Copper has become one of the defining themes of the mining sector.
Demand is expected to rise as electrification, grid expansion, data centres and wider energy infrastructure compete for supply. Against that backdrop, the world’s largest miners are looking for ways to increase their exposure.
Building new mines remains difficult, expensive and slow, making consolidation increasingly attractive.
The proposed combination of Anglo American and Teck Resources is perhaps the clearest example yet.
The merger would create Anglo Teck, a major global copper producer with more than 70% copper exposure, bringing together producing assets and development projects across the Americas.
One of the most interesting parts of the investment case lies in northern Chile.
Teck’s Quebrada Blanca operation sits alongside Collahuasi, in which Anglo American and Glencore each hold a 44% interest.
The proximity of the two operations creates an obvious opportunity.
Anglo and Teck estimate that greater integration and optimisation between Collahuasi and Quebrada Blanca could generate an average US$1.4bn in additional underlying EBITDA annually between 2030 and 2049, on a 100% basis, while potentially adding around 175,000t of annual copper production.
For an industry struggling to bring enough new copper supply to market, extracting substantially more production from existing mining districts is an attractive proposition.
There is, however, a complication. Glencore needs to agree.
Who gets the value?
Negotiations between Anglo American and Glencore are under way over how closer integration could work.
The industrial logic of sharing infrastructure may look straightforward, but the commercial terms are unlikely to be.
There are questions around the relative valuation of the assets, how operations would be managed and how the additional economic value would be divided between the parties.
Glencore enters those discussions from a strong position.
It does not need the Anglo Teck merger to complete in the same way that Anglo and Teck need the Chilean synergies to support one of the arguments behind their combination.
For investors, the US$1.4bn figure is significant, but it should not automatically be treated as value attributable to Anglo Teck shareholders. The companies have made clear that the long-term operational synergies depend on agreement with joint venture partners, as well as permits and approvals.
The question is not simply whether additional value can be created, but how much Anglo Teck will ultimately capture.
The wider copper race
There is a bigger story here too.
Copper accounted for almost three-quarters of Anglo American’s earnings in the first half of 2026, compared with less than one-third in the first half of 2023.
That shift says a lot about where the major diversified miners increasingly see their futures.
BHP’s unsuccessful approach for Anglo American in 2024 was heavily influenced by Anglo’s copper portfolio. Across the sector, miners continue to assess acquisitions, partnerships and brownfield expansions as they look for ways to increase production.
At the same time, developing new tier-one copper mines remains challenging.
Permitting can take years. Capital requirements are enormous. Grades are declining at many existing operations, while political and fiscal changes can alter project economics long before first production.
That makes existing infrastructure increasingly valuable.
The next phase of the copper race may be as much about extracting greater value from established mining districts as finding the next giant deposit.
Collahuasi and Quebrada Blanca are a clear example.
The resources and infrastructure already exist. The challenge is working out how the additional value is shared.
What it means for investors
• Look beyond headline synergy numbers. The US$1.4bn opportunity is substantial, but the value ultimately attributable to Anglo Teck depends on negotiations with Glencore and other approvals.
• Copper exposure continues to attract strategic value. The Anglo Teck combination is another indication of how important high-quality, long-life copper assets have become to the major miners.
• Brownfield growth deserves attention. With new mines difficult and expensive to build, companies capable of adding production through existing infrastructure and established mining districts may have an advantage.
• Partnership structures matter. A world-class asset does not necessarily mean shareholders capture all of its potential value. Joint venture terms, infrastructure ownership and negotiating leverage can have a significant impact on returns.
What it means for mining companies
• Infrastructure is becoming increasingly valuable. Processing plants, water, power, tailings facilities and transport networks can create significant additional value when neighbouring deposits are developed.
• Scale needs to translate into returns. M&A needs to deliver measurable operational benefits rather than simply adding copper tonnes to a corporate portfolio.
• Partnerships are increasingly important. As projects become larger and more complex, negotiating effectively with neighbouring operators, governments and infrastructure owners can have a direct impact on project economics.
For Anglo Teck, the strategic rationale for creating a copper heavyweight remains compelling. The negotiations in Chile are also a useful reminder for the wider market that identifying value is one thing. Capturing it for shareholders can be considerably more complicated.
