifying our portfolio: revenue, capital expenditure (capex) and operating assets We classify commodities into five categories based on climate-related transition risks and growth opportunities: – Type 1 (highest transition-related demand): lithium, graphite, cobalt, nickel – Type 2 (other transition materials): copper, aluminium (including alumina and bauxite), manganese, zinc, other minerals – Type 3: iron ore – Type 4: metallurgical coal – Type 5 (highest transition-related risk): thermal coal Type 1 and Type 2 materials align with a draft classification proposed by the investor coalition Climate Action 100+. Having divested the last of our coal businesses in 2018, we are orienting our growth capex towards materials that enable the energy transition, including copper, lithium and high-grade iron ore. Our ambition is to increase our growth capital to up to $3 billion per year in 2024 and 2025, developing new options and finding innovative ways of bringing projects onstream faster. Growth capex in iron ore relates to higher-grade ore from projects such as Simandou. Capex on mine development at Gudai-Darri and the Western Range is included in total capex. 2022 Production (Mt Cu eq) Revenue1 ($m) Growth capex ($m) Total capex ($m) Operating assets ($m) Type 1 (lithium, graphite, cobalt, nickel) 0 0 15 15 835 Type 2 (copper, aluminium, other minerals) 2.46 25,289 482 3,471 34,264 Type 3 (iron ore) 2.45 33,115 0 3,265 19,263 Type 4 (metallurgical coal) 0 0 0 0 0 Type 5 (thermal coal) 0 0 0 0 0 1. Revenue includes share of equity accounted unit sales and intra-subsidiary / equity accounted unit sales. 13Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Reducing the carbon footprint of our operations We are working to decarbonise our operations to strengthen our alignment with the goals of the Paris Agreement. In 2022, we did not advance our abatement projects as fast as we would have liked; however, our Scope 1 and 2 emissions fell to 30.3Mt CO2e, which is 7% below our 2018 equity emissions baseline. Ambitious targets aligned with 1.5°C Our targets are to reduce our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 15% by 2025 and by 50% by 2030 (relative to 2018 levels), and to reach net zero by 2050. These targets cover more than 95% of our operational emissions and are on an equity basis. We will continue to adjust the 2018 baseline to exclude reductions achieved by divesting assets in the future, and to account for acquisitions. For example, following the acquisition of TRQ in December 2022, we increased our equity in the Oyu Tolgoi copper mine from 33% to 66%, which will result in an increase in our baseline and target trajectory in our 2023 reporting (see data tables for further detail). In the Glasgow Climate Pact adopted at COP26, governments resolved to pursue efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C. The Pact states that this “requires rapid, deep and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions, including reducing global carbon dioxide emissions by 45% by 2030 relative to the 2010 level and to net zero around mid-century, as well as deep reductions in other greenhouse gases”. This is consistent with the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C that sets out multiple pathways to limiting warming to 1.5°C, which average around net zero emissions by 2050. While there is no universal standard for determining the alignment of targets with the Paris Agreement goals, we conclude that our Scope 1 and 2 targets for 2030 are aligned with efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. In 2021, KPMG provided limited assurance over the alignment of our Scope 1 and 2 targets with efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. They also provided assurance of the roadmap to delivering those targets (as set out in our 2021 Climate Change Report). For this 2022 report, KPMG provide limited assurance over our progress reporting against our 2022 Climate Action Plan commitments (in addition to their assurance of our Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions). Their statement is included at the end of the report. Our Scope 1 and 2 emissions in 2022 In 2022, our Scope 1 and 2 emissions were 30.3Mt CO2e (31.0Mt in 2021), a reduction of 7% below our 2018 baseline. This is primarily the result of switching to renewable power at Kennecott and Escondida in prior years, as well as lower than planned production from the Kitimat and Boyne aluminium smelters in 2022. We purchased renewable electricity certificates at Kennecott in the US and switched to renewable electricity contracts at the Escondida mine in Chile (managed by BHP; Rio Tinto owns 30%). In contrast to many of our peers, about 80% of our emissions are driven by processing and producing metals and minerals, which are high temperature, hard-to-abate activities. The remaining 20% are from our mining operations. The four most significant sources of our operational emissions are electricity at 41% (purchased and generated), carbon anodes in aluminium - and reductants in titanium dioxide furnaces at 21%, fossil fuels for heat at our processing plants and alumina refineries at 20%, and diesel consumption in our mining equipment and rail fleet at 13%. The carbon intensity of our assets varies widely across our portfolio, and largely reflects the balance between mining and processing activities. Most of our assets already sit at the low end of their respective commodity carbon intensity curves (see charts in appendix). Operations with a predominant mining and logistics focus are less carbon intensive, while refining and smelting operations are high-temperature, energy-intensive processes. Consequently, approximately 70% of our emissions today are from our aluminium business. Largely because of the high energy intensity of the aluminium business, our Group-wide consumption of electricity is about four times that of other global diversified mining majors. However, our share of renewable electricity consumption is high and we are making investments and supply decisions to increase this. We are reviewing our Scope 2 reporting and moving towards dual location- based (using grid averages) and market-based (using supplier-specific emissions factors) reporting in 2023, at which time the percentage of renewables we consume will also be recalculated using the updated assumptions. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com14
Progress towards our 2025 target – slower than planned We did not advance the actual implementation of our abatement projects as fast as we would have liked last year, so our capital expenditure (capex) on decarbonisation projects was $94 million, lower than we anticipated when we set our targets. Challenges have included late delivery of equipment, resourcing constraints impacting study progress, construction and commissioning, and project readiness. So far, we have reduced our Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 7% below our 2018 baseline. We expect carbon emissions increases of 1.5Mt CO2 as we grow production between 2023 and 2025. Overall, we therefore estimate a need to plan, develop and implement 4.2Mt CO2 of abatement projects to meet our 15% emissions reduction target by 2025 categorised as follows: – 0.6Mt CO2 from projects already approved but not yet executed – 0.9Mt CO2 from projects yet to be approved but in advanced planning – 2.7Mt CO2 from projects in early stages of design and planning. 2022 Scope 1 and 2 emissions by operations and source (equity basis) There are risks and dependencies to delivering the projects to achieve our 2025 and 2030 targets. Many of the abatement projects identified are at early stages of development and it may be months or years before they reach final investment decision, construction and operation. Others may depend on local approvals or require collaboration with a wide range of stakeholders to achieve the large- scale low-carbon transformation that we are aiming for. The breakdown of our abatement projects above assumes that the full abatement potential is delivered on schedule. However, our experience suggests that there will be delays and that we will require a more significant use of offsets to achieve our 2025 target. We still have much work to do to progress our abatement projects and we continue to aim for our 2025 target to maintain focus within the organisation and drive action across our portfolio. Our pathway to our 2030 target: 6+1 abatement programmes Between now and 2030, the two most important decarbonisation levers are firstly, switching the electricity we generate and purchase to renewables, and, secondly, addressing emissions related to process heat at our alumina refineries and minerals processing operations. Beyond 2030, we aim to achieve deeper reductions on the pathway to net zero as we deploy ELYSISTM and phase out the use of carbon anodes at our aluminium smelters, as well as progressing low emissions trucks and mobile equipment at our mining operations. We face continuing challenges to improve the commercial returns and overall readiness of many of our abatement projects. The commercial returns of abatement projects will also be influenced by local carbon prices, which currently remain relatively low in many of the countries where we operate. In 2022, we established six abatement programmes, with dedicated people, to focus on the decarbonisation challenge across our product groups: repowering our Pacific Aluminium Operations, renewables, aluminium anodes – ELYSISTM, alumina process heat, minerals processing and diesel transition. We are also increasing our investment in our Nature Solutions team and now expect high integrity offsets to play a greater role in our decarbonisation strategy. As a result of the six programmes plus our investment in nature-based solutions (NbS), we are now better placed to make complex structural changes to our energy system by 2030, as we work towards our ambitious target that is aligned with the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement. Electricity1 41% Anodes and reductants 21% Process heat 20% Mobile diesel Other2 13% 4% % of total Aluminium 48% Bauxite & alumina 21% Minerals 13% Iron ore1 10% Copper 5% Shipping & corporate functions 2% 30.3Mt Mt CO2e 1. Our Iron Ore product group is primarily our operations in the Pilbara and includes some salt production. Our Minerals product group includes the Iron Ore Company of Canada (IOC). Our 2022 equity emissions do not include the additional equity share of the Oyu Tolgoi mine that was purchased in mid-December 2022. 2. Other includes perfluorocarbons and land-based emissions. Note the sum of the categories may be slightly different to the total due to rounding. 15Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Decarbonising electricity: repowering Pacific Aluminium Operations A continued shift to renewables is central to meeting our 2030 targets and will remain an important area of focus beyond 2030. The Boyne smelter and Gladstone power station in Queensland, and the Tomago smelter in New South Wales, are part of our Pacific Aluminium Operations and all operate in coal-based power grids. These facilities account for 28% of our Scope 1 and 2 emissions and more than half of our emissions from electricity use. Green repowering solutions are essential to the long-term sustainability of these operations. The scale of the smelters’ electricity use means that their transition must take into account the impacts on the broader grid and overall system requirements. This requires complex technical, commercial and political negotiations balancing the needs of multiple stakeholders. Following the signing of a Statement of Cooperation with the Queensland Government in 2021 to work towards establishing more renewable energy in Central Queensland, we began direct market engagement. A formal market request for proposals was undertaken in June 2022 to support the development of large-scale wind and solar power to supply power to the Boyne smelter through the Queensland grid by 2030. This smelter requires 960MW capacity of reliable power to operate, which equates to at least 4GW of quality wind and solar power capacity with firming. We continue to work with the Queensland Government and energy providers to design a renewable energy solution as we approach the end of our supply contract for electricity generation to the smelter. In 2022, we impaired the remaining full value of the Boyne smelter in Queensland, Australia as a result of reduced capacity and the high cost of energy from the coal-fired power station impacting economic performance. (For further detail of the impairment, see note 4 to the Financial Statements). 2030 pathway: emissions reduction potential by major abatement programme In September 2022, Tomago Aluminium Company released an expression of interest to develop, invest in or procure long-term traceable renewable energy and dispatchable firm power generation projects or contracts to supply its production assets, and underpin its decarbonisation strategy and net zero ambition. Decarbonising electricity: renewables deployment As we increasingly electrify our processes and mobile fleets, these will need to be supplied by green energy. In the Pilbara, we have one of the world’s largest microgrids, underpinned by 480MW of gas-based power capacity and each year we spend approximately $100-200 million on natural gas to power these operations. We are working towards a plan that will enable 1GW of renewable power capacity in the Pilbara by 2030, which will largely displace gas-fired electricity generation and could support the electrification of our mobile fleet as the technology becomes available. In 2022, we announced that we are planning to invest $600 million in the Pilbara to fund construction of two 100MW solar power facilities, one 30MW solar facility1, and 200MWh of on-grid battery storage by 2026. This is in addition to the 34MW solar farm installed at the recently commissioned Gudai-Darri iron ore mine. When these solar projects are fully operational, they will displace approximately 30% of our gas usage. Developing large-scale renewable projects in the Pilbara requires extensive stakeholder engagement to facilitate studies and approvals. We are working collaboratively with regulators, Traditional Owners and other key stakeholders about potential renewable developments. Some Traditional Owners have actively participated in planning activities including site selection for wind monitoring and ecological studies. In December, the Western Australian Government announced a new multi-pronged approach to fast-track green energy approvals. Planning for 1GW is ongoing, and in late 2022 we signed early agreements to develop a design for a 100MW solar farm suitable for the Pilbara environment and to better understand and plan for potential project risks. Early studies and planning for wind farm developments also commenced in late 2022. Our planning effort is also considering our future energy needs to support further decarbonisation requirements. It makes sense for us to invest our own capital to develop renewables in the Pilbara as we own much of the infrastructure and operate the grid. In other locations, power purchase agreements may be a better option for us as other investors focused on renewables can develop large capacity solutions at a more attractive cost of capital, offering us savings in operating cost. In 2022, we signed a 130MW solar power purchase agreement for Richards Bay Minerals (RBM). Further projects are being pursued to help us achieve our 100% renewable power ambition in South Africa. Since we reset our agreement with the Government of Mongolia, we approved an Electricity Supply Agreement to provide Oyu Tolgoi with a long-term source of power from the Mongolian grid. In 2022, we continued our work with the Government to support the development of long-term renewable energy generation options on the Mongolian grid and meet Oyu Tolgoi’s commitment to sourcing power domestically. Long duration (defined as 8-150 hours) energy storage will be required as we decarbonise our businesses through the adoption of renewable power from wind and solar sources, as they become the dominant source of energy. In 2021, we became an anchor member of the newly created Long Duration Energy Storage (LDES) Council that was launched at COP26. In 2022, we supported the publication of the LDES Council report on thermal storage (released at COP27) and started two parallel studies to supply green steam to our operations by integrating thermal energy storage with renewable energy. TBU 2022 emissions 2030 potential abatement 0 1 Paci c Aluminium Operations Renewables Aluminium anodes/ELYSIS™ Alumina process heat Mineral processing Diesel transition 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 7.7 5.8 4.7 1.6 0.06.2 4.6 4.2 2.1 0.2 3.6 0.5 2018 emissions baseline 32.5 Emissions reduction to 2022 -2.2 2022 emissions 30.3 Growth to 2030 1.1 Abatement programmes -12.3 Other required abatement (includes NbS) 2.8 2030 emissions (50% reduction) 16.2 New projects will need to be carbon neutral or have emissions mitigated elsewhere in the portfolio. M t C O 2e 1. In our release dated 30th November 2022 and Capital Markets Day presentation, we announced plans for the two 100MW solar power facilities and omitted the additional 30MW facility. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com16 Reducing the carbon footprint of our operations continued
Decarbonising aluminium anodes: ELYSISTM Emissions from the use of carbon anodes, such as in our aluminium smelters, are 6.3Mt CO2e today and a longer-term challenge. We established the ELYSIS partnership in 2018 with Alcoa and with support from Apple and the governments of Canada and Quebec to develop the world’s first carbon-free aluminium smelting process, using inert anodes instead of carbon. With the first industrial scale pilot cell smelting zero-carbon aluminium at the ELYSIS Industrial Research and Development Center, work is now focused on scaling up the ELYSISTM technology towards the demonstration of even larger commercial-size cells. Construction of these prototype cells is underway at the end of an existing potline at our Alma smelter and we expect this to be commissioned in 2023. The smelting cells will operate on an electrical current of 450kA, which is the commercial scale for many large, modern aluminium smelters. So, between now and 2030, we are deploying ELYSISTM for growth of new zero carbon aluminium smelting capacity rather than to reduce emissions from carbon anodes at existing smelters. Beyond 2030, we expect to phase out the use of carbon anodes at our smelters. Decarbonising alumina process heat In the alumina refining process, we use coal and gas to generate steam in boilers and gas to generate heat for calcination. In 2022, emissions from these sources were 4.6Mt CO2e. Our pathway for decarbonisation is through electrification, including the use of renewable energy to create hydrogen. In 2021, we formed two partnerships to research using hydrogen to reduce emissions in alumina refining: a study with the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to assess hydrogen use in industry and support a coordinated approach to developing a local supply chain, and a study with Sumitomo Corporation into building a hydrogen pilot plant at our Yarwun alumina refinery in Gladstone, Australia. In 2022, we continued to progress our studies and are working towards approval for an industrial demonstration of the use of hydrogen in the calcination process. In 2023, we aim to complete studies on options to electrify steam generation at our Australian refineries, while at Vaudreuil in Canada we will progress towards a financial investment decision to produce steam from electric boilers. Thermal storage options studies will be delivered in parallel, as our refineries require a continuous source of heat. Several technologies will be investigated that could allow the use of renewable electricity when available to be stored as heat and used later to generate steam for the refinery. At our Queensland Alumina refinery, our potential double digestion project improves energy efficiency, reducing steam demand for the refinery. Decarbonising minerals processing Our minerals processing programme covers titanium dioxide, iron ore pelletisation, boron and lithium. We use energy for heat and chemical reduction. We developed ilmenite smelting in Sorel-Tracy, Quebec in the 1950s and we have agreed to invest $537 million (C$737 million) to help reduce emissions by up to 70% at the RTIT Quebec Operations. We are working in partnership with the Government of Canada and trialling technological innovations, including BlueSmelting, a new ilmenite smelting technology that, if successful, would allow us to reduce and eventually eliminate the use of coal in the process. In the shorter term, we are electrifying our sources of heat. We ordered four plasma torches in 2021, and we expect to install these in 2023 to commence a trial at the pelletising plant at IOC in Canada. We are also investigating the use of biochar as an alternative to coal and have trials testing the use and product quality, while we look at options for sourcing sustainably produced biochar. Diesel transition Each year we use approximately 1.3 billion litres of diesel in our trucks, trains and other mobile equipment. In 2022, this contributed emissions of 3.6Mt CO2e. We are targeting battery electrification to eliminate these emissions though other technologies will also be important. We expect batteries to develop over time and have been working with heavy mobile equipment suppliers to develop large battery trucks, while working with others in the mining sector to develop charging solutions for them. The Charge On Innovation Challenge, founded by BHP, Rio Tinto and Vale, is complete. This seeks to accelerate commercialisation of effective solutions for charging large electric haul trucks and we are now working with winning vendors to develop low-carbon solutions. We are leading a sector-wide programme linked to the International Council on Mining and Metals’s Innovation for Cleaner, Safer Vehicles, to establish an interoperability framework so that battery trucks and charging solutions can develop in parallel and successfully converge. We will trial the first large battery truck in the Pilbara in 2024 and 2025. We are also working with on-road truck and other equipment manufacturers to introduce smaller and more energy-efficient equipment into mine sites, including automated road-sized electric trucks. As we progress on electrification, which we expect could be mass-deployed from around 2030, we are investigating using biofuels as an interim step to accelerate our progress towards our 2030 target. In 2022, we advanced our biofuels piloting at Boron, and we are working towards transitioning the fleet to 100% biofuels in 2024. A trial of biofuels is also ongoing at Kennecott. However, a scalable global supply chain for biofuels has yet to be fully developed, and we need to use biofuels that are sustainably produced. Nature-based solutions (NbS) and offsets Given the high cost of emissions reductions and lack of feasible production-scale low-carbon technology solutions for parts of our business, our long-term commitment is for our operations to be net zero emissions by 2050, rather than zero emissions. While prioritising emissions reductions at mines and smelters, we are also exploring the role that NbS and offsets can play in our decarbonisation journey. Given the challenges to reduce emissions at our operations noted above, carbon offsets and removals are expected to form a significant part of our decarbonisation strategy this decade. Our connection to a large global landholding with unique and varied biodiversity provides us with the opportunity to develop and invest in high-integrity NbS. At scale, high-integrity NbS can play a substantial role in addressing carbon emissions and biodiversity loss, while also providing socio-economic and wellbeing benefits to local communities. We define high-integrity as projects that balance positive outcomes for people, nature and climate and take an integrated landscape perspective. To do this we are working with communities to implement locally appropriate activities that provide a fair share of benefits to all stakeholders, with robust application of human rights and environmental safeguards, and to secure permanent, additional carbon emissions reductions. This high-integrity definition and associated assessment criteria are based on existing standards for the voluntary market. Together, the definition and criteria guide our two workstreams: a. Developing NbS at, or near, our assets In 2022, we completed pre-feasibility studies at five high-potential landscapes near our assets in Australia, Madagascar, South Africa and Guinea. These studies covered a diverse set of landscapes including forests, coastal dunes, mangroves and pastoral lands. The scale of the first-round projects is significant, with the potential for approximately 500,000 hectares of land under conservation, restoration or sustainable management, and generating up to one million tonnes of offsets per year by 2030. Core to this work is putting communities at the centre and empowering them to enhance their livelihoods through the protection, sustainable management, and restoration of nature and biodiversity. This approach helps to reduce social and environmental risks of our operations and is highly complementary to our work in these regions. We are now progressing the first round of sites through feasibility studies – including stakeholder engagement and partner identification – and completing carbon and biodiversity assessments on the next set of priority sites. b. Securing high-quality carbon credits from the market Given the long lead times to develop our own NbS projects, in parallel we are ramping up commercial activities to secure high-quality carbon credits focusing on regions where our Scope 1 and 2 emissions are highest. Our preference is to have deeper involvement with a smaller number of projects to ensure that we are retiring high-integrity carbon credits. We anticipate that this will require us to explore a range of upstream partnership models (including long-term offtakes, co-investment and co-development) with high-quality partners and developers. 17Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
We have developed a set of quality criteria – covering the carbon integrity of the project and the social and ecological safeguards that underpin it – that form the basis of our NbS project quality due-diligence process. Beyond the voluntary standards, we further test projects using our development criteria for high-integrity NbS before investment Accelerating the creation of high integrity nature-based solutions projects in the regions where we operate O ur a m bi tio n W or ks tr ea m s In te gr ity c rit er ia The recent application of these criteria on the North American carbon offset spot market led to more than 80% of projects failing our internal due diligence, reinforcing the importance of upstream partnerships. We intend to use these criteria in upstream partnership collaborations to either augment existing projects or shape new projects. In 2022, we worked with a steel producer and bank in China to trial a carbon offset iron ore cargo1. We used carbon credits sourced from a Verra-certified forest management project (conversion of logged to protected forest) in Hubei province to offset the emissions associated with Scope 3 upstream activities, as well as Scope 1 and 2 emissions from mining, rail and marine shipping of the iron ore to a port in China (this represents less than approximately 5% of the emissions associated with producing steel with that cargo). Carbon capture and mineralisation We continue to explore carbon capture and mineralisation options leveraging our exploration and geological expertise. Together with Carbfix, we are planning to permanently store carbon underground at our ISAL aluminium smelter in Iceland. Carbfix will use our land surrounding the ISAL smelter for onshore CO2 injection in the world’s first carbon mineral storage hub. Our goal is to use the Carbfix technology to further decarbonise our operations. We have also launched a partnership – partly sponsored by the United States Department of Energy – with climate technology and research bodies to assess the potential to store carbon dioxide as rock at the Tamarack nickel project in Minnesota. The geology of the Tamarack site holds the potential to permanently store large amounts of carbon captured from the atmosphere or from hard-to-abate industries by mineralising it through natural chemical reactions. 1. The following Voluntary Carbon Units were retired upon delivery of the cargo: 9918-159315717-159318418-VCS-VCU-324-VER-CN-14-1935-01012017-31122017-1 9918-159415717-159423014-VCS-VCU-324-VER-CN-14-1935-01012017-31122017-1 – Develop large-scale NbS projects near our assets in Australia, Madagascar, South Africa and Guinea, using local partners and communities to co-design and implement. – Secure long-term quality credits – via commercial deals – in regions with significant Scope 1 and 2 emissions (such as Australia, North America) and explore options to move upstream into co-financing/development for long-term security. We assess: – intervention viability, developer credibility and medium and long-term management plan (beyond credit period) – other funding sources and their impact on additionality claims – threats to permanence (buffer, leakage assumptions) and use in-region benchmarks – baseline credibility and desktop geospatial reviews for NbS projects – impacts of upcoming carbon methodology changes that may adversely affect credits – ability to source recent and future vintage years – monitoring and adaptive management practices for project efficacy and continuous improvement. We ensure that: – projects meet Rio Tinto’s standards and have Climate, Community and Biodiversity (CCB) certification or equivalent – developer’s community approach is fair. We test for Free, Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and whether benefits distribution is fair and transparent – projects do not replace intact eco- systems or introduce invasive species – integrated, regenerative landscape stewardship approaches (water, biodiversity, ecosystem services) are prioritised. Social and wellbeing Create sustainable jobs and regenerative micro-economies from NbS projects that we have developed or originated Nature Originate NbS projects that result in more than 500,000ha being under conservation, restoration or regeneration by 2025 Carbon Build a sustainable and long-term carbon credit portfolio generating approximately 1.7 million tonnes annually by 2030 Ensuring defensible carbon baseline and accounting for real carbon reductions Permanence Additionality Quantification Ecological safeguards Social safeguards Ensuring ecological and social benefits Develop Develop NbS projects on or near assets Invest Secure credits in heavy emission regions Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com18 Reducing the carbon footprint of our operations continued
Capital allocation alignment with our decarbonisation strategy In 2022, we shifted our focus from multiple projects captured in our marginal abatement costs curve to six abatement programmes that cut across our product groups. We are prioritising investment in decarbonising electricity and process heat this decade, as well as developing the technology such as ELYSISTM and low carbon vehicles that will deliver reductions in the longer term. Given the long lead times for these projects, we now expect offsets to make a greater contribution towards our ambitious targets. We are committed to aligning our future capital expenditure with our 2025 and 2030 Scope 1 and 2 emissions targets. We estimate that we will invest $7.5 billion in capital between 2022 and 2030 to deliver our decarbonisation strategy. Our capital expenditure on decarbonisation is expected to increase over the three years to 2025, reaching an estimated total of $1.5 billion. In 2022, our decarbonisation-related capital expenditure was $94 million compared with an original estimate of $500 million. Our capex on decarbonisation projects in the years from 2023 to 2025 mainly relates to renewables deployment in the Pilbara. Decarbonisation investment across the rest of the Group will accelerate beyond 2025. This capital expenditure includes further decarbonisation of the Pilbara electricity system and other abatement projects. These projects will deliver a range of economic outcomes but in aggregate are value accretive at a modest carbon price. Most importantly, they safeguard the integrity of our assets over the longer term and reduce the risk profile of our cash flows. We will also work with third parties through long-term contracts, which are not included in the $7.5 billion capital expenditure noted above. These decisions will of course go through the same rigorous investment process we have for all our projects, and we will remain open-minded about the right mix of direct investment and third-party contracts. In 2022, our incremental operating expenditure to support our decarbonisation work was approximately $140 million compared with an original estimate of $200 million. This includes $24 million on our steel decarbonisation initiatives. Having divested the last of our coal businesses, we are also phasing out investment in some other carbon-intensive assets. The world will need more aluminium, more copper, more high-grade iron ore and more lithium – and this is where we are focusing our growth investments. However, we will only invest in quality assets that will give robust returns under a range of economic, geopolitical and carbon scenarios, creating a resilient portfolio with significant upside to the energy transition. We are applying similar thinking to our approach to decarbonisation. This aims to de-risk cash flows for the longer term while remaining very disciplined today. We will also be well positioned to benefit from any carbon incentives if these are rolled out more widely. Our framework guides our decision making. The framework has five key elements – value, materiality of abatement, maturity of technology, competitiveness versus internal and external benchmarks and alignment with the net zero 2050 target. This ensures our investments in abatement projects are phased in the most logical way, prioritising near-term work around energy inputs and where we already see attractive economics. These projects can have very different technical risk profiles – from ‘tried and tested’ to pioneering technology – and trades-offs between transitionary and long-term solutions. Many require a carbon price to compete at the challenging internal hurdle rate we set for investment. Based on our current assumptions, carbon prices below $100/tCO2e may be enough for us to decarbonise power and support our investment in renewable generation and firming infrastructure. Higher carbon prices and other forms of support are necessary to enable us toaddress harder-to-abate parts of our carbon footprint, such as process heat and carbon anodes, and remain commercially competitive in a global market. We have used a shadow carbon price of $75 per tonne as part of the investment case for large capital projects; however, we are not using this shadow price to incentivise smaller energy efficiency investments. We will reconsider the merit of using this in evaluations of abatement projects in future. 19Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Low-carbon technology innovation “Technology will bring changes we cannot yet imagine – we need to remain open-minded and that is why we are taking a portfolio approach to R&D and not focusing on one particular technology to the exclusion of others.” Nigel Steward Chief Scientist Addressing climate change requires us to replace fossil fuels with zero carbon sources of electricity, such as wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal and others. It will also require the electrification of the wider energy system. This transition will increase demand for key minerals and metals that we produce, such as copper, aluminium and iron ore for steelmaking, as well as creating demand for new materials such as lithium. Our strategy is to provide these materials, and we will have to do this with a net zero carbon footprint ourselves. Today, the key materials for the energy transition are not produced without the use of fossil fuels, so we must innovate and create new technology solutions to do so. We have built an industry-leading Technology and R&D organisation, partnering with universities, governments, companies and start-ups to accelerate technology deployment to support our strategy, and already we have delivered some breakthroughs. We are improving our battery materials capabilities, reducing our carbon footprint through biofuel deployment, and partnering with customers and technology developers to decarbonise steelmaking. We are disciplined in our approach to R&D, with five components to our technology roadmap, aligned with our strategic priorities: health and safety, lightening our overall environmental footprint, supporting growth, decarbonising our operations and our products, and improving productivity. On the low-carbon transition we are focused on energy storage; hydrogen; and repowering our vehicles, trains and ships. And we are using new processing technology to create new growth streams. Our aim is to be the innovation leader in providing materials produced with zero carbon and superior ESG footprint to drive the energy transition. We also strive to be the fastest at translating new ideas into sustained business value. Accessing transformative innovation will require us to take risks, something best done outside the core businesses, which is why we are partnering extensively. We believe our technology innovation and development will bring competitive advantage. It’s also imperative to our future success that we build new capabilities and continue to innovate. There are challenges in achieving net zero across our operations, but also opportunities. There is fierce competition and the pathway to success is uncertain. What is certain is that we won’t achieve our net zero aspirations without this innovation in technologies and in our products. Over the next 10 years wind and solar deployments will help to address emissions from electricity generation. However, this needs to be firmed to support the 24/7 needs of our operations, especially at our aluminium smelters. In the short term, we still see the need for conventional power sources to firm renewable electricity generation. However, new zero- carbon firming or long duration energy storage solutions are being developed – this is an active area with many new start up firms innovating in this field. There are four types of long duration energy storage: thermal, chemical, electrochemical and mechanical. Electro-mechanical storage methods are the only ones capable of storing the large amounts of energy required and then delivering this energy at the power required to our large processing assets and mine sites. Pumped hydropower is such an electro- mechanical storage system that is well known and used today where available. We are also tracking new liquid air and compressed air mechanical storage technologies, and pathways are being pursued to make these technologies more economically viable. Energy storage Alternatively, demand will have to be modulated, and we are developing the capability in our aluminium smelters to flex power demand as a function of renewable electricity production. Lithium-ion battery electrochemical storage is cheaper than the new mechanical storage methods, but still remains expensive, and there is insufficient storage capacity for our sites. The firming of electricity via electrochemical storage still requires development and there are many start ups active in the space. We expect breakthroughs to be deployable in the 2035-2045 timeframe. The good news is that certain thermal storage technologies can provide firm, low-cost power to our energy-intense alumina refineries and other hydrometallurgical plants that require steam, and we are actively pursuing these technologies at present. Gudai-Darri solar plant. The Pilbara, Australia Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com20
Breakthrough technologies are opening up new revenue streams for Rio Tinto. Customers increasingly want to know the provenance of their metals and minerals. We have the ELYSISTM zero-carbon aluminium smelting, and at the Alma smelter we’ve implemented AP4X cell technology, which enables low carbon aluminium production leveraging the highest amperage in its class. At RTFT, we became the first producer of scandium oxide in North America, using an innovative process we developed to extract high purity scandium oxide from waste streams without the need for any additional mining. Scandium is an essential material in aluminium- scandium (Al-Sc) alloys in automotive and aerospace applications. We’ve also produced spodumene, a source of lithium, in a demonstration plant at RTFT. The process used was developed by researchers at our Critical Minerals and Technology Centre, and offers the environmental benefit of not using chemical products and generating only dry, inert residues. At Kennecott, we’ve started producing tellurium – a critical mineral used in solar panels – from by-product streams generated during the refining process. We expect to use hydrogen as a reductant for zero-carbon steelmaking, for ilmenite reduction at Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium Quebec Operations (RTIT) and Richards Bay Minerals, and as a pathway for calcination in our alumina refineries. At the moment, though, hydrogen is very expensive and will require a technological breakthrough to be economically viable. Hydrogen is a very energetic material to produce – requiring approximately four times more energy per tonne than aluminium – but it can provide a great deal of energy back to decarbonise some hard-to-abate industry sectors. There will be very high-power requirements to generate sufficient hydrogen to meet future demand; however, the electrolyser supply chain to deliver green hydrogen is not yet well established and it will take time before it will be a material contributor to decarbonisation. While competitive green hydrogen requires very low-cost green electricity at scale, it also needs lower capital costs. We have invested in Electric Hydrogen, a Californian start up that has reduced capital intensity by a factor of three relative to competitor options through better process design and system engineering, as well as a scientific breakthrough. Where possible we will always seek to electrify our processes as much as we can, for example by using electric boilers to raise steam, rather than using hydrogen as a fuel. This is a far more efficient use of the valuable renewable electricity resource. We lose energy each time we transform an energy from one source to another, and this is what makes direct electrification so compelling and capital- efficient. Therefore, we plan to use hydrogen for its chemical properties where electrification cannot play a role. Furthermore, we will consume it close to its point of generation to avoid supply chain leakage and energy transformation losses. Processing innovation Hydrogen Another technology we’ve advanced is copper heap leaching, called NutonTM. It offers the potential to economically unlock low-grade copper sulphide resources and copper-bearing waste, and achieve higher recoveries on oxide and transitional material. It also has environmental benefits, including more efficient water usage, lower carbon emissions and the ability to reclaim mine sites by reprocessing waste. NutonTM technology pilot plant, Bundoora, Australia. 21Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Partnering to reduce the carbon footprint of our value chains We need to tackle our Scope 3 emissions, as we fully appreciate that to thrive in the long term we need to be part of net zero value chains. The best way for Rio Tinto to contribute to the low-carbon transition is to partner with our customers and others in our value chain to develop innovative solutions and help shape demand for low carbon metals and minerals. Our Scope 3 emissions were 584Mt CO2e in 2022 – over 1% of the global total. These are primarily from our customers in Asia, processing our iron ore into steel and bauxite into aluminium, so our level of control is limited. Our approach to Scope 3 emissions balances ambition, pragmatism and our level of agency: it is focused on our most significant sources and is grounded in actions where we can have impact. Complex structural changes are needed in hard-to-abate sectors, such as steel, aluminium and shipping, to transition to net zero. While it is clear that we have a key role to play, we do not set an overall Scope 3 emissions target as we have limited ability to directly influence the production processes of our customers or their customers. In addition, reducing our Scope 3 emissions by shifting our portfolio away from fossil fuels or the natural depletion of coal mines is not an option for us. In 2022, we increased our engagement with nearly all our direct iron ore and bauxite customers and worked with them to optimise their current operations and to develop the low-carbon technologies needed to reduce emissions across our value chains. It is encouraging that this issue remains high on the agenda when we meet our customers. Two things are clear: first, success will require deep collaboration across the value chain, from iron ore producers to steel makers, as well as technology providers, universities, and industry groups; and, secondly, consistent carbon policy is critical to accelerate the transition. As we develop new capabilities across a wide variety of fields in steel, aluminium and shipping, we are learning from our experience to channel resources into the most promising areas that can have the greatest impact. The low-carbon technologies we need in these sectors – including BioIronTM, hydrogen as a reductant and green methanol – will take years or decades to develop and implement in partnerships between industries and governments. Progress won’t be linear; there will be trade-offs, dilemmas and setbacks on the path to net zero. In 2023, we aim to step up our activities and partnerships to accelerate delivery of real-world outcomes. Each of our technology partnerships has individual goals and targets and our progress towards them is detailed below. Our Scope 3 emissions in 2022 Our Scope 3 emissions were 584Mt CO2e in 2022 (558Mt CO2e in 2021, restated to be equivalent in methods to 2022). Over 94% of this is from the downstream processing of iron ore, bauxite and other products. Over 76% of these processing emissions arise in China, which has pledged to be carbon neutral by 2060, and another 18% come from Japan, South Korea and other countries that have pledged to be carbon neutral by 2050. Estimating our Scope 3 emissions remains challenging, but we have made further improvements in accuracy and completeness in 2022, notably the inclusion of voyage- specific emissions data from chartered ships. Customer-specific emissions data from the 583.9Mt CO2e 2022 Scope 3 emissions by category and source (equity basis) 26.1 8 . 8 386.6 147. 3 15.11% - DRI-EAF 83% Purchased goods and other 7% - Coke Product ion 9% - Steel Conver tor 19% - Sinter Plant 64% - Blast Furnace 70% - Smelt ing (e lectric i ty) 17% - Smelt ing (anodes and other) 10% - Alumina Process heat 17% Fuel 3% - Reƒning (e lectric i ty) Purchases Iron Ore Downstream Customer Emissions Bauxite and Aluminium Other Customers Marine For many of our customers that policy signal is not clear enough. We have seen a significant increase in the number of our customers that are setting public targets for their Scope 1 and 2 emissions (our Scope 3) and have ambitions to reach net zero by 2050. About 50% of our total iron ore sales are to steel producers that have already set public targets to reach net zero by 2050, up from 28% in 2021. Over 40% of our bauxite sales are to customers that have set net zero emissions targets, though only approximately 5% is to companies that are aiming for net zero by 2050. As these numbers rise, so will our ability to partner through the value chain to achieve our common sustainability objectives. An inevitable structural shift toward green steel is underway. In the short to medium term, the industry is predominantly focusing on blast furnace optimisation and we are working closely with customers to support their ambitions. In the medium to long term, the industry will move towards cleaner processing routes such as DRI-EAF1. Steelmakers will increasingly value higher-grade ores with fewer impurities that are more energy efficient to process. Therefore, we are working in partnerships with customers, technology providers, universities and others to develop low-carbon technologies to process our iron ore into steel. This includes exploring DRI pathways using hydrogen and sustainable biomass. We are also working on options to beneficiate and upgrade our Pilbara ores to be better suited to low-carbon steelmaking technologies. 1. Direct Reduced Iron. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com22
processing of our products continue to be limited in availability. We are working with a number of suppliers to understand emission factors for larger purchased goods and fuels with a focus on ensuring an equivalent cradle-to-gate boundary as the current factors. The full details of our updated approach to estimating Scope 3 emissions and our assumptions are available in our separate 2022 Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology Report on our website. Our Scope 3 downstream processing emissions from bauxite and alumina rose from 144Mt CO2e in 2021 to 147Mt CO2e in 2022. This is due to an increase in sales to customers in countries with a higher than average emissions factor, as well as more accurate bauxite and alumina customer emissions reporting. Scope 3 processing emissions related to our iron ore rose from 365Mt CO2e in 2021 to 387Mt CO2e in 2022 primarily due to changes in product mix and an increase in iron ore sold. The steel value chain Steel is one of the most cost-efficient construction materials and is essential in low-carbon infrastructure, transportation and buildings. Steel has a similar carbon footprint to hydro-based aluminium today on a per tonne of product basis. However, with close to 2 billion tonnes of crude steel produced globally in 2022, the industry overall emits over 3 billion tonnes of CO2 annually, equivalent to around 8% of global carbon emissions. In all our scenarios, we anticipate an increase in the use of steel scrap, especially in China, as the scrap pool rises, although this will depend on quality and quantity. However, even by 2050, we expect that more than half of future crude steel production will remain based on iron ore (compared to about two-thirds today). Meanwhile, blast furnace optimisation will be driven by the use of higher-grade ores, including iron ore lumps and pellets, as well as the replacement of pulverised coal injection with hydrogen and the oxygen enrichment of the blast air enabling gas recycling. There is no proven process route at an industrial scale to produce primary net zero steel today; however, the industry is developing and scaling a range of new technologies. These include hydrogen-based DRI feeding into an electric arc furnace or into a basic oxygen furnace (BOF) via an intermediary melter step, direct smelting, the use of sustainable biomass, and carbon capture and storage (CCS), as well as more speculative technologies such as electrolysis. The speed and scale of deploying these new technologies will depend on technological breakthroughs, trends in capital intensity to close the cost gap with existing production methods, customer willingness to pay and government policies, including carbon prices. The low-carbon transition pathway of the steel industry is uncertain today but can be explored and better understood through scenarios. One example is the scenario analysis presented in Net-Zero Steel Sector Transition Strategy first published in 2021, and updated in September 2022, by the Net Zero Steel Initiative (NZSI). NZSI is an industry platform, part of the Mission Possible Partnership, that brings together stakeholders across the whole steel supply chain to help put the sector on a path to net zero emissions by mid-century. The two NZSI net zero-aligned scenarios result in different carbon emission pathways for the steel industry, with reductions ranging from 11% to 33% by 2030, and from 50% to 76% by 2040 (in Tech Moratorium and Carbon Cost respectively, compared to the NZSI 2020 baseline). Assuming that the steel industry follows the NZSI Tech Moratorium scenario, our own analysis indicates that our iron ore-related Scope 3 emissions would fall by 44% by 2035 (24% in our 2021 Climate Change Report). This projection includes expected production growth at our Pilbara operations in Western Australia and the Iron Ore Company of Canada and assumes the development of our Simandou project in Guinea. The greater forecast reduction in Scope 3 emissions versus the 2021 Climate Change Report is due to a range of factors. They include, firstly, refinements to the 2022 NZSI model resulting in increased CO2 reduction via enhanced blast furnace technologies. Secondly, expectation of a faster transition to DRI-based steelmaking via the Melter-BOF route and, thirdly, increased future lump proportion from our Pilbara mines would both have the potential to impact Scope 3 targets. Fourthly, the forecast assumes a greater role for Rhodes Ridge joint venture mines in future production. Our focus areas for iron and steel decarbonisation Our approach is to pursue and support a range of decarbonisation options aligned with the technology pathways highlighted by the NZSI analysis, through partnerships with our customers, suppliers, universities and research institutes. In 2022, we engaged with nearly all our direct steel customers (by sales volume). This represents approximately 70% of our total iron ore sales1 and two thirds of our related emissions. We have an engagement tracking framework with customer projects covering 59% of our sales volume. We have consolidated these initiatives under six focus areas, with coordination from a dedicated Steel Decarbonisation team2 within our Commercial team. This includes beneficiating our Pilbara ores to be better suited to green steel technologies, optimising the traditional blast furnace route to reduce emissions and innovating green solutions using hydrogen and biomass in a sustainable way. In 2022, we made progress on 49 projects, together with over 30 partners, building technical and commercial optionality for the future across the steel value chain. In 2022, we spent $24 million on our iron and steel decarbonisation initiatives, lower than our planned spend of $50 million. We are aiming to increase our investment in our steel decarbonisation initiatives in 2023 and the level of spend will depend on the speed of success of our research and development initiatives. 1. The balance includes spot buyers, traders and others procuring from our China portside business. 2. Steel Decarbonisation team has 16 people – primarily engineers and research personnel, supported by people from our Iron Ore, Development and Technology, Commercial and Business Development teams, working in all our customer markets. NZSI Tech Moratorium scenario technology pathway St ee l p ro du ct io n (M t) 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 Blast Furnace (BF/BOF) Smelting Reduction with CCS Scrap + EAF Average Technology Best Available technolgy (BAT) BAT with H2 injection BAT with Biomass PCI Natural gas based 100% green hydrogen Natural gas with CCS/U Natural gas based 100% green hydrogen Natural gas with CCS/U 50% green hydrogen Scrap + EAF Smelting Reduction with CCS DRI + EAF DRI + Melter + BOF 23Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Goals 2022 progress 2023 objectives 1. Blast furnace optimisation 99% of our iron ore is processed through the blast furnace route today, the optimisation of which could result in potential carbon emission reductions of up to 30%. We will collaborate with over 20 customers, including Baowu, POSCO, Nippon Steel Corporation (NSC) and Shougang, to help them generate those savings as an intermediary decarbonisation step. This includes pilot work on microwave lump drying with Baowu, and progressing our partnership with NSC on test work for lump ores and exploring a new grade of pellets. – We collaborated with China Baowu on low-carbon steelmaking and research projects. The lump drying technology in Baowu’s Meigang subsidiary is one of the signature projects. Through the development and industrial demonstration of green and efficient drying technology for blast furnace lump, the proportion of lump ratio will be increased by 2%. The CO2 emissions will be reduced by 32,000 tonnes per year in Meigang. – 17 lump collaborations with Chinese customers. Outstanding performance results at some operations, with some mills achieving >5% increase in the proportion of lump in use. This corresponds to about 1% reduction in CO2 emissions per customer. – We signed an MoU with Shougang Group to explore, develop and demonstrate a low-carbon emission steel value chain. The collaboration consists of four key projects covering all of the blast furnace / basic oxygen furnace (BF/BOF) process optimisation, including low-carbon sintering, blast furnace heat recovery, BOF slag utilisation and carbon capture and utilisation (CCU). – Commence construction of the pilot plant in March 2023. – Progress work with Nippon Steel Corporation on pelletising and fluidised bed reduction. – Progress collaboration with Shougang. Commence CCU pilot plant construction in 2023. 2. Pilbara beneficiation Our Pilbara blend products have been optimised for the blast furnace process route and have impurities that might be more difficult to manage in emerging green steel technologies. These impurities must be removed upfront via beneficiation or during processing. Our goal is to explore how much upgrading of the ore can be done effectively prior to pyrometallurgical processing. – Bulk samples across products and some current and future mines have been collected. – Density measurement of iron ore lumps has explored how density separation can be used to improve grade to match green steel routes for our Gudai-Darri mine. We have also commenced work on liberation, understanding how crushing and grinding can help improve the separation of impurities in the iron ores. – With the Australian National University (ANU), we have been developing 3D characterisation and machine learning techniques to better understand iron ore minerals, where impurities reside and how they can be best processed. 3D scanning and 2D scanning electron microscope work has provided valuable insights into iron ore quality; the relationship between minerals, impurities and porosity; and potential to upgrade ore through processing. – Successful production of pellets from Pilbara Blend at laboratory scale. – Expand fundamental test programme to include natural fines and an increased number of lump samples from multiple mine sites. – Expand knowledge of density, porosity and liberation to continue to optimise product design and flowsheets for Pilbara ores. – Prepare low impurity beneficiated lump and fines samples and undertake hydrogen-based reduction testwork in conjunction with industry partners. – Produce and evaluate reduction performance of beneficiated, sole sourced and blended ores pellets. – Expand testwork to consider magnetic susceptibility and flotation as options to remove impurities in a range of iron ore types. – Progress fundamental R&D on dry beneficiation and other novel processing techniques led by our Technical Development Centre in Bundoora. – Continue to build on 3D characterisation programme and expand the 3D machine learning data set to include more information on density, porosity, grade, breakage and liberation characteristics. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com24 Partnering to reduce the carbon footprint of our value chains continued
Goals 2022 progress 2023 objectives 3. Research and development of a low-carbon steel making process – BioIronTM Over the past decade we have been researching a method of processing Pilbara ores using microwave energy and sustainable biomass as a reductant. The process produces a pig iron type product for either an electric arc furnace or basic oxygen furnace. The overall steelmaking process has the potential to be carbon neutral or even carbon negative with the addition of carbon capture and storage. In 2022, we planned to scale up the technology and develop the design for a continuous pilot plant (CPP) for approval. – In 2022, we planned to scale up the technology and develop the design for a CPP for approval (following laboratory test work, and subsequent third-party review of results). – Over the past 18 months, the BioIronTM process has been tested extensively in Germany by a project team from Rio Tinto, Metso Outotec, and the University of Nottingham’s Microwave Process Engineering Group. – The initial testing phase showed great promise and demonstrated that the BioIronTM process is well suited to Pilbara iron ore fines. The potential was confirmed in a comprehensive and independent technical review by Hatch. – A prefeasibility study for the pilot plant has been completed and the detailed design of the pilot plant is underway. We are considering suitable locations for its construction. – Develop enhanced microwave energy delivery using pilot models of the CPP plant. – Finalise design and location of CPP and commence fabrication by end 2023. – Complete benchmarking study of sustainable biomass certification processes. 4. Hydrogen DRI and melter An alternative to the beneficiation of Pilbara ores is the production of a mid-grade DRI product, with an intermediary electric melter step to remove impurities before processing into steel in an electric arc furnace or basic oxygen furnace. The use of renewable electricity and green hydrogen in the DRI process provides a pathway to net zero iron and steel. – In 2022, we conducted a joint concept study to assess construction of a pilot plant at BlueScope Port Kembla Steelworks in Australia to produce molten iron from our Pilbara ores via a green hydrogen direct reduction and renewable energy electric melter route. – Concept studies with BlueScope will be completed in the first half of 2023, at which point we will commence a final pilot plant design. As this pathway becomes more understood, we will look into the potential for additional partners. – With our internal Bundoora Technical Development Centre we continue to develop hydrogen reduction processing of iron ores. 5. High-grade DRI The direct reduction of high-grade iron ore pellets is already an available technology today using natural gas as a reductant to produce a low-carbon iron product that can be directly processed in an electric arc furnace. Switching from natural gas to green hydrogen would make this a net zero process route. – In 2022, we planned to complete an order of magnitude study and, subject to approvals, commence the next phase of the study including considering partnership options. We are on track with this. – An order of magnitude study for a green hot briquetted iron (HBI) project has been completed. Phase 2 actions are underway including environmental fieldwork studies, economic studies and partnership discussions. – In June this year we signed an MoU with Salzgitter to study using our iron ore in green steelmaking, including the optimisation of pellets, lump, and sintered fines for use in hydrogen direct reduction steelmaking. – Further evaluate opportunities in North America and the Middle East to produce hot briquetted iron (HBI) with hydro-based green hydrogen and high-grade iron ore from the Iron Ore Company of Canada (IOC). – Ongoing tests of IOC pellets in the SALCOS µDRAL pilot direct reduction plant at Salzgitter. 6. High-grade iron ore portfolio The shift to new, green technologies will require more high-quality iron ore and we are pursuing pathways to develop our high-grade Simandou deposit in Guinea. The deposit has an estimated 40% of iron ore resources that are potentially well suited to meet the DRI specification, which could be processed via the lower-carbon DRI- EAF route. – In 2022, we continued to engage with key stakeholders while we carried out early development works. – Extensive metallurgical evaluation of Simandou ore has been done to support the DRI product strategy including tests with MIDREX, COREM and China Central South University. – In December, we signed a non-binding Term Sheet with our partners (including the Government of Guinea) in a significant step towards securing the shareholder agreement, cost estimates and funding necessary to progress the co-development of the infrastructure. – Continue negotiations on the shareholder agreement, cost estimates and the necessary regulatory authority approvals. – Continue sampling and test work, including mineral characterisation of Simandou DR material. This test work is expected to move into pilot plants and industrial trials. 25Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Our work on inert anode technology through the ELYSIS joint venture is progressing towards industrial scale and is also part of our Scope 1 and 2 decarbonisation roadmap. Construction of large commercial-scale demonstration cells operating on an electric current of 450kA is underway at the end of an existing potline at our Alma aluminium smelter in Quebec, keeping the development pathway on track for the technology to be available for installation from 2024. Meanwhile, in the context of alumina refining, we lead the way in using renewable electricity at our Vaudreuil refinery in Quebec and are exploring the use of hydrogen at Yarwun, in Australia, in partnerships with Sumitomo Corporation and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA). An essential element of our market offering to our bauxite and alumina customers is technical support and knowledge sharing. Our technical teams continuously engage with our customers (our Scope 3 emissions) to share knowledge and expertise, especially from our experience with our own refineries, to support optimal efficiency in processing our products in their facilities. We continue to engage with our customers via our Technical Service Agreements (TSAs) to help optimise processing of our bauxite, which, in turn, results in energy savings. For example, we have conducted joint studies with three customers to evaluate implementing “sweetening” at refineries, which has the potential to increase productivity while at the same time reducing energy consumption and related emissions. We have received good traction with one customer advancing to a preliminary study to quantify the energy benefits under their specific conditions. In 2022, we extended our engagement efforts beyond TSAs to include exploring mutual areas of collaboration in line with our customers’ broader ESG strategies. We have initiated early-stage ESG engagement with nearly all of our bauxite customers (by sales volume) representing about 13% of our total bauxite and alumina Scope 3 emissions. We have progressed toward deeper engagement with three customers and plan to hold collaboration Direct/indirect emissions apportioning indicative using International Aluminium Institute (IAI) primary aluminum life cycle 80% direct emissions 20% indirect emissions from electricity 18% direct emissions Rio Tinto bauxite sales Customers’ alumina reneries Customers’ aluminium smelters 15Mt alumina 39Mt bauxite 4Mt alumina Rio Tinto alumina sales 128Mt CO2e 19Mt CO2e 82% indirect emissions from electricity Downstream bauxite and alumina Scope 3 emissions The aluminium value chain sessions. These include both our largest customer, as well as our longest-standing customer relationship in China, together representing 57% of our bauxite sales. Our focus here includes improved extraction of alumina, optimised heat recovery and productivity gains. Beyond our Scope 3 reported boundary, we are also engaging with our customers’ customers further downstream in the value chain. End users in the transport, packaging and electronic sectors are seeking a transparent, sustainable and verifiable supply chain – this is driven by consumer demand and our customers’ own commitments towards net zero. In 2021, we launched START, a new standard in transparency and traceability for the aluminium industry, enabling customer demand for low- or zero-carbon products to be supported through verifiable ESG credentials via secure blockchain technology. Recycling Aluminium is infinitely recyclable, without loss of properties, and with a significantly reduced carbon footprint compared to primary production. Although it doesn’t directly affect our Scope 3 emissions, recycling of post-consumer scrap today is estimated to avoid about 300 million tonnes of annual CO2e emissions. We are investing $28 million to build a new aluminium recycling facility at our Arvida Plant in Saguenay-Lac-Saint-Jean, Quebec, to expand our offering of low-carbon aluminium solutions for customers in the automotive, packaging and construction markets. The facility will make Rio Tinto the first primary aluminium producer in North America to incorporate recycled post-consumer aluminium into aluminium alloys. The recycling centre is expected to be operational in the second quarter of 2024 and will have an initial capacity of 30,000 tons per year. We are committed to recycled aluminium as an important decarbonisation pathway, while recognising that production of primary aluminium is expected to continue to grow in the coming decades to meet overall demand as recycling rates are already high, more than 90% in some key end-use sectors. Aluminium is a lightweight material essential to the low-carbon transition across a range of end-use sectors including transportation, green energy infrastructure, packaging and buildings. However, the aluminium smelting process is energy intensive and across its full value chain the aluminium industry emits about one billion tonnes of CO2e annually. As one of the leading global producers of low-carbon aluminium, our effort to further decarbonise our assets is core to our engagement with the industry and our customers on Scope 3 emissions from the sale of our bauxite and alumina. Our 147Mt Scope 3 emissions in the aluminium value chain include 19Mt from third-party refining of our bauxite into alumina, and 128Mt from the subsequent aluminium smelting process to produce aluminium from alumina. Note that this is the only area where we consider emissions that are two steps down the value chain in our own Scope 3 emissions, due to materiality of the aluminium smelting emissions (following industry standard). The most emissions-intensive part of the value chain is aluminium smelting, and the most emissions-intensive input is electricity (over 70% of all bauxite-related Scope 3 emissions). However, since our ability to influence customer power sources is limited, the short- to medium-term term focus of our Scope 3 efforts is to improve the alumina refining process to deliver energy efficiency and optimal use of our bauxite. Electricity decarbonisation Over 60% of the primary aluminium industry’s carbon emissions are related to the use of electricity in the smelting process, of which more than two-thirds originate from China, given the country’s share of global production and its predominant reliance on coal-based power. As a large proportion of our bauxite and alumina sales are to customers in China, indirect emissions from the use of electricity account for 74% of our related Scope 3 emissions. Our ability to influence emissions from these sources is extremely limited, especially regarding the overall decarbonisation process of China’s power grid. Some aluminium producers in China currently draw power from captive thermal power stations and have already started to relocate some production capacity to regions such as southwest China that already have hydro-based power options. In addition, as the overall power grid decarbonises, it is possible that some smelters will shift from captive to grid power over time. Renewable power solutions, such as wind and solar, are readily available, although a challenge for the aluminium industry is the sourcing of firmed green power given the limited interruptibility of the aluminium smelting process. Direct emissions Beyond the use of electricity, emissions are mostly related to the combustion of carbon anodes in the aluminium smelting process and the use of energy for process heat in the alumina refining process. These emissions sources account for about 12% and 10% respectively of Scope 3 emissions related to our bauxite and alumina sales. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com26 Partnering to reduce the carbon footprint of our value chains continued
- A.P. Moller Maersk (the world’s largest container liner) has ordered 19 green methanol / dual fuel (GM DF) vessels, while CMA CGM have followed with six GM DF vessels and Cosco in October 2022 with 12 GM DF vessels. 2. Currently, of the total 98 million tonnes of methanol produced globally, only 0.2 million tonnes is classified as green. 50 million tonnes/year of green methanol would be required for 5% of global shipping to be net zero. Shipping Our total Scope 3 emissions from shipping and logistics are 8.8Mt CO2e. Of this 5.1Mt (57%) comes from the approximately 230 vessels we charter, over which we have relatively greater influence, while around 2.2Mt (25%) comes from shipping of our products where freight has been arranged by the purchaser and where our leverage is limited. The remainder comprises other logistics elements such as truck, rail and container movement, accounting for approximately 1.5Mt (17%). As a ship owner of 17 vessels, we emit 0.5Mt in addition to the above – these are included in our Scope 1 totals. Shipping is a material part of the total CO2 emissions to produce and deliver products to our customers (for example, shipping emissions are approximately two-thirds of the total emissions to produce and deliver iron ore to China). Across our global fleet of owned and chartered vessels, we aim to realise a 40% reduction in emissions intensity by 2025, five years ahead of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) targets, to have net zero vessels in our portfolio by 2030 and to be net zero emission by 2050. So far, we have achieved a 30% emissions intensity reduction relative to 2008 levels through technical and operational enhancements. This target we have defined as inclusive of marine shipping of our products and includes emissions relating to ships that we own, operate or manage such as time-chartered vessels. We have also been exploring the use of transitional fuels. We are conducting a 12-month biofuel trial in one vessel with a 30% blend with very low sulphur fuel oil (VLSFO). This fuel blend reduces CO2 emissions by 26%. In 2023 to 2024, we will also incorporate nine LNG dual-fuel chartered vessels into our fleet, with each delivering up to 15 to 20% CO2 emissions reduction. To achieve our 2030 and 2050 goals, our Marine team’s core focus area is on end-state fuels. Although there is no clear, single end-state fuel solution within the shipping industry today, green methanol and green ammonia are viewed currently as the most promising to reach carbon neutrality. Green methanol is significantly more advanced as a maritime fuel with methanol engines already on the water since 2015. It has handling properties that can be supported by existing bunkering infrastructure. Large container operators have also backed green methanol with at least 37 large dual-fuel container vessels on order1. By comparison, green ammonia is a highly toxic and corrosive gas requiring high pressure or low temperature storage, and currently lacks engine design, clear regulation and guidance for safe application in the shipping industry. While green ammonia may play an important role in the long term as these challenges are addressed, green methanol remains the most credible end-state fuel for the foreseeable future and provides the most achievable pathway today to realising our 2030 goal. Effectively reducing emissions from shipping requires participants across the value chain to share the incremental costs. For example, there are still as yet unresolved questions around the economics of the biofuel blend in the near term, which pose a challenge to scaling up its use. Similarly, the current supply side constraints for end-state fuel solutions such as green methanol2 and green ammonia also cast uncertainty around the economics of these fuels today. Nonetheless, we remain optimistic and committed to identifying and implementing sustainable solutions across varying time horizons with a clear focus on accelerating end-state compatible solutions in shipping. We will continue to pursue industry partnerships to support access to leading, low-cost net zero fuel projects and to foster green corridors, such as the West Australia to East Asia route being developed with the Global Maritime Forum. Looking ahead, the main value drivers are: – The development of low-cost green fuels production through partnerships. – Regulatory support incentivising green fuel investment and lowering green fuel production cost. – Carbon prices affecting the use of carbon- intensive fuels. In 2022, we announced our membership of the First Movers Coalition, through which, with over 60 other major global companies, we can leverage our buying power to help stimulate green technological breakthroughs in hard-to-abate sectors including shipping, trucking and aviation. We will also continue to develop partnerships to support access to leading, low-cost fuel projects and partner with influential industry bodies (for example, Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Center for Zero Carbon Shipping). Upstream (procurement) Upstream Scope 3 emissions from procurement were 25.5Mt CO2e in 2022, split between purchased fuels, goods and services. The goods and services are further divided between emissions related to operational expenditure purchases (such as third party alumina, caustic, explosives) of 18.9Mt, and capital expenditure purchases (such as machinery, electrical equipment) of 2.1Mt. Due to the nature of our businesses, many of our purchased inputs are from hard-to-abate sectors, such as caustic, coke, pitch and steel. In 2022, given the impacts of COVID-19, the Procurement team prioritised supply chain resilience. In addition, we requested emissions factors from key suppliers with the aim of integrating them into sourcing criteria for high impact categories. To complement the discussion with our mobile equipment suppliers on decarbonising our operations, we are also seeking to better understand emissions through their value chains. In 2023, we will define our approach to upstream Scope 3 in more detail and determine where and how we can drive upstream decarbonisation. 27Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Enhancing our resilience to physical climate risk From Madagascar’s tropical climate to Canada’s subarctic conditions, we operate in six continents across the globe. Many of our assets, infrastructure, communities and broader value chains are located in areas that are highly exposed to extreme weather events (acute climate risk), including extreme heat and cold, tropical cyclones, drought, extreme rainfall and coastal extremes. As our climate continues to change, so does the magnitude, intensity and frequency of individual and compound extreme weather events, which will impact our operations for the foreseeable future. From exploration through to closure, quantifying our present and future risk to extreme weather and climate change is critical. Understanding our exposure across the entire value chain and how climate risks are likely to manifest in the future will ensure that we are appropriately placed to respond. The first step is understanding our risk, then we can translate that risk into resilience. Taking and managing risk responsibly is essential to operating and growing our business safely, effectively and sustainably. Managing our risks effectively ensures we deliver our four objectives to strengthen our social licence, become the best operator, achieve impeccable ESG credentials and excel in development. Our Group’s strategy, values and risk appetite inform and shape our risk management and internal controls framework. We embed risk management at every level of the organisation to effectively manage threats and opportunities to our business, host communities and our impact on the environment. Our three lines of defence provide assurance that risks are Three lines of defence Responsibilities Accountability 1st – All operational leaders Identification, management, verification, and monitoring of risks and controls Management 2nd – Centre of Excellence, Areas of Expertise and Group functions Oversight of risks and control effectiveness; design of Group controls; advice on capabilities; and objective assurance of compliance with the Group’s policies, standards and procedures Management 3rd – Group Internal Audit Independent objective assurance to evaluate the effectiveness of risk management, internal controls and governance Board and Board committees effectively managed in line with our policies, standards and procedures. While risk management is the accountability of our leaders, all employees are empowered to identify and manage risks at the point that they arise in their business. Our Board and Executive Risk Management Committee provide oversight of our principal risks and the Audit Committee monitors the overall effectiveness of our system of risk management and internal controls. The Principal Risks and Uncertainties section of our 2022 Annual Report considers both physical climate risks and low-carbon transition risks. We measure and mature the effectiveness of our risk management practices through our risk management system. This system is built up of six core elements that are continually improved to ensure that we are effectively managing current risks and preparing for emerging risks: 5. Risk assurance: We ensure that risks and critical controls are implemented and managed effectively. 6. Capability and culture: Risk capability is built through coaching and training for leaders and teams across our business. A risk culture of actively managing risks is embedded into how we run our business. A risk culture fosters the collective ability to identify, understand, escalate, and then openly discuss and respond to current and future risks. 1. Risk management framework: The framework contains Group roles and responsibilities, standards, procedures and guiding principles for effective, consistent and integrated risk management. 2. Reporting and insights: Oversight is supported by proactive and regular reporting to relevant Executive and Board committees. Decision making is supported by connected and insightful risk and control analysis. 3. Systems, technology and data analytics: We leverage systems and data analytics to support risk and control analysis, management and oversight. 4. Risk analysis and management: Risks are measured, monitored and managed, which requires critical controls performance to also be measured, monitored and managed. Risks and their control information are current, transparent and connected. Leaders lead the analysis and management. We expect that all our leaders and team members understand their risks, assess them in line with our values and Group policies and procedures, and respond. Where risks are material to the Group, they are escalated to the Risk Management Committee for oversight, and, as appropriate, to the relevant Board committees and the Board. Enhancing our resilience to physical climate risks is an important component of our climate change strategy. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com28
Our approach to quantifying and managing physical climate risk In 2022, we launched the Physical Resilience Programme across the business. The Energy and Climate Change Centre of Excellence (E&CC CoE), in collaboration with the Risk team, developed a physical risk and resilience assessment guidance methodology, which provides our assets and product groups with a bottom-up assessment framework to quantify physical climate risk. The guidance methodology provides a systematic framework that focuses on the following: – Climate modelling assumptions: to guide the selection of future emission scenarios and time horizons to support bottom-up risk assessment/analyses. – A risk assessment process: to identify and evaluate climate-related risks and opportunities. – A risk management framework: to plan and implement risk responses, communicate risks with stakeholders, and maintain and update risk information. Adopting this framework, our Iron Ore business conducted a physical risk and resilience assessment across its entire Pilbara operation in the second half of 2022. Our Aluminium business also conducted a physical climate risk and resilience assessment across its Saguenay operation, focused on climate change risks associated with managing the lake level of Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean. Outcomes from each of these assessments are discussed in more detail on the following pages. Quantify location-specific climate change projections Physical climate change risk identification Physical climate change risk evaluation Plan and implement risk response Communicate risk information Maintain and update risk information R isk analysis R isk m anagem ent – Spatial resolution: downscaled, asset-specific projections – Latest generation modelling: CMIP6 – Emissions scenario: SSP5-8.5 (approximately +4°C warming by 2100) – Time horizons: every 5 years between 2025 and 2100 (project depending) – Climate variables: 60+ variables – The process for planning and implementing risk responses, both actions and controls, to manage risks to achieve performance targets. Determine: 1. Which risks require immediate attention and action? 2. Which risks can be actively monitored? 3. Which risks require no active monitoring? – Communicate risk information with product groups and risk holders in a timely manner to inform business strategy and planning, investment decisions, project implementation and assurance activities. – Integrate outcomes of assessment into Rio Tinto Risk Management Information System – Review material risks (Class III and IV) not less than three times per year – If a material change/update in (a) climate projections, (b) the social, environmental or economic context of the site-based climate change risk assessment, repeat risk assessment – Determine detailed asset-specific focus and detailed risks and impacts – Rate the level of potential consequence (including financial impacts) – Identify and validate priority risks – Inherent control effectiveness assessment – quantify the effectiveness of controls in place to mitigate risk – Map risks (Class I (low) to IV (high)) based on maximum reasonable consequence and preliminary control effectiveness rating 1 2 3 4 5 6 Repeat: Consider the controls that could be implemented to reduce risk 29Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Using the latest generation climate modelling Our Physical Resilience Programme is underpinned by the latest-generation emission scenarios and climate modelling (Coupled Model Intercomparison Project 6 (CMIP6)) from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report. We have partnered with a world-leading climate data service provider to provide downscaled (site-specific) climate projections for every asset in our portfolio and wider value chain. Accessing site-specific projections more accurately captures local climatic trends and change, compared to regional-scale projections, which are broader and may overestimate or underestimate the magnitude (and directionality) of expected climate change. Over 30 CMIP6 models (an ensemble or group of climate model simulations) are available for five “tier-one” shared socio- economic pathway (SSP) future emission scenarios. Climate change projections from the latest generation climate modelling and natural catastrophe modelling are used widely across our business, including: – Asset-level physical resilience assessments: ensuring quantification of physical climate risk across our operations, our assets, our people and communities. – Closure planning and optimisation: making informed decisions to ensure our operational, closing and legacy assets are resilient to a changing climate. – Tailings storage facility (TSF) management: to conform with the Global Industry Standards on Tailings Management (GISTM), each of our tailings storage facilities (TSFs) must undergo a physical risk assessment for extreme and very-high classification facilities by August 2023 and for all other sites by August 2025. – Exploration, projects and climate due diligence: supporting climate due diligence and climate risk assessments for exploration and new projects ensures we quantify our exposure to physical climate risk and adopt risk-informed decision making and planning. – Mine water management (water balance, flood estimation): understanding how rainfall and water availability may change in the future will inform design. – Group finance and insurance: for use in asset-level critical risk assessments and in insurance. Our physical climate risk and resilience assessments consider a plausible high- emissions future (SSP5-8.5), equivalent to global warming of approximately +4°C by 2100 (compared to pre-industrial levels). Over 60 climate change variables are available for assets in all climate zones, including temperature and extreme heat/cold, rainfall (mean and extreme rainfall) and flooding, drought risk, coastal extremes including sea level rise, tropical cyclone and storm risk, fire danger and extreme wind. Assessing the resilience of our Pilbara Iron Ore business Our Iron Ore business conducted a physical climate change risk assessment across the entire Pilbara operation (Coastal Operations, Mining Operations, Dampier Salt Limited (DSL) operations, and Integrated Rail and Utilities) in 2022. Climate projections and risks were considered across multiple time horizons, including 2030 (near-term), 2050 (mid-term) and 2100 (long-term), using site-specific climate change projections assuming a high-emissions scenario (Shared Socio- economic Pathway SSP5-8.5). Projections were considered for rainfall (mean and extreme), temperature (mean and maximum daily air temperatures), extreme heat days (number of days >35°C and >40°C), tropical cyclone frequency, intensity and location, sea level rise and extreme still high water levels, extreme wind and fire risk. Impacts associated with these changes (such as changes in flooding incidence) were also considered. Currently, our Pilbara operation is exposed to the impacts associated with tropical cyclone activity, including extreme wind, rainfall, flooding and storm surge. Impacts related to projected changes in tropical cyclone activity were associated with 42% of all Class IV risks (the most serious) identified by 2050. Changes in tropical cyclone activity could result in damage to critical coastal infrastructure (for example, ship loader and/or conveyor systems), an inability and/or interruption in exporting ore, increased vulnerability of our people and communities. Potential consequences include health and safety implications, production and financial loss, and shipping and schedule delays. Although our Iron Ore operation is well-versed in managing risks associated with current tropical cyclones, changes in their characteristics, particularly in intensity, will likely impact future operations. Other risks associated with changes in extreme precipitation, flooding, extreme heat and sea level rise were also captured. Of all climate-related risks identified by 2050, 45% were identified as material to the business (Class III and IV), reduced to 18% with the implementation of proposed additional adaptation and control measures to manage the risk. The assessment produced a valuable baseline of our current risks that will now be utilised to guide the focus of the Iron Ore Physical Resilience Programme for 2023 and beyond. Material risks have been prioritised for further quantification and evaluation and will be regularly reviewed as per our risk assessment process. Progress in managing acute physical risk in the Pilbara The Dampier Resilience project is progressing through implementation with construction workfronts at Yurrayli Maya Power Station (YMPS) 220kV substation extension, transmission line pole erection from YMPS to the new Kangaroo Hill bulk supply substation, and at the Kangaroo Hill bulk substation itself. The scope of the project is to upgrade the 220kV transmission line between the YMPS and our Port at Dampier, and to develop a new bulk supply substation at Kangaroo Hill and 33kV distribution connections to Dampier and a third party network operator. This critical project replaces existing assets with fit-for- purpose and climate-resilient infrastructure to ensure power network stability, reliability and security. In 2022, we completed our work to enhance asset resilience of the Cape Lambert A jetty and wharf. These works included replacing berthing and mooring dolphins, longitudinal strengthening of the jetty and protective coating remediation of the jetty piles. These controls have significantly improved the structural integrity and asset life associated with our operations in the Cape Lambert marine port environment. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com30 Enhancing our resilience to physical climate risk continued
Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean Climate Risk Assessment Phase I of the Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean Climate Risk Assessment was conducted in 2022 with a focus on quantifying and understanding how climate change might impact the management of the water level of Lac-Saint-Jean. Climate projections and risks were identified for a number of time horizons, including 2030 and 2050, considering a high-emissions (SSP5-8.5) scenario. Risks identified vary according to season. There are many risks associated with projected climate changes in winter (particularly snowfall, snowmelt and ice), including: – Projected changes in winter precipitation and increased temperatures could result in more frequent floodgate operations (gate for controlling the flow of water over spillways), causing damage to critical dam infrastructure. – Projected changes in freezing rain events could result in cascading breakage of electricity transmission lines, causing a major power shortage at one or more aluminium smelters. On the other hand, many other risks are associated with summer, including but not limited to: – Projected changes in precipitation combined with an increase in temperature during summer could increase forest fires, limiting access to our hydropower plants for extended periods of time and causing power shortages at our smelters. – Projected increases in temperature and evaporation could result in a lower water level in the reservoir (Lac-Saint-Jean) causing low water flows through our hydropower plants and a reduction in output, potentially causing production losses at our smelters. In 2023, further work will consider risks related to our production sites (refinery and smelters), energy generation sites (hydropower plants), and transport (rail network and port) across our entire Saguenay operation. The outcomes of this work will inform priority areas for focus and guide the implementation of adaptation strategies to improve our resilience to the risks associated with climate change. Global Industry Standards on Tailings Management In August 2020, alongside other members of the International Council on Mining and Metals, we committed to implementing the Global Industry Standard on Tailings Management (GISTM) across all managed and non- managed TSFs. In total, we manage 95 active, inactive and closed TSFs across our global assets with a further 43 non-managed TSFs. For facilities classified Very High and Extreme GISTM consequence, conformance to GISTM requirements must be achieved by August 2023. For all remaining facilities, conformance must be achieved by August 2025. To achieve conformance to the GISTM requirements relating to climate change, we developed a Group-wide climate change resilience assessment methodology, which is now being implemented across our Very High and Extreme consequence facilities. Leaning on the risk analysis and assessment process as outlined above, and using site-specific climate projection data, guidance is specifically tailored to compare design specifications with relevant climate change variables to identify and quantify credible failure modes (such as an exceedance of inflow design flood, resulting in an overtopping of the embankment crest) and impacts associated with non-failure modes (such as changes in rainfall and drought incidence causing vegetation stress). The climate resilience knowledge base is expected to be regularly updated, at least every three years, or if there is a material change to: – the tailings storage facility – the social, environmental or local economic context – climate projections, brought about by a significant advance in climate modelling capabilities. Testing the resilience of our closure plans Closure planning considers future climate change projections along every step of the process to support safe and appropriate final landform design. Doing so enables us to meet our host communities’ and long-term stewards’ expectations and supports our goal of leaving a positive legacy for future generations. In 2022, the design assumptions of the Diavik Diamond Mine closure plan were evaluated considering the latest-generation climate modelling and assuming a high-emissions climate change scenario (SSP5-8.5) for future time horizons, including 2050 and 2080. Closure designs were found to be robust and climate-resilient while being fit-for-purpose. A small number of recommendations were made, including installing additional buttressing for the Processed Kimberlite Containment (PKC) facility. Physical risk and resilience implementation in 2023 We will continue to quantify our physical risks and opportunities arising from climate change in 2023. We are planning a comprehensive programme of product group-led physical resilience assessments starting in 2023, including our Iron Ore Canada (IOC) operation, and the Simandou iron ore project in Guinea. This is in addition to our GISTM physical resilience assessments for Very High and Extreme consequence TSFs and our ongoing physical risk and resilience programmes currently underway in the Pilbara and Saguenay. In 2023, we will progress a Group-wide, top-down assessment to quantify the financial impacts associated with physical climate change, including Group-wide risks and opportunities. This is in addition to the bottom- up climate risk and resilience assessments that are conducted at individual sites. 31Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Climate policy engagement In 2015, we supported the adoption of the Paris Agreement and the long-term goal to limit global average temperature rise to well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. Government policy that creates the right framework for change is critical, coupled with real business action and societal shifts. A challenge as serious as climate change requires transparency, collaboration and a shared contribution to the solution. To achieve our decarbonisation goals and to support global goals, we need policy that promotes the production and consumption of low-carbon metals and minerals. Summary of our positions on climate change policy 1 We agree with the mainstream climate science published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We support the Glasgow Climate Pact, in which governments resolved to pursue efforts to limit the global temperature increase to 1.5°C that “requires rapid, deep and sustained reductions in global greenhouse gas emissions, including reducing global carbon dioxide emissions by 45% by 2030 relative to the 2010 level and to net zero around mid-century, as well as deep reductions in other greenhouse gases”. Consequently, we do not advocate for policies that undermine the Paris Agreement or discount Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). 2 Business has a vital role in addressing and managing the risks and uncertainties of climate change and driving emissions to net zero. A range of policy measures is necessary to support the early movers in our sector that innovate and deploy low-carbon technology. Our policy principles provide a common architecture for the positions we take in different jurisdictions – policy should be effective, fair, pragmatic, market-based and support free trade. 3 A market-based price on carbon is the most effective way to incentivise the private sector to make low-carbon investments and drive down emissions. Based on our current assumptions, carbon prices below $100/tCO2e may be enough for us to decarbonise power and support our investment in renewable generation and firming infrastructure. Higher carbon prices and other forms of support are necessary to address harder-to-abate parts of our carbon footprint, such as process heat and carbon anodes, and remain commercially competitive in a global market. 4 Minerals and metals are globally traded, so effective climate policy should incentivise the private sector to invest in low-carbon technology without undermining the competitiveness of trade-exposed industries and shifting production, jobs and supply chains to countries with lower emissions standards (carbon leakage). If there is significant regional variation in carbon prices, carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAM), or alternative policies, are necessary to limit leakage, provided they are pragmatic, effective and equitable. 5 Carbon pricing, on its own, might not be sufficient to transform the metals sector. Other policy tools are necessary to tackle emissions and simultaneously achieve objectives related to industrial policy. These can include: – grant funding, tax incentives and investment incentives to support research and development, innovation and first-of-a-kind projects – product standards and procurement obligations (such as minimum and rising requirements for low or zero carbon metal) that drive deployment of pre-commercial technology. Working with our industry associations Industry associations play an important role in policy development, sharing best practice and developing standards. The Rio Tinto Board approves our positions on climate change policy, our approach to engaging with industry associations and our annual review of their advocacy. Responsibility for comparing our positions with those of individual industry associations is delegated to management on a “comply or explain” basis. Recognising that industry associations’ views will not always be the same as ours, we monitor the advocacy of all our industry associations and periodically review our memberships. This assessment includes: – the purpose of the association and the value that membership may provide to us and our investors – the adequacy of governance structures within the industry association – policy positions and advocacy. Our annual review of all our industry association memberships supplements this report and can be found on our website. Industry association policy and advocacy alignment Where our membership is significant, we will work in partnership with industry associations to ensure that their policy positions and advocacy are consistent with our own public position and the Paris Agreement. In accordance with our principles, which govern how we monitor our industry association memberships, we may suspend our support and membership of industry associations where they do not align with our own public position and the Paris Agreement. In 2022, we decided not to renew our membership of the Queensland Resources Council. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com32
Climate governance The Board approves our overall strategy, our policy positions and the Climate Change Report. It sets the 2025, 2030 and 2050 emissions targets and monitors performance against the targets and operational resilience. The Chair of the Board is responsible for our overall approach to climate change. “We have taken a fresh look at our governance arrangements to ensure that the Board and our committees are focusing our time on supporting the delivery of the Group’s strategic objectives.” Dominic Barton, Chair The Sustainability Committee has oversight of key sustainability areas that may be impacted by climate change, such as biodiversity and water, including the effectiveness of associated controls. The Sustainability Committee also reviews industry association engagement. Other Board committees also address particular climate issues such as how we consider climate change and our scenarios in our Financial Statements (Audit Committee) or the integration of climate-related performance metrics into short-term incentive plans (Remuneration Committee). We base our appointments to the Board on merit, and on objective selection criteria, with the aim of bringing a range of skills, knowledge and experience to the business. We aim to appoint people who will help us address the operational and strategic challenges and opportunities facing the company, and we strive to ensure that our Board is diverse in terms of gender, nationality, social background and cognitive style. The key skills and experience of our Board are set out in the 2022 Annual Report. This explicitly assesses the Board’s climate-related knowledge, understanding and competency in the following areas: climate science, technology development, low-carbon and energy transition and climate-related public policy. Five directors meet one or more of the criteria above. The Chief Executive is responsible for delivering the Climate Action Plan approved by the Board. Risk management, portfolio reviews, capital investments, annual financial planning and our approach to government engagement integrate our approach to climate change and target execution considerations. The Annual Planning Review focuses on our Board engagement on climate change in 2022 Climate change and the low-carbon transition are routinely on the Board’s agenda, including as part of strategy discussions, risk management, financial reporting and executive remuneration. In addition, in 2022, the Board: – Held dedicated meetings to focus on decarbonisation including on large-scale renewable projects, repowering the Boyne Smelters, nature-based solutions and climate change policy. – Reaffirmed our strategy that puts the low-carbon transition at the heart of our business. – Engaged with investors and civil society organisations following the publication of our Climate Action Plan, as well as in November and December. – Approved the 2021 Climate Change Report and approach to industry associations. – Approved the 2022 Climate Action Plan and the advisory Say on Climate resolution in the 2022 AGMs. – Reviewed our revised climate change policy positions. – Approved revisions to the way climate change is integrated into executive incentives (Remuneration Committee). – Approved the climate-related disclosures in the notes to the financial statements (Audit Committee). short-term (up to two years) and medium-term (2-10 years) plans and integrates the new growth and decarbonisation strategy into the financial planning process. The Chief Executive leads the strategy process with the Executive Committee each year and in 2022, reaffirmed the decision to put the low-carbon transition at the heart of our business strategy. Accountability for delivering the goals, targets and objectives in the Climate Action Plan is delegated to the following members of the Executive Committee: Chief Financial Officer (capital allocation alignment, disclosure); Chief Legal Officer, Governance and Corporate Affairs (climate policy engagement, governance); Chief Technical Officer (Scope 1 and 2 emissions targets and just transition); and Chief Commercial Officer (Scope 3 goals). The Chief Technical Officer works closely with the product group Chief Executives to implement the mitigation projects and also oversees the Energy and Climate Change Centre of Excellence, the Energy Development team (which focuses on developing large- scale renewable power options), the Nature Solutions team, and the low-carbon research and development work led by the Chief Scientist. To support decarbonisation across our operations, we established six abatement programmes in 2022 that focus on the cross-cutting issues of repowering our Pacific Aluminium Operations, renewables, ELYSISTM, alumina process heat, minerals processing and diesel transition. These six programmes cover 95% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions from across the Group. Progress reports on operational emissions and abatement projects are provided to relevant Executive Committee members every month. Interim progress reports on actions set out in the Climate Action Plan are provided at the start the third and 4th quarters. Strengthening the link between executive remuneration and our climate performance Since 2018, our Chief Executive’s performance objectives in the short-term incentive plan (STIP) have included delivery of the Group’s strategy on climate change. These are cascaded down into the annual objectives of relevant members of the Executive Committee, including the product group Chief Executives and other members of senior management. In 2022, the STIP focused on progress on abatement projects that directly contribute Climate change is a material and strategic topic for Rio Tinto and is therefore part of ongoing discussion and analysis at the most senior levels of management and the Board. It is also a key topic when the Board and Executive Committee engage with investors and civil society organisations. towards the achievement of our 2025 and 2030 Scope 1 and 2 emissions targets as well as our Scope 3 goals. In 2022, we approved or delivered abatement projects that should contribute 0.29Mt CO2 of abatement towards the 2025 target against a target of 0.8Mt. Challenges have included late delivery of equipment, resourcing constraints impacting study progress, construction and commissioning delays, and project readiness. Approval of a solar PV wheeling arrangement for Richards Bay Minerals was a material contributor to performance. We also delivered all four Scope 3 goals relating to steel decarbonisation partnerships, our aluminium value chain and shipping. We have revised our approach to the STIP in 2023. Climate change performance objectives are assigned an explicit performance weighting of 10% in the STIP (up from 5% in 2022) and we will assess progress of moving carbon abatement projects through the various stages of development all the way to execution to meet our decarbonisation ambition. Further detail is available in the remuneration section of our 2022 Annual Report. 33Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Just transition – managing impacts on people and society This is why we commit to listen to, partner with, and respect the rights of employees, host communities and others with whom we interact. It is also central to our human rights due diligence process and broader commitment to implement business and human rights standards into our decarbonisation plans and actions – including the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the International Labour Organisation Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. We have codified these commitments – and our commitment to an energy transition that is socially inclusive and just – in our recently updated Human Rights policy. In this way, we are aligned with the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change that emphasises an energy transition that does not leave people behind. Our four business objectives help guide how we operate and progress towards our climate targets in a way that is fair and maximises outcomes for our employees and affected communities – a ‘just transition’, in the words of many of our stakeholders. Excel in development The quantum of minerals required to realise the global energy transition will require new mines, many of which will be located on Indigenous land. Respectful and ongoing engagement is critical as we develop and scale up wind and solar projects that may occupy large areas of land. We are changing the way we engage with Indigenous communities. We are progressively working more closely in partnership with Indigenous peoples across our operations to preserve and protect cultural heritage. We are moving to a model of co-management to ensure Indigenous voices are heard as part of our decision making. We recognise that unless managed carefully, the low-carbon transition may negatively impact host communities and people. We take care in understanding – and to avoid or mitigate – potentially adverse impacts, with a particular focus on disadvantaged and vulnerable groups. Our communities and site teams are also starting to work with Indigenous and host communities to explore opportunities for them to participate in and benefit from our climate initiatives. Best operator Our approach to closure provides useful experience as we seek to reduce our carbon emissions while also enabling social and economic benefits. For example, as the closure of the Shawinigan smelter in Quebec, Canada approached in 2015, we worked with the local community and government officials to help remediate and transfer the smelter lands to the City of Shawinigan and assist with the economic transition. This included supporting the creation of a hub for new technology to leverage the digital economy. Most affected employees secured other work either outside or within the company. As our decarbonisation strategy continues to evolve, we will seek to support affected employees to transition to other opportunities either within our business, with other resource companies in different locations or to new industries altogether. Impeccable ESG We are exploring nature-based solutions projects that create opportunities for communities while also helping offset emissions and improve biodiversity. Our experience with our abatement projects suggests that there will be delays and that we will require a more significant use of offsets to achieve our 2025 target. We intend to invest in high-quality projects that implement internationally accepted social and environmental safeguards. We will partner with host communities and other local stakeholders to learn from them and jointly find ways to improve the resilience and protect the biodiversity of land in and around our operations. Social licence Like any disruptive change, the low-carbon transition brings both opportunities and risks. The introduction of the ELYSISTM technology in Canada or battery electric haul trucks at our mines will create an ecosystem of new opportunities and jobs. We will work closely with our employees and host communities to plan for these changes. We have an important role to play in driving the development of competitive renewable energy sources for our assets and also working with governments to support their renewable energy targets. We have plans to develop large-scale wind and solar power in Central and Southern Queensland to power our aluminium assets, help meet climate change ambitions, and further encourage renewable development and industry in the region. These activities will help support ongoing economic development in the region, but may also bring challenges, so we will engage and listen to the perspectives of our stakeholders in civil society, government and the communities where we operate. Governance and external engagement In line with our business strategy to contribute to and thrive in a low-carbon future, we established an Executive Committee-sponsored cross- functional energy transition working group in 2022, with participation from Closure, Communities and Social Performance, Human Resources, Strategy and other teams. Working with an external expert, this working group is investigating the development of a tool to profile transition risks and opportunities at our assets. Knowing that we do not have all the answers, we made external engagement a priority in 2022. This included listening to civil society organisations, investor groups and others to understand good practice and expectations on companies like ours as we transition to a low-carbon future. We participated in an industry working group, convened by sustainability business networks, BSR and the B Team, that is developing guidance and tools to enable a more worker- and community- centred transition. Our priorities include assessing transition- related risks and opportunities across our assets; defining transition principles; awareness- raising across the business; and continued engagement with civil society organisations, host communities and employees. Social licence Earn trust by building meaningful relationships and partnerships Excel in development Deliver organic and inorganic growth, on time, on budget Impeccable ESG credentials Strengthen track record and transparency Best operator Expand capability and leadership Our climate targets are ambitious and demand swift action. Achieving them relies on integrating social and human rights risks and opportunities associated with our decarbonisation strategy into our planning, in the same way we do for our other business activities. It means taking a holistic approach to manage this complex process, considering the full spectrum of environmental, social and governance issues. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com34
TCFD disclosure We support the recommendations from the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) and also welcomed the Climate Action 100+ Net Zero Company Benchmark when it was published in 2020. We are committed to continue to align our climate change disclosures with both of these frameworks. We are also engaging with CA100+ as it develops its Net Zero Standard for evaluating action on climate change by diversified mining companies. During the year, we received a letter from the Financial Reporting Council’s (FRC) Corporate Reporting Review team advising their intention to include extracts from our 2021 Annual Report and accounts as examples of good practice in their thematic reviews of “TCFD disclosures and climate in the financial statements” and “Judgements and estimates”. They also made recommendations for improvements to our disclosures, which we have incorporated into our 2022 Annual Report. The scope of the review by the FRC and correspondence with management was limited to the 2021 Annual Report and it did not provide assurance that the report and accounts are correct in all material respects. The CA100+ calls on companies to reduce emissions by 45% relative to 2010 levels by 2030, which aligns with the emissions pathway described in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report on 1.5°C. Our target to reduce Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 50% compared with 2018 levels by 2030 exceeds this objective. Climate change-related financial reporting The Directors have considered the relevance of the risks of climate change and transition risks associated with achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement when preparing and signing off the company’s accounts. The narrative reporting on climate-related matters is consistent with the accounting assumptions and judgments made in this report. The Audit Committee reviews and approves all material accounting estimates and judgments relating to financial reporting, including those where climate issues are relevant. The Group’s approach to climate change is supported by strong governance, processes and capabilities. Notes to the financial statements Given increasing interest in how companies integrate climate change considerations into their financial statements, the following is an abridged version of note h (and is not an exact copy). Readers should refer to the 2022 Annual Report for the complete notes in the financial statements. As part of our annual strategy process, we replaced our three scenarios described in the 2021 Annual Report and now focus on two core scenarios. These are used to generate a central reference case for use in commodity forecasts, valuation models, and reserves and resources determination, as was the case in the prior year. These changes in scenarios represent an evolution of our interpretation and estimations in the current year, not a change in accounting policy and as such we have not restated comparative information. There are many plausible scenarios for global energy transition, all with different impacts on future commodity price outcomes. At the UN Climate Summit in late 2022 (COP27), there was broad recognition that the pace of decarbonisation across the global economy is too slow to limit warming to 1.5°C and that current climate policies in many countries are not yet aligned with their stated ambitions. Consequently, neither of our two core scenarios are consistent with the expectation of climate policies required to accelerate the global transition to meet the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement. Although our operational emissions reduction targets align with the goals of the Paris Agreement, our two core scenarios do not. Consequently, we also assess our sensitivity and test the economic performance of our business against a scenario we have developed (Aspirational Leadership) to reflect our view of the global actions required to meet the stretch goal of the Paris Agreement. Importantly none of our three scenarios are considered a definitive representation for our assessment of the future impact of climate change on the Group. Scenario modelling has inherent limitations and by its nature allows a range of possible outcomes to be considered where it is impossible to predict which outcome is likely. We do not publish the commodity price forecasts associated with these scenarios as to do so would weaken our position in commercial negotiations and might give rise to concerns from other market participants. Accounting judgments and estimates Impacts from executing our climate change strategy - accounting for capital expenditure and operating costs underpinning our Climate Action Plan Given the significant investment we are making to abate our carbon emissions, we have considered the potential for asset obsolescence, with a particular focus on our Pilbara operations where we are prioritising investment in renewables to switch away from natural gas power generation. No material changes to accounting estimates to useful economic lives have been necessary due to the anticipated use of these assets for firming support in the transition. As the renewable projects progress, it is possible that such adjustments may be identified in the future. The renewable assets in the Pilbara are our own built and operated arrangements and follow normal rules on capitalisation of directly attributable costs. The solar power purchase agreement for RBM is accounted for on an accrual basis as energy is produced. There are no accounting impacts to date from the programme to develop renewable energy solutions for our Queensland aluminium assets as the work has not been completed and commercial terms have not been agreed. Large scale renewable power off-take arrangements may, in the future, require complex derivative measurement or lease accounting depending on contractual terms. No adjustments to useful lives of the existing fleet have been identified to date as a result of planned fleet electrification in the Pilbara and the purchase of battery-powered locomotives. The solutions are still in development or pilot stages and the gradual fleet replacement is intended to be part of the normal lifecycle renewal of trucks. Depending on technological development, which is highly uncertain, this could lead to accelerated depreciation in the future. Similarly, our target to have net zero vessels in our portfolio by 2030 has not given rise to accounting adjustments to date, as the replacement is planned as part of the lifecycle renewal. The energy efficiency digestion project at Queensland Alumina refinery does not reduce the economic lives of the underlying alumina assets but could lower operating costs and improve margins. 35Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
In general, the expenditure on our own carbon abatement projects and technology advancements follows existing accounting policies on cost capitalisation, research and development costs. Use of sensitivities to Paris-aligned accounting The forecast commodity prices (including carbon prices) informed by a blend of our two core scenarios are used pervasively in our financial processes from budgeting, forecasting, capital allocation and project evaluation to the determination of ore reserves. In turn, these prices are used to derive critical accounting estimates included as inputs to impairment testing, estimation of remaining economic life for units of production, depreciation and discounting, closure and rehabilitation provisions. These prices represent our best estimate of actual market outcomes based on the range of future economic conditions regarding matters largely outside our control, as required by the International Financial Reporting Standards. As neither of our core scenarios represents the Group’s view of the goals of the Paris Agreement, our commodity price assumptions used in accounting estimates are not consistent with the expectation of climate policies required to accelerate the global transition to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. As described above, we use our Aspirational Leadership scenario to understand the sensitivity of these estimates to Paris-aligned assumptions. The Aspirational Leadership scenario is a commodity sales price and carbon tax sensitivity, with all other inputs remaining equal compared to the two core scenarios and is built by design to reach net-zero emissions globally by 2050 and help us better understand the pathways to meet the Paris Agreement goal, and what this could mean for our business. It is used for strategy and risk discussions, including analysis of sensitivity to our view of a Paris-aligned pathway and comparison of relative economic performance to our core scenarios. Through our strategy process we compare the economic performance of our portfolio under our two core scenarios and the Aspirational Leadership scenario and this indicates that overall the economic performance of our portfolio would be stronger in scenarios with proactive climate action, particularly in relation to aluminium, copper and higher-grade iron ore. It is possible therefore, under the right conditions, that historical impairments associated with these assets could reverse. We recognised an impairment of US$202 million during the year for the Boyne smelter cash-generating unit, triggered by economic and operating performance of the smelter (refer to Note 4). When measuring the recoverable amount for this cash-generating unit we used net present value of cash flows to the end of the existing joint venture agreements in 2029, which also coincides with the Group’s targeted carbon emission reductions by 2030. The Group continues to evaluate lower emission power solutions for the smelter that could extend its life to at least 2040. In such circumstances, the net present value of forecast future cash flows may support the reversal of past impairments. Both the recorded outcome and the sensitivity represent a reduction in emissions that we consider to be Paris-aligned. We anticipate the economic performance associated with our assets that produce lower-grade iron ore to be lower under forward pricing curves consistent with the Paris Agreement. In the Aspirational Leadership scenario we expect the prices for lower-grade iron ore to be supported in the medium term by an assumed increase in GDP-driven demand. However, in the longer term we expect pricing for lower-grade iron ore to be weaker. This will depend on the development of low-emissions steel technology, the pace of which is uncertain. We expect this to be offset by higher prices for higher-grade iron ore. This is highly unlikely to give rise to impairment triggers today or in the foreseeable future due to the high returns on capital employed in the Pilbara. The impact of climate change on our business is further described in the following notes to the financial statements: Financial reporting considerations and sensitivities related to climate change Annual Report page Recoverable value of our assets, asset obsolescence, impairment and use of sensitivities (Note 4) 168 Operating expenditure spent on decarbonisation (Note 7 - footnote (h)) 171 Water rights - climate impact on indefinite life (Note 12) 177 Estimation of asset lives (Note 13) 179 Additions to property, plant and equipment with a primary purpose of reducing carbon emissions (Note 13 - footnote (d)) 181 Useful economic lives of power generating assets (Note 13) 181 Close-down, restoration and environmental cost (Note 14) 185 Coal royalty receivable (Note 24) 200 We completed the divestment of our coal businesses in 2018 and no longer mine coal, but retained a contingent royalty from these divestments. Recent favourable coal prices exceeded contractual benchmark levels and resulted in the cash royalty receipt of US$36 million during 2022. We also carry royalty receivables of US$209 million on our balance sheet at 31 December 2022, measured at fair value (refer to Note 24). The fair value of this balance may be adversely impacted in the future by a faster pace of transition to a low-carbon economy, but this impact is not expected to be material. Closure dates and cost of closure are also sensitive to climate assumptions, but no material changes have been identified in the year, specific to climate change, that would require a material revision to the provisions in 2022. For those commodities with higher forward price curves under the Aspirational Leadership scenario, it may be economical to mine lower mineral grades, which could result in the conversion of additional Mineral Resources to Ore Reserves and therefore longer dated closure. Overall, based on the Aspirational Leadership scenario pricing outcomes, and with all other assumptions remaining consistent with those applied in our 2022 financial statements, we do not currently expect a material adverse impact of the 1.5°C Paris-aligned sensitivity on asset carrying values, remaining useful life, or closure and rehabilitation provisions for the Group. It is possible that other factors may arise in the future, which are not known today, that may impact this assessment. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com36 TCFD Disclosure continued
Emissions data Scope 1, 2 and 3 greenhouse gas emissions - equity basis Equity greenhouse gas emissions – million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO2e) 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 Scope 1 emissions 22.8 22.8 22.9 23 24.4 Scope 2 emissions 7.5 8.2 8.8 8.4 9.3 Total Scope 1 and 2 emissions 30.3 31.0 31.7 31.4 33.7 Carbon offsets retired 0.02 Scope 3 emissions 583.9 558.3 576.2 - - Operational emissions intensity (tCO2e / t Cu-eq)(equity)1 6.2 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 Our 2030 greenhouse gas emissions targets are to reduce our absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 15% by 2025 and 50% by 2030 compared with our 2018 equity baseline. Please see our Greenhouse Gas Emissions Methodology for details of our approach to reporting Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions. Note that our 2022 equity emissions and our 2018 baseline do not include the additional equity share of the Oyu Tolgoi mine that was purchased in mid-December 2022. Queensland Alumina Limited (QAL) is 80% owned by Rio Tinto and 20% owned by Rusal. However, as a result of QAL’s activation of a step-in process following the Australian Government’s sanction measures, Rio Tinto is currently entitled to utilise 100% of the capacity at QAL, but paying 100% of the costs for as long as that step-in continues. Our 2022 equity emissions and our 2018 baseline include QAL emissions on the basis of Rio Tinto’s 80% ownership. In 2022, the additional emissions associated with the step-in were 0.53Mt. Rusal has commenced proceedings challenging the validity of the step-in and the sanctions regime may change over time, such that the duration of the step-in remains uncertain. Historical Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions have been restated to reflect improvements in data quality. 1. Historical information for copper equivalent intensity has been restated in line with the 2021 review of commodity pricing to allow comparability over time. 2. We retired 10,000 offsets in 2022 as part of a trial to carbon offset iron ore cargo with a steel producer in China. Further information on this transaction is provided on page 18. 2022 equity greenhouse gas emissions by product group and source (Mt CO2e) Electricity1 Anodes and reductants Process heat Mobile diesel Other 2022 total emissions (Mt CO2e) Aluminium 9.5 5.0 5.2 0.3 1.2 21.1 Aluminium (Pacific) 7.7 1.7 0.2 0.0 0.2 9.7 Aluminium (Atlantic) 0.5 3.3 0.3 0.0 0.7 4.8 Bauxite and alumina 1.2 0.0 4.7 0.2 0.3 6.5 Minerals (includes IOC) 1.6 1.4 0.7 0.3 0.0 4.0 Iron Ore (includes Dampier Salt) 0.8 0.0 0.1 2.2 0.0 3.1 Copper 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.0 1.5 Other (includes shipping and corporate functions) 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.6 Total 12.5 6.3 6.2 4.1 1.2 30.3 Note: The sum of the categories may be slightly different to the Rio Tinto total due to rounding. 1. Electricity includes imported power and own generation; process heat includes diesel consumption from stationary sources such as pumps; mobile diesel sources are haul trucks, locomotives and other mining fleet. 2022 equity greenhouse gas emissions by location (Mt CO2e) Scope 1 emissions (Mt CO2e) Scope 2 emissions (Mt CO2e) Total emissions (Mt CO2e) Australia 13 5.6 18.2 Canada 6.1 0 6.1 South Africa 0.4 1.3 1.7 US 1 0 1 Other: rest of Africa 0.3 0 0.3 Other: Europe 0.3 0 0.3 Other: Asia, New Zealand, Central America, South America 1.7 0.6 2.7 Total 22.8 7.5 30.3 2018 emissions baseline and progress towards our 2030 targets 29.5 30.0 30.5 29.0 31.0 31.5 32.5 32.0 RTA RTC RTIO RTM O ther 2021 RTA RTC RTIO RTM O ther 2022 2018 baseline (D ec 2022) 32.5 0.38 1.22 0.38 0.21 0.05 31.0 0.59 0.74 0.13 0.48 0.01 30.3 37Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions - equity basis Total equity Scope 3 greenhouse gas emissions (Mt CO2e) 2022 2021 restated 2020 restated Upstream emissions 32.6 32.3* 30.4* Downstream emissions 551.3 526 545.8* Total emissions 583.9 558.3 576.2 * Numbers restated from those originally published to ensure comparability over time. Carbon intensity curves of global commodity producers by sector Pac.Al Atl.Al 0 5 10 15 20 tC O 2/ t A l Global production Industry average 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Aluminium Iron Ore IOC RT Pilbara kg C O 2/d ry t of ir on o re Global production Industry average 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% 0 50 100 150 200 RT 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0 t C O 2/ t A l 2O 3 Global production Industry average 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% Alumina Copper 0 5 10 15 tC O 2/ t C u eq Global production Industry average 0% 25% 50% 75% 100% RT Source: CRU, Rio Tinto analysis, 2021 data 2022 Scope 3 emissions from product processing by country 549Mt CO2e Mt CO2e China 418.3 Japan 43.5 South Korea 19.7 Other countries with net zero pledges 34.0 Other countries without net zero pledges 33.5 Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com38 Emissions data continued
Scope 3 emissions summary Sources of Scope 3 equity greenhouse gas emissions (Mt CO2e) 2022 2021 restated 2020 restated Upstream emissions 1 Purchased goods and services 18.9 19.51 19.31 2 Capital goods 2.1 1.9 1.4 3 Fuel and energy related activities 4.5 4.52 4.52 4 Upstream transportation and distribution 6.5 5.9 5.1 5 Waste generated in operations 0.1 0.1 0 6 & 7 Business travel and employee commuting 0.5 0.4 0.14 8 Upstream leased assets Not applicable3 Not applicable Not applicable Downstream emissions 9 Downstream transportation and distribution 2.3 2.7 3.0 10 Processing of sold products Iron Ore 386.6 364.6 376.4 Bauxite and alumina 147.3 144.5 152 Titanium dioxide feedstock 5.9 4.9 5.8 Copper concentrate 0.5 0.5 0.6 Salt 7.1 7.2 6 Other 1.6 1.6 2 11 Use of sold products Not applicable3 Not applicable Not applicable 12 End-of-life treatment of sold products Not applicable4 Not applicable Not applicable 13 Downstream leased assets Not applicable4 Not applicable Not applicable 14 Franchises Not applicable4 Not applicable Not applicable 15 Investments Not applicable5 Not applicable Not applicable Total 583.9 558.3 576.2 Note: The sum of the categories may be slightly different to the Rio Tinto total due to rounding. 1. Approximate equivalent 2020 and 2021 figures for purchased goods and services for high emission goods including alloys, coke and pitch used in aluminium smelting have been re-estimated using the 2022 methodology and provided to allow comparability over time. These re-estimates have greater uncertainty than the 2022 reported data. 2. Fuels updated to include bunker fuel for time chartered vessels and more complete non-managed site data. Re-estimated for 2020, 2021 based on 2022 assumptions. These re-estimates have greater uncertainty than the 2022 reported data. 3. Not applicable since Rio Tinto does not produce fossil fuels or manufacture products applicable to this category. 4. Not applicable since Rio Tinto does not lease significant upstream and downstream assets or have franchised operations. In relation to end-of-life treatment, our products – and end-use materials from our products – are predominantly recycled. 5. This category is for reporting emissions from company investments not already reported in Scope 1 and 2. Rio Tinto reports using the equity share approach, so all Scope 1 and 2 emissions from managed and non-managed investments are included in Scope 1 and 2 reporting and Scope 3 emissions within other applicable categories of Scope 3 reporting. 18.9 - Purchased goods and services 2.1 - Capital goods 4.5 - Fuel and energy related activities 6.5 - Upstream transportation and distribution 0.1 - Waste generated in operations 0.5 - Business travel and employee commuting 2.3 - Downstream transportation and distribution 5.9 - Processing of titanium dioxide feedstock 0.5 - Processing of copper concentrate 1.6 - Processing of other sold products 7.1 - Processing of salt 147.3 Processing of bauxite and alumina 386.6 Processing of iron ore 50.0 39Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Independent Assurance Report of KPMG (KPMG Australia) to the Directors of Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited ©2023 KPMG, an Australian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a private English company limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are trademarks used under license by the independent member firms of the KPMG global organisation. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation Information Subject to Assurance The Information Subject to Assurance comprised the following data and information for the year ended 31 December 2022: • The CAP Progress, as disclosed in “Our Climate Action Plan – 2022 progress & 2023 update: Progress in 2022” and the disclosures directly related to each “Progress in 2022” update within the body of the report • Total Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions (equity basis) 30.3 Mt CO2e • Total Scope 3 GHG Emissions (equity basis) 583.9 Mt CO2e in the Rio Tinto Climate Change Report 2022 available on Rio Tinto’s website at https://www.riotinto.com/en/sustainability/climate-change. Reporting Criteria The Reporting Criteria used as the basis of reporting are: • For the CAP Progress, the Basis of Preparation as described and presented within the Climate Action Plan and the Rio Tinto Climate Change Report 2022; • For the Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions, the World Resources Institute (WRI) and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)’s GHG Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (Revised Edition) (2015), and the Basis of Preparation as described and presented within the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022; and • For the Scope 3 GHG Emissions, the WRI and WBSCD’s GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and Reporting Standard (2013) and Technical Guidance for Calculating Scope 3 Emissions (version 1.0), and the Basis of Preparation as described and presented within the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022. Basis for Conclusion We conducted our work in accordance with International Standard on Assurance Engagements ISAE 3000 and International Standard on Assurance Engagements ISAE 3410 (Standards). In accordance with the Standards we have: Used our professional judgement to plan and perform the engagement to obtain limited assurance that we are not aware of any material misstatements in the CAP Progress and the Scope 3 GHG Emissions, whether due to fraud or error; Used our professional judgement to assess the risk of material misstatement and plan and perform the engagement to obtain reasonable assurance that the Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; Considered relevant internal controls when designing our assurance procedures, however we do not express a conclusion on their effectiveness; and Ensured that the engagement team possess the appropriate knowledge, skills and professional competencies. Summary of Procedures Performed In gathering evidence for our conclusions, our assurance procedures comprised: Enquiries with relevant Rio Tinto personnel to understand and evaluate the design and implementation of the key systems, processes and internal controls to capture, collate, calculate and report the Information Subject to Assurance; Assessment of the suitability and application of the Reporting Criteria in respect of the Information Subject to Assurance; Corroborative enquiries with relevant management to understand progress against the Climate Action Plan commitments; Testing the disclosed information on CAP Progress to source documentation on a sample basis; Analytical procedures over the Scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG Emissions; CONCLUSION Climate Action Plan Progress – Limited assurance Based on the evidence we have obtained from the procedures performed, we are not aware of any material misstatements in the reporting of Rio Tinto’s progress against its Climate Action Plan commitments (CAP Progress) presented in the Rio Tinto Climate Change Report 2022 for the year ended 31 December 2022, which has been prepared by Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited (together, Rio Tinto) in accordance with the Reporting Criteria. Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions – Reasonable assurance In our opinion, in all material respects, Rio Tinto’s total Scope 1 and 2 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions (equity basis) of 30.3 Mt CO2e (Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions) presented in the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022 for the year ended 31 December 2022, has been prepared by Rio Tinto in accordance with the Reporting Criteria. Scope 3 GHG Emissions – Limited assurance Based on the evidence we obtained from the procedures performed, we are not aware of any material misstatements in the Scope 3 GHG emissions (equity basis) of 583.9 Mt CO2e (Scope 3 GHG Emissions) presented in the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022 for the year ended 31 December 2022, which has been prepared by Rio Tinto in accordance with the Reporting Criteria. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com40
Independent Assurance Report of KPMG (KPMG Australia) to the Directors of Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited ©2023 KPMG, an Australian partnership and a member firm of the KPMG global organisation of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Limited, a private English company limited by guarantee. All rights reserved. The KPMG name and logo are trademarks used under license by the independent member firms of the KPMG global organisation. Liability limited by a scheme approved under Professional Standards Legislation Substantively tested the Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions, on a sample basis at corporate and operational level, which included testing a selection of 15 operations being Weipa, Winu, Gladstone Power Station, Pilbara Rail Operations, Brockman, Yandicoogina, Marandoo, Boyne Smelters Limited, Tomago, Alouette, IOC Processing Plant, Queensland Alumina Limited, RTFT Smelting, Yarwun and Sohar; Interviews and walkthroughs with site personnel at each of the 15 operations listed above to assess the key systems, processes and internal controls to capture, collate, calculate and report Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions at an operational level, and how this information is reported and captured at corporate level; Testing the Scope 3 GHG Emissions to source documentation on a sample basis; Testing the mathematical accuracy of a sample of calculations underlying the Scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG Emissions; Assessing the appropriateness of a sample of emissions factors applied in calculating the Scope 1, 2 and 3 GHG Emissions; Reviewing the Scope 1, 2 and 3 Emissions Calculation Methodology 2022 and the Rio Tinto Climate Change Report 2022 in their entirety to ensure they are consistent with our overall knowledge of Rio Tinto and our observation of its operations. How the Standard Defines Limited Assurance, Reasonable Assurance and Material Misstatement The procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature and timing from, and are less in extent than for a reasonable assurance engagement. Consequently, the level of assurance obtained in a limited assurance engagement is substantially lower than the assurance that would have been obtained had a reasonable assurance engagement been performed. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but is not a guarantee that it will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements, including omissions, are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence relevant decisions of the Directors of Rio Tinto. Use of this Assurance Report This report has been prepared for the Directors of Rio Tinto for the purpose of providing assurance conclusions on the Information Subject to Assurance and may not be suitable for another purpose. We disclaim any assumption of responsibility for any reliance on this report, to any person other than the Directors of Rio Tinto, or for any other purpose than that for which it was prepared. Management’s responsibility Management are responsible for: Determining that the Reporting Criteria is appropriate to meet their needs; Preparing and presenting the Information Subject to Assurance in accordance with the Reporting Criteria; Establishing internal controls that enable the preparation and presentation of the Information Subject to Assurance that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; Ensuring the Basis of Preparation in accordance with which the Information Subject to Assurance has been determined and compiled is clearly and unambiguously set out in the Climate Action Plan and the Rio Tinto Climate Change Report 2022; Telling us of any known and/or contentious issues relating to the Information Subject to Assurance; and Maintaining integrity of the website. Our Responsibility Our responsibility is to perform a limited assurance engagement in relation to the CAP Progress and total Scope 3 GHG Emissions and a reasonable assurance engagement in relation to the Total Scope 1 and 2 GHG Emissions for the year ended 31 December 2022, and to issue an assurance report that includes our conclusions. Our Independence and Quality Control We have complied with our independence and other relevant ethical requirements of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants (including Independence Standards) issued by the IFAC Ethical Standards Board, and complied with the applicable requirements of International Standard on Quality Control 1 to maintain a comprehensive system of quality control. [signature] KPMG 22 February 2023 [signature] Adrian King Partner Melbourne, Australia 41Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com Climate Change Report 2022
Forward-looking statements This report includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements other than statements of historical facts included in this report, including, without limitation, those regarding Rio Tinto’s financial position, business strategy, plans and objectives of management for future operations (including development plans and objectives relating to Rio Tinto’s products, production forecasts and reserve and resource positions), are forward-looking statements. The words “intend”, “aim”, “project”, “anticipate”, “estimate”, “plan”, “believes”, “expects”, “may”, “should”, “will”, “target”, “set to” or similar expressions, commonly identify such forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Rio Tinto, or industry results, to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements are based on numerous assumptions regarding Rio Tinto’s present and future business strategies and the environment in which Rio Tinto will operate in the future. The important factors that could cause Rio Tinto’s actual results, performance or achievements to differ materially from those in the forward- looking statements include, but are not limited to: an inability to live up to Rio Tinto’s values and any resultant damage to its reputation; the impacts of geopolitics on trade and investment; the impacts of climate change and the transition to a low-carbon future; an inability to successfully execute and/or realise value from acquisitions and divestments; the level of new ore resources, including the results of exploration programmes and/or acquisitions; disruption to strategic partnerships that play a material role in delivering growth, production, cash or market positioning; damage to Rio Tinto’s relationships with communities and governments; an inability to attract and retain requisite skilled people; declines in commodity prices and adverse exchange rate movements; an inability to raise sufficient funds for capital investment; inadequate estimates of ore resources and reserves; delays or overruns of large and complex projects; changes in tax regulation; safety incidents or major hazard events; cyber breaches; physical impacts from climate change; the impacts of water scarcity; natural disasters; an inability to successfully manage the closure, reclamation and rehabilitation of sites; the impacts of civil unrest; the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; breaches of Rio Tinto’s policies, standard and procedures, laws or regulations; trade tensions between the world’s major economies; increasing societal and investor expectations, in particular with regard to environmental, social and governance considerations; the impacts of technological advancements; and such other risks identified in Rio Tinto’s most recent Annual Report and Accounts in Australia and the United Kingdom and the most recent Annual Report on Form 20-F filed with the SEC or Form 6-Ks furnished to, or filed with, the SEC. Forward-looking statements should, therefore, be construed in light of such risk factors and undue reliance should not be placed on forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this report. Rio Tinto expressly disclaims any obligation or undertaking (except as required by applicable law, the UK Listing Rules, the Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules of the Financial Conduct Authority and the Listing Rules of the Australian Securities Exchange) to release publicly any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement contained herein to reflect any change in Rio Tinto’s expectations with regard thereto or any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based. Nothing in this report should be interpreted to mean that future earnings per share of Rio Tinto plc or Rio Tinto Limited will necessarily match or exceed its historical published earnings per share. Climate Change Report 2022 | riotinto.com42
This report is printed on paper certified in accordance with the FSC® (Forest Stewardship Council®) and is recyclable and acid-free. Pureprint Ltd is FSC certified and ISO 14001 certified showing that it is committed to all round excellence and improving environmental performance is an important part of this strategy. Pureprint Ltd aims to reduce at source the effect its operations have on the environment and is committed to continual improvement, prevention of pollution and compliance with any legislation or industry standards. Pureprint Ltd is a Carbon / Neutral® Printing Company. Designed by Wunderman Thompson, produced by Black Sun. riotinto.com
Rio Tinto plc 6 St James’s Square London SW1Y 4AD United Kingdom Rio Tinto Limited Level 43, 120 Collins Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Australia
ex09d23app4g_asx
Rules 4.7.3 and 4.10.3 ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 1 Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations Name of entity Rio Tinto Limited ABN/ARBN Financial year ended: 004 458 404 31 December 2022 Our corporate governance statement1 for the period above can be found at:2 ☒ These pages of our 2022 Annual Report: 88 - 146 ☒ This URL on our website: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance The Corporate Governance Statement is accurate and up to date as at 23 February 2023 and has been approved by the board. The annexure includes a key to where our corporate governance disclosures can be located.3 Date: 23 February 2023 Name of authorised officer authorising lodgement: Tim Paine, Joint Company Secretary 1 “Corporate governance statement” is defined in Listing Rule 19.12 to mean the statement referred to in Listing Rule 4.10.3 which discloses the extent to which an entity has followed the recommendations set by the ASX Corporate Governance Council during a particular reporting period. Listing Rule 4.10.3 requires an entity that is included in the official list as an ASX Listing to include in its annual report either a corporate governance statement that meets the requirements of that rule or the URL of the page on its website where such a statement is located. The corporate governance statement must disclose the extent to which the entity has followed the recommendations set by the ASX Corporate Governance Council during the reporting period. If the entity has not followed a recommendation for any part of the reporting period, its corporate governance statement must separately identify that recommendation and the period during which it was not followed and state its reasons for not following the recommendation and what (if any) alternative governance practices it adopted in lieu of the recommendation during that period. Under Listing Rule 4.7.4, if an entity chooses to include its corporate governance statement on its website rather than in its annual report, it must lodge a copy of the corporate governance statement with ASX at the same time as it lodges its annual report with ASX. The corporate governance statement must be current as at the effective date specified in that statement for the purposes of Listing Rule 4.10.3. Under Listing Rule 4.7.3, an entity must also lodge with ASX a completed Appendix 4G at the same time as it lodges its annual report with ASX. The Appendix 4G serves a dual purpose. It acts as a key designed to assist readers to locate the governance disclosures made by a listed entity under Listing Rule 4.10.3 and under the ASX Corporate Governance Council’s recommendations. It also acts as a verification tool for listed entities to confirm that they have met the disclosure requirements of Listing Rule 4.10.3. The Appendix 4G is not a substitute for, and is not to be confused with, the entity's corporate governance statement. They serve different purposes and an entity must produce each of them separately. 2 Tick whichever option is correct and then complete the page number(s) of the annual report, or the URL of the web page, where your corporate governance statement can be found. You can, if you wish, delete the option which is not applicable. 3 Throughout this form, where you are given two or more options to select, you can, if you wish, delete any option which is not applicable and just retain the option that is applicable. If you select an option that includes “OR” at the end of the selection and you delete the other options, you can also, if you wish, delete the “OR” at the end of the selection. See notes 4 and 5 below for further instructions on how to complete this form. EXHIBIT 99.9
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 2 ANNEXURE – KEY TO CORPORATE GOVERNANCE DISCLOSURES Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 1.1 A listed entity should have and disclose a board charter setting out: (a) the respective roles and responsibilities of its board and management; and (b) those matters expressly reserved to the board and those delegated to management. ☒ and we have disclosed a copy of our board charter at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 1.2 A listed entity should: (a) undertake appropriate checks before appointing a director or senior executive or putting someone forward for election as a director; and (b) provide security holders with all material information in its possession relevant to a decision on whether or not to elect or re-elect a director. ☒ 1.3 A listed entity should have a written agreement with each director and senior executive setting out the terms of their appointment. ☒ 1.4 The company secretary of a listed entity should be accountable directly to the board, through the chair, on all matters to do with the proper functioning of the board. ☒ 4 Tick the box in this column only if you have followed the relevant recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. Where the recommendation has a disclosure obligation attached, you must insert the location where that disclosure has been made, where indicated by the line with “insert location” underneath. If the disclosure in question has been made in your corporate governance statement, you need only insert “our corporate governance statement”. If the disclosure has been made in your annual report, you should insert the page number(s) of your annual report (eg “pages 10-12 of our annual report”). If the disclosure has been made on your website, you should insert the URL of the web page where the disclosure has been made or can be accessed (eg “www.entityname.com.au/corporate governance/charters/”).
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 3 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 1.5 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose a diversity policy; (b) through its board or a committee of the board set measurable objectives for achieving gender diversity in the composition of its board, senior executives and workforce generally; and (c) disclose in relation to each reporting period: (1) the measurable objectives set for that period to achieve gender diversity; (2) the entity’s progress towards achieving those objectives; and (3) either: (A) the respective proportions of men and women on the board, in senior executive positions and across the whole workforce (including how the entity has defined “senior executive” for these purposes); or (B) if the entity is a “relevant employer” under the Workplace Gender Equality Act, the entity’s most recent “Gender Equality Indicators”, as defined in and published under that Act. If the entity was in the S&P / ASX 300 Index at the commencement of the reporting period, the measurable objective for achieving gender diversity in the composition of its board should be to have not less than 30% of its directors of each gender within a specified period. ☒ and we have disclosed a copy of our diversity policy at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance and we have disclosed the information referred to in paragraph (c), on pages 24, 51, 103 and 122 of our 2022 Annual Report. 1.6 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose a process for periodically evaluating the performance of the board, its committees and individual directors; and (b) disclose for each reporting period whether a performance evaluation has been undertaken in accordance with that process during or in respect of that period. ☒ and we have disclosed the evaluation process referred to in paragraph (a) and whether a performance evaluation was undertaken for the reporting period in accordance with that process on pages 101 and 145 of our 2022 Annual Report. 1.7 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose a process for evaluating the performance of its senior executives at least once every reporting period; and (b) disclose for each reporting period whether a performance evaluation has been undertaken in accordance with that process during or in respect of that period. ☒ and we have disclosed the evaluation process referred to in paragraph (a) and whether a performance evaluation was undertaken for the reporting period in accordance with that process in the Remuneration Report on pages 110 – 135 of our 2022 Annual Report.
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 4 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 2.1 The board of a listed entity should: (a) have a nomination committee which: (1) has at least three members, a majority of whom are independent directors; and (2) is chaired by an independent director, and disclose: (3) the charter of the committee; (4) the members of the committee; and (5) as at the end of each reporting period, the number of times the committee met throughout the period and the individual attendances of the members at those meetings; or (b) if it does not have a nomination committee, disclose that fact and the processes it employs to address board succession issues and to ensure that the board has the appropriate balance of skills, knowledge, experience, independence and diversity to enable it to discharge its duties and responsibilities effectively. ☒ and we have disclosed a copy of the charter of the committee at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance and the information referred to in paragraphs (4) and (5) on pages 101 - 103 of our 2022 Annual Report. 2.2 A listed entity should have and disclose a board skills matrix setting out the mix of skills that the board currently has or is looking to achieve in its membership. ☒ and we have disclosed our board skills matrix on page 103 of our 2022 Annual Report. 2.3 A listed entity should disclose: (a) the names of the directors considered by the board to be independent directors; (b) if a director has an interest, position, affiliation or relationship of the type described in Box 2.3 but the board is of the opinion that it does not compromise the independence of the director, the nature of the interest, position or relationship in question and an explanation of why the board is of that opinion; and (c) the length of service of each director. ☒ and we have disclosed the names of the directors considered by the board to be independent directors, and, where applicable, the information referred to in paragraph (b), and the length of service of each director on pages 90 - 91 of our 2022 Annual Report. 2.4 A majority of the board of a listed entity should be independent directors. ☒ 2.5 The chair of the board of a listed entity should be an independent director and, in particular, should not be the same person as the CEO of the entity. ☒ 2.6 A listed entity should have a program for inducting new directors and for periodically reviewing whether there is a need for existing directors to undertake professional development to maintain the skills and knowledge needed to perform their role as directors effectively. ☒
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 5 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 3.1 A listed entity should articulate and disclose its values. ☒ and we have disclosed our values on page 16 of our 2022 Annual Report and at https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 3.2 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose a code of conduct for its directors, senior executives and employees; and (b) ensure that the board or a committee of the board is informed of any material breaches of that code. ☒ and we have disclosed our code of conduct on pages 73, 74 and 145 of our 2022 Annual Report and at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 3.3 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose a whistleblower policy; and (b) ensure that the board or a committee of the board is informed of any material incidents reported under that policy. ☒ and we have disclosed our whistleblower policy on pages 74 and 145 of our 2022 Annual Report and at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 3.4 A listed entity should: (a) have and disclose an anti-bribery and corruption policy; and (b) ensure that the board or committee of the board is informed of any material breaches of that policy. ☒ and we have disclosed our anti-bribery and corruption policy on page 74 of our 2022 Annual Report and at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 4.1 The board of a listed entity should: (a) have an audit committee which: (1) has at least three members, all of whom are non-executive directors and a majority of whom are independent directors; and (2) is chaired by an independent director, who is not the chair of the board, and disclose: (3) the charter of the committee; (4) the relevant qualifications and experience of the members of the committee; and (5) in relation to each reporting period, the number of times the committee met throughout the period and the individual attendances of the members at those meetings; or (b) if it does not have an audit committee, disclose that fact and the processes it employs that independently verify and safeguard the integrity of its corporate reporting, including the processes for the appointment and removal of the external auditor and the rotation of the audit engagement partner. ☒ and we have disclosed a copy of the charter of the committee at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance and the information referred to in paragraphs (4) and (5) on pages 104 - 107, 90 - 91 and 101 of our 2022 Annual Report.
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 6 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 4.2 The board of a listed entity should, before it approves the entity’s financial statements for a financial period, receive from its CEO and CFO a declaration that, in their opinion, the financial records of the entity have been properly maintained and that the financial statements comply with the appropriate accounting standards and give a true and fair view of the financial position and performance of the entity and that the opinion has been formed on the basis of a sound system of risk management and internal control which is operating effectively. ☒ 4.3 A listed entity should disclose its process to verify the integrity of any periodic corporate report it releases to the market that is not audited or reviewed by an external auditor. ☒ 5.1 A listed entity should have and disclose a written policy for complying with its continuous disclosure obligations under listing rule 3.1. ☒ and we have disclosed our continuous disclosure compliance policy at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 5.2 A listed entity should ensure that its board receives copies of all material market announcements promptly after they have been made. ☒ 5.3 A listed entity that gives a new and substantive investor or analyst presentation should release a copy of the presentation materials on the ASX Market Announcements Platform ahead of the presentation. ☒ 6.1 A listed entity should provide information about itself and its governance to investors via its website. ☒ and we have disclosed information about us and our governance on our website at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 6.2 A listed entity should have an investor relations program that facilitates effective two-way communication with investors. ☒ 6.3 A listed entity should disclose how it facilitates and encourages participation at meetings of security holders. ☒ and we have disclosed how we facilitate and encourage participation at meetings of security holders at https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance 6.4 A listed entity should ensure that all substantive resolutions at a meeting of security holders are decided by a poll rather than by a show of hands. ☒ 6.5 A listed entity should give security holders the option to receive communications from, and send communications to, the entity and its security registry electronically. ☒
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 7 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 7.1 The board of a listed entity should: (a) have a committee or committees to oversee risk, each of which: (1) has at least three members, a majority of whom are independent directors; and (2) is chaired by an independent director, and disclose: (3) the charter of the committee; (4) the members of the committee; and (5) as at the end of each reporting period, the number of times the committee met throughout the period and the individual attendances of the members at those meetings; or (b) if it does not have a risk committee or committees that satisfy (a) above, disclose that fact and the processes it employs for overseeing the entity’s risk management framework. ☒ and we have disclosed copies of the Board charter, and the terms of reference of the Audit & Risk Committee and the Sustainability Committee at https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance and the information referred to in paragraphs (4) and (5) on pages 104 - 107, 108 – 109, 90 - 91 and 101 of our 2022 Annual Report. We have also disclosed the processes we employ for overseeing our risk management framework on pages 76 - 78, 105, 107, 108 - 109 and 146 of our 2022 Annual Report. 7.2 The board or a committee of the board should: (a) review the entity’s risk management framework at least annually to satisfy itself that it continues to be sound and that the entity is operating with due regard to the risk appetite set by the board; and (b) disclose, in relation to each reporting period, whether such a review has taken place. ☒ and we have disclosed whether a review of the entity’s risk management framework was undertaken during the reporting period on page 107 of our 2022 Annual Report. 7.3 A listed entity should disclose: (a) if it has an internal audit function, how the function is structured and what role it performs; or (b) if it does not have an internal audit function, that fact and the processes it employs for evaluating and continually improving the effectiveness of its governance, risk management and internal control processes. ☒ and we have disclosed how our internal audit function is structured and what role it performs on page 107 of our 2022 Annual Report. 7.4 A listed entity should disclose whether it has any material exposure to environmental or social risks and, if it does, how it manages or intends to manage those risks. ☒ and we have disclosed whether we have any material exposure to environmental and social risks and, if we do, how we manage or intend to manage those risks on pages 46 – 75 and 79 - 86 of our 2022 Annual Report.
Appendix 4G Key to Disclosures Corporate Governance Council Principles and Recommendations ASX Listing Rules Appendix 4G (current at 17/7/2020) Page 8 Corporate Governance Council recommendation Where a box below is ticked,4 we have followed the recommendation in full for the whole of the period above. We have disclosed this in our Corporate Governance Statement: 8.1 The board of a listed entity should: (a) have a remuneration committee which: (1) has at least three members, a majority of whom are independent directors; and (2) is chaired by an independent director, and disclose: (3) the charter of the committee; (4) the members of the committee; and (5) as at the end of each reporting period, the number of times the committee met throughout the period and the individual attendances of the members at those meetings; or (b) if it does not have a remuneration committee, disclose that fact and the processes it employs for setting the level and composition of remuneration for directors and senior executives and ensuring that such remuneration is appropriate and not excessive. ☒ and we have disclosed a copy of the charter of the committee at: https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance and the information referred to in paragraphs (4) and (5) 110 - 135, 90 - 91 and 101 of our 2022 Annual Report. 8.2 A listed entity should separately disclose its policies and practices regarding the remuneration of non-executive directors and the remuneration of executive directors and other senior executives. ☒ and we have disclosed separately our remuneration policies and practices regarding the remuneration of non- executive directors and the remuneration of executive directors and other senior executives in our Remuneration Report on pages 110 - 135 of our 2022 Annual Report. 8.3 A listed entity which has an equity-based remuneration scheme should: (a) have a policy on whether participants are permitted to enter into transactions (whether through the use of derivatives or otherwise) which limit the economic risk of participating in the scheme; and (b) disclose that policy or a summary of it. ☒ and we have disclosed our policy on this issue or a summary of it on page 140 of our 2022 Annual Report and at https://www.riotinto.com/invest/corporate-governance
Document
| EXHIBIT 99.10<br><br>Notice to ASX/LSE | | --- || 27 February 2023 | | --- |
Shareholdings of persons discharging managerial responsibility (PDMR) / Key Management Personnel (KMP)
As part of its dual listed company structure, Rio Tinto notifies dealings in Rio Tinto plc and Rio Tinto Limited securities by PDMRs / KMPs to both the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) and the London Stock Exchange (LSE).
Performance Share Award ("PSA") granted under the Rio Tinto 2018 Equity Incentive Plan
The PSA is a performance based award which provides participants with the conditional right to receive Rio Tinto plc or Rio Tinto Limited shares, subject to performance conditions being met.
The PSA granted in 2018 is subject to a Total Shareholder Return (TSR) performance measure.
On 23 February 2023, the following PDMRs / KMPs received their vested PSA in the form of shares, of which sufficient were sold to pay applicable withholding tax and other deductions.
| Security | Name of PDMR / KMP | Conditional award granted | Number of shares lapsed | Number of shares vested* | Number of shares sold | Price per share | Number of shares retained | Date of transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Stausholm, Jakob | 29,886 | 0 | 39,894 | 11,903 | GBP 59.221903 | 27,991 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Cunningham, Peter | 7,229 | 0 | 9,763 | 4,648 | GBP 59.221903 | 5,115 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Baatar, Bold | 63,039 | 0 | 85,143 | 40,530 | GBP 59.221903 | 44,613 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Barrios, Alfredo | 66,050 | 0 | 89,209 | 31,363 | GBP 59.221903 | 57,846 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto Limited shares | Kaufman, Sinead | 6,322 | 0 | 8,324 | 4,017 | AUD 122.5763 | 4,307 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Trott, Simon | 57,188 | 0 | 77,240 | 18,775 | GBP 59.221903 | 58,465 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto Limited shares | Vella, Ivan | 13,376 | 0 | 17,613 | 4,247 | AUD 122.5763 | 13,366 | 23/02/2023 |
*The number of shares vested includes additional shares calculated to reflect dividends declared during the vesting period.
Management Share Awards (“MSA”) granted under the Rio Tinto 2018 Equity Incentive Plan
The MSA provides participants with a conditional right to receive Rio Tinto plc or Rio Tinto Limited shares, subject to continuous employment.
On 23 February 2023, the following PDMRs / KMPs received their vested MSA in the form of shares, of which sufficient were sold to pay applicable withholding tax and other deductions. All MSA included in this announcement were granted prior to the PDMR/KMP becoming a member of the Executive Committee.
| Security | Name of PDMR / KMP | Conditional award granted | Number of shares vested* | Number of shares sold | Price per share | Number of shares retained | Date of transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rio Tinto plc shares | Cunningham, Peter | 3,713 | 4,551 | 2,167 | GBP 59.221903 | 2,384 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto Limited shares | Kaufman, Sinead | 4,289 | 5,160 | 2,491 | AUD 122.5763 | 2,669 | 23/02/2023 |
| Rio Tinto Limited shares | Vella, Ivan | 1,931 | 2,323 | 787 | AUD 122.5763 | 1,536 | 23/02/2023 |
*The number of shares vested includes additional shares calculated to reflect dividends declared during the vesting period on the original shares granted.
FCA notifications in accordance with the EU Market Abuse Regulation have been issued to the London Stock Exchange contemporaneously with this release.
LEI: 213800YOEO5OQ72G2R82
Classification: 3.1. Information disclosed under article 19 of the Market Abuse Regulation.
| Notice to ASX/LSE Page 2 of 3 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Contacts | Please direct all enquiries to media.enquiries@riotinto.com | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Media Relations, UK<br><br>Matthew Klar<br><br>M +44 7796 630 637<br><br><br><br>David Outhwaite<br><br>M +44 7787 597 493<br><br><br><br>Media Relations, Americas<br><br>Simon Letendre<br><br>M +1 514 796 4973<br><br><br><br>Malika Cherry<br><br>M +1 418 592 7293<br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, UK<br><br>Menno Sanderse<br><br>M +44 7825 195 178<br><br><br><br>David Ovington<br><br>M +44 7920 010 978<br><br><br><br>Clare Peever<br><br>M +44 7788 967 877 | Media Relations, Australia<br><br>Matt Chambers<br><br>M +61 433 525 739<br><br><br><br>Jesse Riseborough<br><br>M +61 436 653 412<br><br><br><br>Alyesha Anderson<br><br>M +61 434 868 118<br><br><br><br><br><br><br><br>Investor Relations, Australia<br><br>Tom Gallop<br><br>M +61 439 353 948<br><br><br><br>Amar Jambaa<br><br>M +61 472 865 948 | |
| Rio Tinto plc<br><br>6 St James’s Square<br><br>London SW1Y 4AD<br><br>United Kingdom<br><br><br><br>T +44 20 7781 2000<br><br>Registered in England<br><br>No. 719885 | Rio Tinto Limited<br><br>Level 43, 120 Collins Street<br><br>Melbourne 3000<br><br>Australia<br><br><br><br>T +61 3 9283 3333<br><br>Registered in Australia<br><br>ABN 96 004 458 404 |
This announcement is authorised for release to the market by Steve Allen, Rio Tinto’s Group Company Secretary.
riotinto.com
| Notice to ASX/LSE Page 3 of 3 |
|---|