Global Metals, Mining & Steel ConferenceMay 16, 2017
Forward Looking Information
Both these slides and the accompanying oral presentations contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities LitigationReform Act of 1995 and forward-looking information within the meaning of the Securities Act (Ontario) (collectively referred to herein as forward-looking statements).Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Teckto be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statementsinclude statements relating to our long-term strategies and priorities, the long-life of our assets and estimated resource life, the possibility that we will have a longerresource life in zinc very soon, our production guidance, estimated profit and estimated EBITDA and the sensitivity of estimated profit and estimated EBITDA to foreignexchange and commodity prices, the statement that the improving zinc market could translate into hundreds of millions of additional EBITDA this year and a number ofyears going forward, estimated future cash flow and cash flow potential, our expectations regarding market supply, demand and price in the commodities we produce,including our expectations regarding factors which may impact supply or demand in key markets, the expected timing and amount of production at the Fort Hills oil sandsproject and expectation that the oil price environment will be above our costs of production, potential EBITDA, potential of expanded zinc uses, our statement thatQuebrada Blanca 2 is a potential tier 1 asset, the statements made regarding the potential mine life, capital costs, mine life extension and expansion optionality andproduction for our Quebrada Blanca Phase 2 project, our statements regarding our Satellite Project, including, statements regarding the value, mine-life and potential ofthese projects, the statement that debt reduction remains a priority, routes to value realization, our statements regarding the sustainability of our cost-managementprogram, statements regarding Red Dog resource potential, 2017 production guidance and cost guidance, 2017 capital expenditures guidance, our growth/value pipeline,our statements regarding expected strip ratios, statements relating to the “Five Year Plan: Sustain 27 Million Tonnes” slide, our statements regarding potential increases inport capacity, expectation of future copper deficits, all projections for our Quebrada Blanca 2 project, including those on the slides titled “Quebrada Blanca 2 Overview”and “QB2: Robust Economics & Tier 1 Attributes”, all projections for NuevaUnión, including statements made on the “NuevaUnión: Project Overview” slide, projections andexpectations regarding our Satellite Project including those on the “Satellite Project: 5 Quality Base Metal Assets” slide, our predictions regarding zinc supply and demand,Fort Hills project indicative NPV and life, financial projections and other statements regarding the Fort Hills project, including those made on the “The Real Value of Long-Life Assets” slide, transportation capacity and our ability to secure transport for our Fort Hills production, statements regarding our sustainability goals, and management’sexpectations with respect to production, demand and outlook regarding coal, copper, zinc and energy.
These forward-looking statements involve numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties and actual results may vary materially, which are described in Teck’s publicfilings available on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and EDGAR (www.sec.gov). In addition, the forward-looking statements in these slides and accompanying oral presentationare based on assumptions regarding, including, but not limited to, general business and economic conditions, the supply and demand for, deliveries of, and the level andvolatility of prices of, zinc, copper and coal and other primary metals and minerals as well as oil, and related products, the timing of the receipt of regulatory andgovernmental approvals for our development projects and other operations, our costs of production and production and productivity levels, as well as those of ourcompetitors, power prices, continuing availability of water and power resources for our operations, market competition, the accuracy of our reserve estimates (includingwith respect to size, grade and recoverability) and the geological, operational and price assumptions on which these are based, conditions in financial markets, the futurefinancial performance of the company, our ability to attract and retain skilled staff, our ability to procure equipment and operating supplies, positive results from the studieson our expansion projects, our coal and other product inventories, our ability to secure adequate transportation for our products, our ability to obtain permits for ouroperations and expansions, our ongoing relations with our employees and business partners and joint venturers. Reserve and resource life estimates assume the mine lifeof longest lived resource in the relevant commodity is achieved, assumes production at planned rates and in some cases development of as yet undevelopedprojects. Management’s expectations of mine life are based on the current planned production rates and assume that all resources described in this presentation aredeveloped. Certain forward-looking statements are based on assumptions disclosed in footnotes to the relevant slides. Our estimated profit and EBITDA and EBITDAsensitivity estimates are based on the commodity price and currency exchange assumptions stated on the relevant slide. Cost statements are based on assumptionsnoted in the relevant slide. Assumptions regarding Fort Hills also include the assumption that project development and funding proceed as planned, as well asassumptions noted on the relevant slides discussing Fort Hills. Assumptions regarding our potential reserve and resource life assume that all resources are upgraded toreserves and that all reserves and resources could be mined. The foregoing list of assumptions is not exhaustive.
2
Forward Looking Information
Factors that may cause actual results to vary materially include, but are not limited to, changes in commodity and power prices, changes in market demand for ourproducts, changes in interest and currency exchange rates, acts of foreign governments and the outcome of legal proceedings, inaccurate geological and metallurgicalassumptions (including with respect to the size, grade and recoverability of mineral reserves and resources), unanticipated operational difficulties (including failure of plant,equipment or processes to operate in accordance with specifications or expectations, cost escalation, unavailability of materials and equipment, government action ordelays in the receipt of government approvals, industrial disturbances or other job action, adverse weather conditions and unanticipated events related to health, safetyand environmental matters), union labour disputes, political risk, social unrest, failure of customers or counterparties to perform their contractual obligations, changes inour credit ratings or the financial market in general, unanticipated increases in costs to construct our development projects, difficulty in obtaining permits or securingtransportation for our products, inability to address concerns regarding permits of environmental impact assessments, changes in tax benefits or tax rates, resolution ofenvironmental and other proceedings or disputes, and changes or deterioration in general economic conditions. We will not achieve the maximum mine lives of ourprojects, or be able to mine all reserves at our projects, if we do not obtain relevant permits for our operations. Our Fort Hills project is not controlled by us andconstruction and production schedules may be adjusted by our partners. NuevaUnión is jointly owned. The effect of the price of oil on operating costs will be affected bythe exchange rate between Canadian and U.S. dollars.
Statements concerning future production costs or volumes are based on numerous assumptions of management regarding operating matters and on assumptions thatdemand for products develops as anticipated, that customers and other counterparties perform their contractual obligations, that operating and capital plans will not bedisrupted by issues such as mechanical failure, unavailability of parts and supplies, labour disturbances, interruption in transportation or utilities, adverse weatherconditions, and that there are no material unanticipated variations in the cost of energy or supplies.
We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements except as required under securities laws. Further information concerning assumptions, risks anduncertainties associated with these forward-looking statements and our business can be found in our most recent Annual Information Form, as well as subsequent filingsof our management’s discussion and analysis of quarterly results, all filed under our profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR (www.sec.gov).
3
Agenda
Teck Overview & Strategy
Commodity Market Observations
Teck Update
4
Attractive Portfolio of Long-Life Assets In Low Risk Jurisdictions
Zinc Energy
Steelmaking Coal Copper
5
Diversified business model
Attractive portfolio of long life assets
Low half of the cost curve
Appropriate scale
Low risk jurisdictions
Quality organic growth
Consistent Long-Term Strategy
6
Mid-Point of Production Guidance
Unit of Change
Effect on Annual Estimated
Profit3
Effect on Annual Estimated
EBITDA1
$C/$US C$0.01 C$42M /$0.01∆ C$68M /$0.01∆
Coal 27.5 Mt US$1/tonne2 C$21M /$1∆ C$32M /$1∆
Copper 282 kt US$0.01/lb C$5M /$0.01∆ C$7M /$0.01∆
Zinc 904 kt US$0.01/lb C$9M /$0.01∆ C$13M /$0.01∆
The Value of our Diversified Business Model
Leverage to Strong Steelmaking Coal & Zinc Markets in 2017
1. Non-GAAP financial measure. See “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our quarterly news releases for further information. Annual effect based on commodity prices and our balance sheet as of February 14, 2017 and a C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.30. Assumes the midpoint of 2017 guidance ranges. Zinc effect on annual estimated EBITDA was updated as of April 24, 2017 and includes 602 kt of zinc in concentrate and 302 kt of refined zinc.
2. Based on a US$1/tonne change in benchmark premium steelmaking coal price.7
Agenda
Teck Overview & Strategy
Commodity Market Observations
Teck Update
8
60
90
120
150
180
210
240
270
300
$ / to
nne
Quarterly Contract SettlementArgus FOB Australia
Coal Price Assessments
Source: Argus Plotted to May 3, 2017
Price Spike Q4 2016• Price induced closures globally• Supply disruptions from weather
& temporary mine failures• Inventory build by mills due
concern about supply disruptions• Chinese policy
Price Correction Q1 2017• Price induced supply response• Inventory drawdown by mills as
no signs of supply disruptions• Chinese policy
Price Spike April 2017• Cyclone Debbie disrupts
Australian supply
Steelmaking Coal Price Normalizing?
Prices driven >US$300 for the fourth time since 20089
Slowing Copper Mine Production Growth
Copper Production Expected to Decrease Uncommitted Projects Increasingly Delayed
Existing and Fully Committed Mines
Committed and operating mine production peaking & replacement projects delayed
Source: Wood Mackenzie, CRU, ICSG, Teck
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
2018FLast Year
2018FToday
2020FLast Year
2020FToday
2022Last Year
2022Today
Thou
sand
Ton
nes
Base Highly Probable Probable Possible
15%in
Base Case
15% in
Base Case
10% in
Base Case
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Thou
sand
Ton
nes
Mine Production SXEW ScrapProjects Demand
10
Multiple Signs of Tightness in Zinc Market
TCs Fall to Historic Lows Chinese Smelter Utilization Falls
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016Spot TC Annual TC
Source: Teck, CRU, Wood Mackenzie
LME/SHFE Stocks Declining
0
20
40
60
80
100
Jan-
12
May
-12
Sep
-12
Jan-
13
May
-13
Sep
-13
Jan-
14
May
-14
Sep
-14
Jan-
15
May
-15
Sep
-15
Jan-
16
May
-16
Sep
-16
Jan-
17
%
Smelter utilization rateLarge smelters (>200kt)Medium-sized smelters (100-200kt)Small smelters (20-100kt)
US Premiums Spike Higher
0
500
1,000
1,500
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
Thou
sand
s of
Ton
nes
LME Stocks SHFE
02468
1012
Zinc Special High Grade- High
Source: LME/SHFE Source: LME/SHFE
11
Source: Consensus Economics, April 2017
Fort Hills first production may coincide with forecasted supply deficit
Oil Market to Rebalance
Global Crude Oil Supply and Demand Balances
Mill
ion
of b
arre
ls p
er d
ay
Mill
ion
of b
arre
ls p
er d
ay
12
Agenda
Teck Overview & Strategy
Commodity Market Observations
Teck Update
13
First Quarter 2017 Highlights
• Record coal sales in March
• Adjusted EBITDA of $1.5B1,2
• Gross profit up >$1B1,3
• Repurchased ~US$1B notes outstanding
• Fort Hills construction >83% complete
• Reported annual zinc concentrate treatment charges decrease significantly in favour of miners
1. Non-GAAP financial measures. See “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our quarterly news releases for further information.2. Adjusted EBITDA is based on the same adjustments made to adjusted profit, applied on a pre-tax basis.3. Before depreciation and amortization.
14
Significant Cash Flow Generation
Potential EBITDA1
Less: Corporate
Steelmaking Coal
Copper
Zinc
1. Non-GAAP financial measures. See “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our quarterly news releases for further information. Estimates are based on the mid-point of our2017 production guidance ranges and assume a C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.30 and our typical steelmaking coal sales mix of 40% contract and 60% spot. The steelmaking coal priceassumption is based on a combination of our Q1 2017 realized price of US$213 per tonne, and an assumed quarterly contract benchmark price of US$155 per tonne and an averagerealized price of 92% of the contract price for the balance of the year. Base metal price assumptions are based on the 2017 year to date average copper price of US$2.60 perpound and average zinc price of US$1.25 per pound. Actual prices will vary, and operating performance and sales may vary materially for a variety of reasons, causing these productionand sales estimates to be materially incorrect. These estimates are based on numerous assumptions, and are subject to various risks and uncertainties that may cause results to varymaterially. Please see the Cautionary Note on Forward-Looking Information at the beginning of this presentation for more specific information.
• Strong operating margins
• Significant leverage to coal, copper and zinc prices
2017 Based on Current Prices
Energy starts contributing EBITDA1 in 2018
>C$5 Billion
15
Largest Global Net Zinc Mining Companies
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Thou
sand
tonn
es
Source: Wood Mackenzie, 2016.
Teck is the Largest Net MinerProvides Increased Exposure to Zinc Price
Public Company
Private CompanyTeck
16
Defending / Expanding Zinc Market
Giga SteelUltrahigh-strength & galvanizable competes
well with aluminum.
Source: IZA, New York State Thruway Authority, Zinc.org
Continuous Galvanized RebarHigh productivity process which enables coated rebar to be shaped in the field.
Zinc Thermal SprayPortable technology to spray molten zinc
onto a steel surface .
Zinc Micro-Nutrient FertilizerZinc micronutrient in fertilizer well accepted
and growing market.
17
• Construction >83% complete• 4 of 6 areas turned over to Operations• >60% operations personnel hired• First oil end of 2017
Source: Fort Hills Energy Limited Partnership, Fall 2016.
Fort Hills Project Status & Progress
18
Quebrada Blanca 2: Potential Tier 1 Asset
Potential top 15 copper producer globally‒ 300 ktpa copper equivalent production in first 5 years
Total costs (AISC) well in low half of cost curve‒ Exceptionally low strip ratio
Initial mine life 25 years with ~25% of reserves & resources‒ Optionality for expansion or much longer life
Attractive capital intensity‒ Development capital costs reduced significantly
Familiar, mining-friendly jurisdiction
19
Satellite Project: Overview
• Situation: Strong base metal growth options largely invisible to the market
• Objective: To surface the value in 3-5 years
• Possible routes to value realization include:‒ Prudent funding to increase certainty of
development‒ Work with development partner(s) to
advance in a timely manner‒ IPO, sell down and/or divest at the
appropriate time ‒ Build as a Teck project
Staged Growth/Value Pipeline
Future Options
ZincWorld-class resource combined with integrated assets
CopperStrong platform with substantial growth options
San Nicolás (Cu-Zn)
Mesaba
Zafranal
Schaft Creek
Galore Creek
20
Achieved Significant Debt Reduction
1. As at April 24, 2017.2. Our revolving credit facility requires a debt to debt-plus-equity ratio of <50%. Non-GAAP financial measures. See “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our quarterly news
releases for further information.
Notes Outstanding
Current Debt Portfolio1
Public notes outstanding US$5.1B
Average coupon 5.7%
Annual interest savings ~US$55M
Weighted average term to maturity ~15 years
Debt to debt-plus-equity ratio2 27%
Undrawn credit facility US$3.0B
Tender offer to purchase US$1B of outstanding public notes completed on March 8, 2016
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
30/09/2015 31/12/2015 30/09/2016 31/12/2016 31/03/2017
US$
Bill
ion
21
Returning Cash to Shareholders
• Increased the dividend‒ Annualized dividend of $0.20/share ‒ Payment quarterly
• Shift in dividend policy to align with cyclical nature of our business‒ Variable component, at the Board’s
discretion
22
• Continuing to execute for higher production per share− No equity dilution− No operating assets sold− Investing in production growth from Fort Hills− Maintaining strong liquidity− Reducing debt & managing maturities
• Benefiting from the right commodity mix at the right time
• Reducing debt
• High quality organic growth options
Summary
23
Additional Information
24
NorthAmerica
~22%Europe~14%
LatinAmerica
~3%
China~19%
Asia excl. China~42%
Diversified Global Customer BaseExposure to Recovery in Developed Markets As well as Growing Emerging Markets
* Based on 2016 revenue.
Revenue Contribution from Diverse Markets*
25
>$1B of Annualized Savings
Largest savings from mining productivity
Annualized Savings from Major Cost Reduction Program Initiatives
- $100 $200 $300 $400
Other ($22M)
Components (life/cost) ($12M)
Plan optimization ($51M)
Pricing Improvements ($26M)
Equipment Rental Savings ($28M)
Admin savings ($79M)
Idling & Energy Savings ($66M)
Consumables ($77M)
Employee Cost Reduction ($191M)
Contractors/Consultants Reduction ($216M)
Mining Productivity ($354M)
2013 Initiatives 2014 Initiatives 2015 Initiatives 2016 Initiatives
CAD$ millions
26
Solid Record of Delivery Against Guidance
27
Solid Delivery Against 2016 Guidance
1. Approximate, based on capitalized stripping guidance and mid-point of production guidance range.2. Steelmaking coal unit cost of sales include site costs, inventory adjustments, collective agreement charges and transport costs. Total cash unit costs are unit cost of sales
plus capitalized stripping. US dollar unit costs assume a Canadian dollar to US dollar exchange rate of 1.33 in 2016 and 1.30 in 2017.3. Non-GAAP financial measures. See ‘Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures’ in our quarterly results news releases for additional information.4. Includes one-time collective agreement settlement charges of $2 per tonne.5. Net of by-product credits.6. Copper total cash unit costs include cash C1 unit costs (after by-product margins) and capitalized stripping. 7. Including co-product zinc production from our copper business unit.8. Including capitalized stripping.
Guidance ResultsSteelmaking Coal
Production 25-26 Mt 27.6 Mt Record productionSite costs $45-49/t $43/tCapitalized stripping $11/t1 $10/tTransportation costs $35-37/t $34/t
Total cash unit costs2,3 $91-97/tUS$69-73/t
$89/t4US$67/t4
Lower unit costs
CopperProduction 305-320 kt 324 ktC1 unit costs5 US$1.50-1.60/lb US$1.35/lbCapitalized stripping US$0.21/lb1 US$0.17/lbTotal cash unit costs3,6 US$1.71-1.81/lb US$1.52/lb Lower unit costs
ZincMetal in concentrate production7 630-665 kt 662 ktRefined production 290-300 kt 312 kt Record production
Capital Expenditures8 $2.0B $1.9B Lower capex
28
Higher Margin Despite Lower Prices
29 1 Before depreciation and amortization.* The Teck Commodities Index reflects an equal weighting of steelmaking coal, copper and zinc prices, with each price rebased to 100 in 2014.
• Average commodity prices dropped 11% in 2014-2016
• 8-point margin improvement, driven by cost management program‒ Implemented in 2013‒ Focused on productivity‒ Reduced unit costs ‒ Lowered corporate costs
Gross Profit Margin1 vs. Indexed Prices
Gro
ss p
rofit
mar
gin
(%)
Teck
Com
mod
ity P
rice
Inde
x
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
2014 2015 2016
Gross Profit Margin (lhs) Teck Commodities Index* (rhs)
29
2016 Results 2017 Guidance*Steelmaking Coal
Production 27.6 Mt 27-28 MtSite costs $43/t $46-50/tCapitalized stripping $10/t $16/t1
Transportation costs $34/t $35-37/t
Total cash costs2, 3 $89/tUS$67/t
$97-103/tUS$74-79/t
CopperProduction 324 kt 275-290 ktC1 unit costs4 US$1.35/lb US$1.40-1.50/lbCapitalized stripping US$0.17/lb US$0.18/lb1
Total cash costs4 US$1.52/lb US$1.58-1.68/lbZinc
Metal in concentrate production5 662 kt 590-615 ktRefined production 312 kt 300-305 kt
2017 Production & Site Cost Guidance
* As at April 24, 2017.1. Approximate, based on capitalized stripping guidance and mid-point of production guidance range.2. Average C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.33 in 2016. Assumes C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.30 in 2017.3. Steelmaking coal unit cost of sales include site costs, inventory adjustments, collective agreement charges and transport costs. Total cash costs are unit cost of sales
plus capitalized stripping. 4. Net of by-product credits. Copper total cash costs Include cash C1 unit costs (after by-product margins) and capitalized stripping. 5. Including co-product zinc production from our Copper business unit.
30
($M) SustainingMajor
EnhancementNew Mine
Development Sub-totalCapitalized
Stripping TotalSteelmakingCoal 140 120 - 260 430 690Copper 130 20 200 350 140 490
Zinc 210 15 20 245 50 295
Energy 50 - 675 725 - 725
TOTAL 530 155 895 1,580 620 2,200
Total capex of ~$1.6B, plus capitalized stripping
2017 Capital Expenditures Guidance
31
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017Guidance
New MineDevelopment
MajorEnhancements
Sustaining Capital
CapitalizedStripping
$M
Capital Expenditures
Total Capital Expenditures 2012-2017
32
Strong platform combined with diverse portfolio of options allows us to be selective for risk/reward opportunity and timing
Staged Growth/Value Pipeline
In Construction Pre-Sanction
EnergyBuilding a new business through partnership
Fort Hills Frontier
Lease 421
Future OptionsMedium-Term Growth Options
ZincWorld-class resource combined with integrated assets
Red DogSatellite Deposits
Cirque
Trail #2 Acid Plant
Red DogMill Optimization
Teena
CoalWell established with capital efficient value options
Elk Valley Replacement Brownfield Quintette/Mt. Duke
Elk Valley Brownfield
Neptune Terminals to >18Mtpa Coal Mountain 2
CopperStrong platform with substantial growth options
San Nicolás (Cu-Zn)
QB Phase 2 NuevaUnión Mesaba
ZafranalHVC Brownfield
Schaft Creek
Antamina Brownfield
Galore Creek
33
Operation Expiry DatesHighland Valley Copper In Negotiation - September 30, 2016Trail May 31, 2017Cardinal River June 30, 2017
Quebrada BlancaNovember 30, 2017
January 31, 2019March 31, 2019
Quintette April 30, 2018Antamina July 31, 2018Coal Mountain December 31, 2018Line Creek May 31, 2019
Carmen de Andacollo September 30, 2019December 31, 2019
Elkview October 31, 2020Fording River April 30, 2021
Collective Agreements
34
No Substantial Maturities for 5 Years
1. As at April 24, 2017.
Maturity Profile1
Few maturities through potential QB2 construction period
US
$M
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
2029
2030
2031
2032
2033
2034
2035
2036
2037
2038
2039
2040
2041
2042
2043
Senior Unsecured Notes Senior Unsecured Guaranteed Notes Repurchased in 2017
35
Credit Ratings
S&P Moody’s Fitch
BBB Baa2 BBB
BBB- Baa3 BBB-
BB+ Ba1 BB+
BBstable Ba2 BB
positive
BB- Ba3positive BB-
Investment Grade
Non-Investment Grade
Supported by:• Diversified business model• Low risk jurisdictions• Low cost assets• Conservative financial policies• Significant cost reductions• Capital discipline• Excellent operating execution• Increasing coal production• Responsible dividend• Reducing debt
Constrained by:• Debt-to-EBITDA*, due to improving metrics
Debt reduction is a priority
As at April 24, 2017.* EBITDA is a Non-GAAP financial measure. See ‘Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures’ in our quarterly results news releases for additional information.
Issuer Credit Ratings
36
Teck Credit Ratings vs. Bloomberg Commodity Price Index
Credit Ratings Reflect Commodity Prices
Plotted to May 4, 2017
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000Ja
n-05
Jan-
06
Jan-
07
Jan-
08
Jan-
09
Jan-
10
Jan-
11
Jan-
12
Jan-
13
Jan-
14
Jan-
15
Jan-
16
Jan-
17
Moody's S&P Fitch LME Index (Right Axis)
BBB/Baa2
BBB-/Baa3
BB+/Ba1
BB/Ba2
BB-/Ba3
BBB+/Baa1
B+/B1
B/B2
B-/B3
A+/A1
A/A2
A-/A3
Inve
stm
ent G
rade
Non
-Inve
stm
ent G
rade
37
Tax Efficient Earnings in Canada
~$6 billion in available tax pools1, including:• $4.6B in loss carryforwards• $1.3B in Canadian Development Expenses
Applies to:• Cash income taxes in Canada
Does not apply to:• Resource taxes in Canada• Cash taxes in foreign jurisdictions
Multiples should reflect tax efficiency of earnings
1. As of December 31, 2016.38
Our Sustainability Strategy
2011: Launch strategy with short and long-term goals
2015: Complete first set of short-term goals
2020: Target date for short-team goals
2030: Target date for long-term goals
Community Water Our People Biodiversity Energy and Climate Change
Air
39
Our External Recognition
Best 50 Corporate Citizens in Canada 2016
On the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index seven years in a row
Top 50 Socially Responsible Corporations in Canada
Listed on FTSE4Good Index in 2015
40
Note: Based on public filings and Teck’s press release dated April 21, 2017. Assumes Temagami Mining Company Limited has sold 35,000 Class B shares to fund cash taxes.
Teck Resources LimitedApril 21, 2017
Shares Held Percent Voting RightsClass A ShareholdingsTemagami Mining Company Limited 4,300,000 55.39% 31.91%SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 1,469,000 18.89% 10.90%Public 2,008,304 25.82% 14.90%
7,777,304 100.00% 57.71%Class B SharesTemagami Mining Company Limited 725,000 0.13% 0.05%SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 295,800 0.05% 0.02%China Investment Corporation (Fullbloom) 101,304,474 17.78% 7.52%Public 467,554,085 82.04% 34.70%
569,879,359 100.00% 42.29%Total SharesTemagami Mining Company Limited 5,025,000 0.87% 31.96%SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 1,764,800 0.31% 10.92%China Investment Corporation (Fullbloom) 101,304,474 17.54% 7.52%Public 469,562,389 81.29% 49.60%
577,656,663 100.00% 100.00%
Share Structure & Principal Shareholders
41
Outstanding Valuation Thesis
• Share price increase of ~500% in 2016• Valuation hasn’t kept pace with expected EBITDA increase
‒ EV/EBITDA multiple trailing Global Diversified comparables
Source: Capital IQ. Plotted to May 3, 2017.
Teck vs. Global DiversifiedsDividend Adjusted Share Pricing
Teck vs. Global DiversifiedsEV/EBITDA (NTM)
2x
4x
6x
8x
10x
12x
Anglo American ValeRio Tinto BHP BillitonTeck Freeport-McMoRanGlencore South 32
-100%
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
500%
600%
Anglo American Rio TintoBHP Billiton ValeFreeport-McMoRan TeckSouth 32 Glencore
42
Steelmaking CoalBusiness Unit & Markets
Our Market - Seaborne Hard Coking Coal2: ~200 Million Tonnes
1. Source: International Energy Agency 2014 data2. Source: CRU
Global Coal Production1: 7.9 billion tonnesSteelmaking Coal Production2: ~1,185 million tonnes
Export Steelmaking Coal2: ~325 million tonnesSeaborne Steelmaking Coal2: ~290 million tonnes
High Grade Hard Coking Coal Is A Niche Market
44
500
600
700
800
900
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
2010
2013
2016
2019
f
Nominal GDP, Billion USD(LHS) Crude Steel Production, Mt(RHS)
Ex-China
Improving Steel Demand & Output Globally
Steel Demand
YoY Growth 2017
Global +1.3%
China 0%
Developing, ex-China +4%
Developed +0.7%Source: WSA
Global steel demand expected to grow overall
GDP and Crude Steel Production
500
800
1,100
1,400
1,700
2,000
$0
$40,000
$80,000
$120,000
1986
1991
1996
2001
2006
2011
2016
2021
f
Global
0
300
600
900
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
1986
1989
1992
1995
1998
2001
2004
2007
2010
2013
2016
2019
f
China
Source: WSA, IMF
45
Traditional Steel Markets
• China rebounded
• JKT stable
• EU recovering
Rest of the World
• India strong growth
• Brazil rebounding
• US recovering
Monthly Hot Metal Production
Source: WSA, based on data reported by countries monthly; NBS
Mt
Plotted to March 2017
Global Hot Metal Production
JKT
India
Europe
USA
Brazil
45
55
65
China
0
3
6
9
12
15
Jan-
10
May
-10
Sep
-10
Jan-
11
May
-11
Sep
-11
Jan-
12
May
-12
Sep
-12
Jan-
13
May
-13
Sep
-13
Jan-
14
May
-14
Sep
-14
Jan-
15
May
-15
Sep
-15
Jan-
16
May
-16
Sep
-16
Jan-
17
E.U USA India JKT Brazil
46
0
200
400
600
800
1000
2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Milli
on to
nnes
Crude Steel and Hot Metal Production
Source: WSA, China Association of Metalscrap Utilization, Wood Mackenzie
Crude Steel
China Scrap Use to Increase Slowly
China’s Scrap Ratio Low vs. Other Countries
73%54%
33%
88%
28%
50%
11%
36%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
UnitedStates
Europe Japan Turkey Russia Korea China WorldAverage China
Steel Use By Sector(2000-16)
Electric Arc Furnace
Hot Metal
Hot metal / crude steel ratio to remain >90% and EAF share of crude steel production <10% until ~2028
Source: Wood Mackenzie
Source: China Metallurgy Industry Planning and Research Institute
Construction55-60%
Others15-20%
Machinery15-20%
Auto5-10%
47
Source: CRU; Wood Mackenzie
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Imports (Average of CRU and Wood Mackenzie, Change 2021 vs. 2016)
China’s import demand is currently stronger,and coastal plants depend on seaborne imports
Strong Demand Fundamentals ex. China
265
270
275
280
285
290
295
300
2016 Brazil Europe India Others 2021, ex-China
China 2021
Mt
48
Seaborne Coking Coal Imports
Hegang Project• Inland plant relocating to coastal area• Capacity: crude steel 20Mt• Status: Timeline not announced
Guofeng Project• Inland plant relocating to coastal area• Capacity: crude steel 8Mt, hot metal 8Mt• Status: Construction to be started in 2017;
completion in 2021
Shougang Jingtang Plant• Expansion• Capacity: crude steel 9.4Mt (phase 2)• Status: Construction started in 2015; completion in
2018
Shandong Steel Rizhao Project• Greenfield project• Capacity: crude steel 8.5Mt• Status: Construction started in 2015; completion
in 2017
Liusteel Fangcheng Project• Greenfield project• Capacity: Phase 1 crude steel ~10Mt• Status: Timeline for blast furnace not announced
Large users and coastal steel projects to support seaborne demand
1021 21 22 25
25
39
26
13 11
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Small users 14 large users
Large Users Increasing Seaborne Imports
2 projects under construction3 approved projects
Source: China Customs
49
Coal Capacity Reduction Target
2017 coal capacity reduction target @ 150Mt
Steel Capacity Reduction Target
140
65
50
25
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
2016-2020target
2016 actual 2017 target 2018-2020remaining
target
Milli
on to
nnes
800
290
150
360
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2016-2020target
2016 actual 2017 target 2018-2020remaining
target
Mill
ion
tonn
es
Source: Governmental announcementsSource: Governmental announcements
Capacity Reductions Continue in China
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
HMP forecast by CRU
HMP forecast by Wood Mackenzie
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Imports (average Wood Mackenzie and CRU)
Mt
India’s Hot Metal Capacity; Projects and Operations
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal ImportsRequired to Meet India Hot Metal Production
Seaborne steelmaking coal imports forecasted to increase by >25%
Growing India Steelmaking Coal Imports
Actual HMP (WSA)
z
51
2nd Largest Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Supplier
High quality, consistent, reliable, long-term supply
Competitively positioned to supply steel producers worldwide
North America~5%
Europe~15%
China ~20%
Asia excl. China~55% Latin America
~5%
52
An Integrated Long Life Coal Business
53
Prince Rupert
Ridley Terminal
Vancouver
Prince George Edmonton
Calgary
Westshore Terminal
Quintette
Cardinal River
Elk Valley
Kamloops
British Columbia
Alberta
Seattle
Elkford
Sparwood
Hosmer
Fernie
Fording River
Greenhills
Line Creek
Elkview
Coal Mountain
ElcoElk Valley
1,150 km
• >1 billion tonnes of reserves support ~27 Mt of production for many years• Geographically concentrated in the Elk Valley• Established infrastructure and capacity with mines, railways and terminals• Only steelmaking coal mines still operating in Canada; competitive globally
Neptune Terminal
53
Coal MountainPhase 2
53
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Q1
2010
Q2
2010
Q3
2010
Q4
2010
Q1
2011
Q2
2011
Q3
2011
Q4
2011
Q1
2012
Q2
2012
Q3
2012
Q4
2012
Q1
2013
Q2
2013
Q3
2013
Q4
2013
Q1
2014
Q2
2014
Q3
2014
Q4
2014
Q1
2015
Q2
2015
Q3
2015
Q4
2015
Q1
2016
Q2
2016
Q3
2016
Q4
2016
Q1
2017
US$
/ to
nne
Teck Realized Price (US$) Benchmark Price
Average realized price relative to the benchmark price is a function of:
1. Product mix: >90% hard coking coal
2. Direction of quarterly benchmark prices (QBM) and spot prices- Q4 2016 average realized price was
higher than benchmark price
- Q1 2017 average realized price was 75% of US$285/t benchmark, which was higher than Q4 2016
Historical Average Realized Prices
Average Realized Price in Steelmaking Coal
Realized prices averaged 94% of QBM over the past three years (2014-2016)
96%
88%
93%
94%
92%
91%
99%
54
4635 32
3
12
35
28 26
15
128
2014 2015 2016
Total cash unit costs down 32% from 2014 to 20162,3
Total Cash Unit Costs2 US$/t 2014 2015 2016 Change
Site $46 $35 $32 -30%
Inventory Adjustments $3 $1 $0 -100%
Transportation $35 $28 $26 -26%
Unit Cost of Sales (IFRS) $84 $64 $603 -29%
Capitalized Stripping $15 $12 $8 -50%
Total Cash Unit Costs2 $99 $76 $683 -32%
Sustaining Capital $6 $2 $1 -83%
All In Sustaining Costs2 $105 $78 $693 -35%
1. In US dollars per tonne. Assumes a Canadian dollar to US dollar exchange rate of 1.10 in 2014, 1.28 in 2015 and 1.33 in 2016.2. Steelmaking coal unit cost of sales include site costs, inventory adjustments and transport costs. Total cash costs are unit cost of sales plus capitalized stripping. All in sustaining costs are
total cash costs plus sustaining capital. Non-GAAP financial measure. See “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of our quarterly press releases for further information.3. Includes one-time collective agreement settlement charges of ~US$2 per tonne in 2016.
IFRS
Steelmaking Coal Unit Costs1
$99
$76
IFRS IFRS
$683
Site
Inventory
Transport
Capitalized Stripping
Collective Agreement
55
Competitive on Steelmaking Coal Margin Curve
$(20)
$-
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
US$
per
Ton
ne
Operating Margin1
Source: Wood Mackenzie
• High quality hard coking coal assets provide strong margins
• Competitive mining costs
• Operations well positioned in a volatile market
Teck
1. Quality-adjusted operating margin, based on Wood Mackenzie’s data set for 2016 and utilizing an FOB port equivalent benchmark price of US$131 per tonne for the highest quality products. Assumes a Canadian dollar to US dollar exchange rate of 1.30 and an Australian dollar to US dollar exchange rate of 1.37.56
$70
$75
$80
$85
$90
$95
$100
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
$/to
nne
Total Costs1
Coal Strip Ratio Supports Future Production
• Low strip ratio in 2016 due timing of permitting
• Strip ratio increase expected in 2017‒ Coal Mountain near end of life‒ New developments have higher
strip ratios & better quality coal• Going forward, strip ratio expected
to trend lower 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Cle
an S
trip
Rat
io
Clean Strip Ratio
1. Total costs are site costs plus transportation costs. 2017 is based on the mid-point of guidance.
~~0
57
Five Year Plan: Sustain 27 Million Tonnes1
Objectives• Manage transition from Coal
Mountain
• Pursue incremental production capacity in remaining Valley mines
• Evaluate Cardinal River mine life extension
• Maintain optionality with Quintette & Coal Mountain Phase 2
1. Subject to market conditions.
-
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Pro
duct
ion
(mill
ion
tonn
es)
Conceptual Production Profile
Fording River Greenhills (80%) ElkviewLine Creek Cardinal River Coal MountainAdditional Elk Valley
58
>75 Mt of West Coast Port Capacity PlannedOur Portion is 40 Mt
• Exclusive to Teck • Recently expanded to 12.5 Mt • Planned growth to 18.5 Mt
Westshore Terminals
Neptune Coal Terminal
Ridley Terminals
West Coast Port Capacity
• Current capacity: 18 Mt• Expandable to 25 Mt• Teck contracted at 3 Mt
• Teck is largest customer at 19 Mt• Large stockpile area• Recently expanded to 33 Mt• Planned growth to 36 Mt • Contract expires March 2021
Milli
on T
onne
s (N
omin
al)
Our share of capacity exceeds current production plans, including Quintette
12.518
336
7
3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Neptune CoalTerminal
RidleyTerminals
WestshoreTerminals
Current Capacity Planned Growth
59
• Around the world, and especially in China, blast furnaces are getting larger and increasing PCI rates
• Coke requirements for stable blast furnace operation are becoming increasingly higher
• Teck coals with high hot and cold strength are ideally suited to ensure stable blast furnace operation
• Produce some of the highest hot strengths in the world
50 60 70 80 90 100
South Africa
Japan (Sorachl)
Japan(Yubarl)
U.S.A.Canada OtherTeck HCCAustraliaJapanSouth Africa
Australia(hard coking)and Canada
U.S.A.
Australia(soft coking)
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Drum Strength Dl 30 (%)
CSR
Teck HCC
Coking Coal Strength
High Quality Hard Coking Coal
Source: Yasuschi, Masashi et al, 1983
60
Copper Business Unit & Markets
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Mar
-16
Apr-1
6
May
-16
Jun-
16
Jul-1
6
Aug-
16
Sep-
16
Oct
-16
Nov
-16
Dec
-16
Jan-
17
Feb-
17
Mar
-17
Apr-1
7
Month of Forecast
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Month of Forecast
Wood Mackenzie 2017 Refined Balance Wood Mackenzie 2018 Refined Balance
Wood Mackenzie Copper Outlook Moved to DeficitTh
ousa
nd t
onne
s
62
Improved fundamentals supporting stronger prices
2018 market also moved into deficit
Thou
sand
ton
nes
Market now in deficitdespite lower demand
Copper Mine Production Disappoints
-1,200
-1,000
-800
-600
-400
-200
02005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015
2017(Mar)
Thou
sand
tonn
es
2.8%
Disruptions Exceeding 5%
4.1%
Significant Disruptions in Q1 2017,With Effects Through Q2-Q3 2017
Source: Wood Mackenzie, CRU, Teck
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Jan
Feb
Mar Apr
May Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep Oct
Nov
Dec
Thou
sand
s To
nnes
Constancia Mt. Milligan Sentinel
Grasberg Guidance Grasberg FM Grasberg Export Ban/Strike
Los Pelambres Escondida Strike Escondida Slow Ramp Up
Cerro Verde Strike
Disruptions could total >625kmt
63
Copper Stocks Rise on Seasonal Slowdown
-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
US¢/lb
Thou
sand
tonn
es
Chinese Bonded LME COMEX SHFE LME Price
• Price correction late 2016 as more balanced market expected
• Total stocks (including bonded), in days of global consumption:‒ Today: 29 days‒ Early 2013: ~45 days‒ Average this decade
~33 days
Copper Stocks
Source: CRU, SHFE, LME, CME, Teck
plotted to April 2017
Seasonal stock build in China is being drawn down
64
LME Copper Stock Drops Not Demand Driven
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Thou
sand
s of
Ton
nes
LME Copper Stocks
Source: CRU, SHFE, LME, CME, Teck
plotted to May 4, 2017
SHFE stock falls likely reflect seasonal destocking
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
Thou
sand
s of
Ton
nes
SHFE Copper Stocks
plotted to May 4, 2017
65
Copper Scrap Spreads Incentivize Availability
-150
-125
-100
-75
-50
-25
0
25
50
75
100
150
170
190
210
230
250
270
290
310
330
350
Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16 Jul-16 Jan-17
Spread Copper #1 Heavy Copper Cathode
Scrap to Comex Copper Arbitrage in US¢/lb Discount No.2 Scrap Imported into China USD/t
Scrap arbitrage narrowing; scrap consumers now looking to buy cathodes66
Copper Scrap Discounts Narrow & Premiums Improve
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
USAEuropeChina (domestic)
Scrap Discounts Narrowing
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Jan2015
Apr2015
Jul2015
Oct2015
Jan2016
Apr2016
Jul2016
Oct2016
Jan2017
Apr2017
Shanghai Refined Metal Imported CIF High USD/tRotterdam Refined Metal CIF High USD/tUS East Coast Refined Metal High USD/t
Cathode Premiums Recovering
US$
/t US$
/t
67
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Cathode Concs Scrap Blister/Semis
000’
s to
nnes
(con
tent
)
Net Copper Imports
Source: NBS Plotted to March 2017
Total copper unit imports climb in 2015 & 2016, but lower YTD by 8% over same period last year
China Switching to Copper Concentrates
68
52% 43%
25%
37%23%
20%
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
11th - 5yr PlanCompleted
12th - 5yr PlanCompleted
13th - 5year PlanEstimate
RM
B tri
llion
Transmission Distribution-Urban Distribution-Rural
Chinese Copper Demand to Remain Strong
Source: CEC, ICA Source: NEA, ICA
Significant Power Grid Investment
282
202
7148
2119
-7 -75
-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Ktpa
Potential Annual Growth in Most Sectors
69
China Demand Supported by Energy & Pollution
• Copper intensity is 4–12 x higher in renewable over non-renewable energy.
• Wind & solar require more copper per installed MW.
• Current targets by India & China for solar PV alone could add 6.5 Mt of new copper.
• Current targets by India & China alone could see an increase of 1200 GW of wind generation which would be 3.6 Mt of copper.
De-Carbonization/ RenewablesPositive for Copper Demand
De-carbonization through the use of renewable energycould add >10 Mt of copper demand by 2030
Copper Distribution within Electricity Generation Sector
Source: ICA, Warren Centre, Centre for Industrial Ecology – Yale.70
China NEV Demand Outpaces ROW
• China sold 351,800 Electric Cars in 2016• Tesla sold 76,200.
• China Will Replace All 67,000 Fossil-Fueled Taxis In Beijing With Electric Cars.
• IEA estimates that as battery technology improves Average EV could contain 90kg – 150kg of Copper vs 15kg for ICE.
• Aaaa• Aaa• Aaaa
• aa
China Electric Car Sales 47% of World
Copper intensity of EV and hybrid vehicles 4-6x that of ICE;penetration could reach 50%
China will Leap Frog US & EuropeWith Electric Vehicles
Source: ICA, Warren Centre, IEA, CleanTechnica, Dow Jones, Automotive News.
China Electric Car Registrations (December 2016)
71
• At 2.1% global demand growth, 521 kt new supply needed annually
• Mine production falls ~230 kt per year after 2019
• Market finely balanced through 2018‒ Could materially change with
similar disruption level as 2015
• Structural deficit starts 2019
• Projects delayed today will not be available by 2019
Forecast Copper Refined Balance
Long-Term Copper Mine Production Still Needed
Source: ICSG, Wood Mackenzie, Teck
-6,000
-5,000
-4,000
-3,000
-2,000
-1,000
0
1,000
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
Thou
sand
tonn
es
72
Ore Grade TrendsOngoing Decline will put Upward Pressure on Unit Costs
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
2.4
2.6
0.8
0.9
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020 2024
Cop
per G
rade
Cu
%
All Operations Primary Mines Co-By Product Mines - (RH axis)
Industry Head Grade Trends (Weighted by Paid Copper)
Source: Wood Mackenzie
73
Quebrada Blanca 2 Overview
Project Capital1
US$4.7billion
Capital Intensity2
~US$16,000$/tonnes annual CuEq
C1 Cash Costs2
US$1.28per pound
Note: Based on Feasibility Study.1. 100% basis, in constant first quarter of 2016 dollars, excluding working capital and interest during construction. Teck owns a 76.5% share.2. Average production rates, copper equivalent production rates, C1 cash costs and initial development capital are based on the first full five years of operations. C1 cash costs are
net of by-product credits.
• Competitive capital intensity• Tier 1 metal producer• AISC well in the low half of the cost curve• Very low strip (included as cash cost) and low sustaining capital
Throughput
140,000tonnes per day
Copper Equivalent Production2
300,000tonnes per year
Molybdenum Production2
7,700tonnes per year
74
QB2: Robust Economics & Tier 1 Attributes
Copper Price (US$ per pound) $2.75 $3.00 $3.25 $3.50Net present value at 8% (US$ millions) 565 1,253 1,932 2,604Internal rate of return (%) 9.7% 11.7% 13.5% 15.2%Payback from first production (years) 6.8 5.8 5.0 4.4
Annual EBITDAFirst Full Five Years (US$M pa) 856 1,002 1,148 1,294First Full Ten Years (US$M pa) 781 918 1,055 1,192Life of Mine (US$ million pa) 685 811 937 1,063
NI 43-101 Case
Long life (25 years plus optionality)Attractive production metrics (top 15 copper producer globally)Low cost (low half of AISC cost curve)Competitive capital intensity (~$16k per tonne)Attractive jurisdiction for long term ownership
75
NuevaUnión: A New Approach to Project Development
Teck and Goldcorp have combined Relincho & El Morro projects and formed a 50/50 joint venture company• Committed to building strong, mutually
beneficial relationships with stakeholders & communities
Capital smart partnership • Shared capital, common infrastructure• Shared risk, shared rewards
Benefits of combining projects include:• Longer mine life• Lower cost, improved capital efficiency• Reduced environmental footprint• Enhanced community benefits• Greater returns over either standalone project
76
NuevaUnión Project Overview
Initial Project Capital
US$3.5billion
Copper Production1
190,000tonnes per year
Gold Production1
315,000ounces per year
Mine Life
32+years
Copper in Reserves2
16.6billion pounds
Gold in Reserves2
8.9million ounces
Note: Conceptual based on preliminary design from the PEA.1. Average production rates and copper equivalent production are based on the first full ten years of operations.2. Total copper and gold contained in mineral reserves as reported separately by Teck and Goldcorp.3. Capital estimate for Phase 1a based on preliminary design shown in 2015 dollars on an unescalated basis.
• Copper equivalent production of 250 kt per year• Prefeasibility study completion expected at end Q3 2017• Proactive & participatory community engagement approach
77
Satellite Project: 5 Quality Base Metal Assets
Galore Creek (50%)• Rare significant copper-gold-silver
deposit in developing district• High average grade; potential for
first quartile C1 costs• Substantial design and engineering
work completed in 2012
Schaft Creek (75%)• Large copper-molybdenum-gold-
silver deposit • Long mine life; potential expansion• Continue to advance value added
field work, along with desk-top engineering and optimization studies
San Nicolás (79%)• High grade, open pit operation with
3-4 year timeline to production• Low first quartile costs, offering
quick payback• 2016 drill program and scoping
study improved understanding and augmented value
Mesaba (100%) • Very large copper‐nickel sulphide
resource• In a district with long mining history• Proximity to existing infrastructure,
and opportunities for significant development synergies
• Teck developed proprietary value-added mineral processing technology
Zafranal (80%)• Highly competitive mid-sized
copper-gold deposit• Pre-feasibility study published June
2016; indicates robust economics• Advancing Feasibility and
Environmental Impact Studies in 2017-2018
Substantial resources in mining friendly jurisdictions 78
ZincBusiness Unit & Markets
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
0¢
50¢
100¢
150¢
200¢
250¢
LME Stocks SHFE Price
Zinc Metal Market Moving Towards Tightness
US¢
/lb
Plotted to May 4, 2017
Source: LME/SHFE
Daily Zinc Prices & Stocks
Stocks are at the critical level from 2006
Stocks inflection point in 2005/2006
Stoc
ks
80
Zinc Stocks Approaching Critical LevelsU
S¢/lb
Data Plotted from 2000 to May 4, 2017Source: LME, SHFE, Wood Mackenzie
Zinc Prices vs. Days of Reported Stocks
• Significant mine closures completed
• Mine production has fallen
• Asian metal production curtailments
• Inventories declining
• Treatment charges have tightened significantly
Days of stocks
0¢
50¢
100¢
150¢
200¢
250¢
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
2007
2003
2004
20062005
Jan 2014Jan 2013
Jan 2015
Jan 2016
May 4, 2017
Dec 31, 2016
81
Source: SMM, Antaike, Teck
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Jan-
11
Jul-1
1
Jan-
12
Jul-1
2
Jan-
13
Jul-1
3
Jan-
14
Jul-1
4
Jan-
15
Jul-1
5
Jan-
16
Jul-1
6
Jan-
17
Chinese Zinc Concentrate Port Stocks
Source: Teck, LME, SHFE, RBC
Zinc Treatment Charges
Low concentrate stocks reflected in low TCs
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
0
50
100
150
200
250
Jan-
10Ju
l-10
Jan-
11Ju
l-11
Jan-
12Ju
l-12
Jan-
13Ju
l-13
Jan-
14Ju
l-14
Jan-
15Ju
l-15
Jan-
16Ju
l-16
Jan-
17
Imported spot TCs Domestic spot TCs
kdm
t
Impo
rted
TC ($
/dm
t)
Dom
estic TC (R
MB/t)
Concentrate Stocks at Historic Lows
82
2014-2020 2014-2020
Significant Zinc Mine ReductionsLarge Short-Term Losses, More Long Term
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
Cen
tury
Lish
een
Red
Dog
Ram
pura
Agu
cha
Hui
ze Q
ilinch
ang
Jagu
ar
Mae
Sod
Wol
verin
e
San
Cris
toba
l
Zyry
anov
sk
Cay
eli 0
100
200
300
400
500
Anta
min
aG
amsb
erg
Dug
ald
Riv
erM
cArth
ur R
iver
…G
uojia
gou
Bish
aSi
ndes
ar K
hurd
Kyzy
l-Tas
htyg
skoe
Zaw
ar M
ines
Cas
tella
nos
Sang
uiko
uAn
gour
an E
l Bro
cal
Cha
ihe-
Erda
ohe
Agua
s Te
nida
sM
unga
naC
arib
ou…
Biliu
tai
Source: ICSG, Wood Mackenzie Teck, Company Reports Source: ICSG, Wood Mackenzie Teck, Company Reports
83
10,000
11,000
12,000
13,000
14,000
15,000
16,000
17,000
2010 2013 2016 2019 2022
Thou
sand
Ton
nes
Mine Production Secondary Demand
Slowing Zinc Mine Production Growth
Zinc Mine Production Has Peaked Uncommitted Projects Increasingly Delayed
Existing and Fully Committed Mines
Committed and operating mine production peaking & replacement projects delayed
Source: Wood Mackenzie, CRU, Teck
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2018LastYear
2018Today
2020LastYear
2020Today
2022FLastYear
2022Today
Thou
sand
Ton
nes
Base Highly Probable Probable
84
Monthly Chinese Mined Zinc Production
Chinese Mined Zinc Production Seasonality is a Potential Catalyst for Market Inflection
Source: CNIA
Production typically declines in winter (January-April)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Jan-
06Ju
n-06
Nov
-06
Apr
-07
Sep
-07
Feb-
08Ju
l-08
Dec
-08
May
-09
Oct
-09
Mar
-10
Aug
-10
Jan-
11Ju
n-11
Nov
-11
Apr
-12
Sep
-12
Feb-
13Ju
l-13
Dec
-13
May
-14
Oct
-14
Mar
-15
Aug
-15
Jan-
16Ju
n-16
Nov
-16
Thou
sand
s D
MT
Plotted to Marchl 2017
85
Zinc Concentrate Stocks at Chinese Ports Declining
Plotted to April 2017
Monthly Stocks of Zinc Concentrate
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Thou
sand
Ton
nes
Huangpu port:
Zhanjiang port:
Beihai port:
Yunyuejiang port
Fangcheng port:
Nanjing port:
Qinzhou port:
Dalian port:
BaYuQuan port:
QHD port:
Jinzhou port:
Yantai Port:
LYG port:
Source: Teck86
Concentrate Supply Shrinking
Chinese Zinc Metal Imports
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16 Jul-16 Jan-17
kt
Mine production Concs imports Annualized Monthly Avg. Supply
Spot and Benchmark TCs Tighten
• Domestic concentrate production plus imports ~550 kt/mth in 2013 - Currently ~410 kt/mth
• Concentrate imports averaged ~95 kt/mth 2013 to 2015 − 2016 averaging 70 kt/mth
• Reduction in supply forcing metal production cuts
• Continued tightness is evidenced by the falling TCs
Source: NBS/CNIA, Customs
$0
$50
$100
$150
$200
$250
$300
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Spot Annual
Down ~80%
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Jan-13 Jul-13 Jan-14 Jul-14 Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16 Jul-16 Jan-17
kt
555 kt
Down ~10%
502 kt
Chinese Zinc Concentrate Supply Declining
Source: NBS/CNIA, Customs
Source: NBS/CNIA, Customs
Plotted to March 2017
Plotted to March 2017
Plotted to April 2017
87
China5%
USA 20%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15
Galvanized Steel as % Crude ProductionChina Zinc Demand
Construction15%
Transportation 20%
Other 5%
Consumer Goods30%
Infrastructure30%
Chinese Zinc Demand to Outpace Supply
Source: Teck
If China were to galvanize crude steel at half the rate of the US using the same rate of zinc/tonne, a further 2.1 Mt would be added to global zinc consumption
Source: Teck
88
Committed Zinc Supply Insufficient for Demand
Forecast Zinc Refined Balance
Source: Wood Mackenzie
• Insufficient mine supply to constrain refined production− 2015-2020: demand increase of
1.8 Mt vs. supply increase 1.3 kt
• Market in deficit from 2012
• Inventory that has funded the deficit will be depleted in 2017
• Demand growth projections outpacing supply response (4,000)
(3,500)
(3,000)
(2,500)
(2,000)
(1,500)
(1,000)
(500)
0
Thou
sand
tonn
es
89
EnergyBusiness Unit & Markets
• Price upside limited by US production growth in short term
• Production cuts & demand growth expected to balance market in 2017
• Expectations for US$75/bbl WTI by 2025
Energy Market Moving Towards Balance
World Liquid Fuels Production & Consumption
Source: EIA Short Term Energy Outlook April 2017
North American Rig Count & US Production
Source: Baker Hughes, EIA
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
US$
/bbl
2014-2017 Historical 2017-2025 Forecast (Real $)*
WTI Benchmark Price (US$/bbl)
Sources: National Bank of Canada, Sproule, GLJ, IHS
5000
7000
9000
11000
200
600
1,000
1,400
1,800
Jan-
11
Jan-
12
Jan-
13
Jan-
14
Jan-
15
Jan-
16
Jan-
17
Thou
sand
bpd
Rig
cou
nt U
nits
US Rig Count CAD Rig Count
-3
-1
1
3
5
84
88
92
96
100
mbp
d
mbp
d
Implied stock change and balance (right axis)World production (left axis)World consumption (left axis)
91
* Export capacity includes pipeline and rail.Actuals plotted to May 2017.
Heavy Oil Benchmark Differentials
WTI - Western Canadian Select Differential
Edmonton CRW C5 + Diluent Minus WTI Differential
$0$5
$10$15$20$25$30$35$40$45
Jan-
10M
ay-1
0Se
p-10
Jan-
11M
ay-1
1Se
p-11
Jan-
12M
ay-1
2Se
p-12
Jan-
13M
ay-1
3Se
p-13
Jan-
14M
ay-1
4Se
p-14
Jan-
15M
ay-1
5Se
p-15
Jan-
16M
ay-1
6Se
p-16
Jan-
17M
ay-1
7
US
$/bb
l
Constrained Export Capacity*
Sufficient Export Capacity*
-$10
-$5
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
Jan-
10M
ay-1
0Se
p-10
Jan-
11M
ay-1
1Se
p-11
Jan-
12M
ay-1
2Se
p-12
Jan-
13M
ay-1
3Se
p-13
Jan-
14M
ay-1
4Se
p-14
Jan-
15M
ay-1
5Se
p-15
Jan-
16M
ay-1
6Se
p-16
Jan-
17M
ay-1
7
US
$/bb
l
Western Canadian Select (WCS) Is The Benchmark Price For Canadian Heavy Oil At Hardisty, Alberta• Contract settled monthly as differential to Nymex WTI• Based on heavy/light differential, supply/demand, alternate
feedstock accessibility, refinery outages and export capability• Year to date differential: $13.50 US/bbl• Narrower short-term heavy differentials supported by:
• OPEC production curtailments• Strong regional demand for heavy supply• Planned/Unplanned production outages
• Differentials forecasted to widen in 2018-2019 − Increased oilsands production− Constrained export pipeline capacity and increased rail
shipments• Industry evaluating impacts of new bunker fuel oil sulphur specs
that take effect in 2020
Diluent (C5+) at Edmonton, Alberta Is the benchmark contract for diluent supply for oil sands• Contract settled monthly as differential to Nymex WTI• Long-term diluent (C5+) differential of Nymex WTI +/- $5 US/bbl• Based on supply/demand, seasonal demand (high in winter, low
in summer), import outages• Supply forecasted to exceed demand − Growing local production, − Contract carriage import pipelines
92
Oil Liquids – Discovered Resources & Production (Billion bbl)
Oil Exploration Success Fell To a Post-1952 Low in 2015
Enough oil has been discovered to meet production in only four of the past 30 years
Source: Rystad Energy, Morgan Stanley
93
Source: BMO Capital Markets, May 2016
Oil Sands Mining Costs Lower Than Understood
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Cash Cost Royalty Cash Tax Sustaining Capex
$/bbl Phase 2: Stabilized Market
Where we are now
94
WTI-WCS* differentials forecast to improve with export pipeline capacitySource: CAPP 2016 Supply Forecast, Lee & Doma, Teck* Western Canadian Select heavy blend.
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
5,500
6,000
6,500
7,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
kbpd
Western Canada Supply Western Canada Supply GrowthTotal Pipeline & Local Refining Total Pipeline, Local Refining & Rail
TransMountain & Enbridge
Keystone XL
Excess Pipeline Capacity
Western Canada Supply/Demand Balance
Recent Pipeline Announcements Constructive
Constrained Pipeline Capacity ; Rail
Available
95
Building An Energy Business
Strategic diversification
Large truck & shovel mining projects
World-class resources
Long-life assets
Mining-friendly jurisdiction
Competitive margins
Minimizing execution risk
Tax effective
Mined bitumen is in Teck’s ‘sweet spot’96
• Significant value created over long term
• 60% of PV of cash flows beyond year 5
• IRR of 50-year project is only ~1% higher than a 20-year project
• Options for debottlenecking and expansion
The Real Value of Long-Life Assets
Fort Hills Project Indicative Rolling NPV1
1. Indicative NPV assumes US$95 WTI, $1.05 Canadian/US dollar exchange rate, and costs as disclosed with the Fort Hills sanction decision (October 30, 2013).
50-year assets provide for superior returns operating through many price cycles
97
Strategic Objectives• Successful commissioning & start-up• 12-month ramp up to 90% capacity • Maximize sales volumes & bitumen netbacks• Market diversification
Guiding Principles for Fort Hills Marketing
Key Commercial Activities• Bitumen production*: 37 kbpd• Diluent acquisition: 11 kbpd• Blend sales: 48 kbpd
* Under “steady state” operating conditions.Source: Fort Hills Energy Limited Partnership98
Blended Bitumen Pipelines
TransCanada Energy East
Enbridge/Enbridge Flanagan South
TransMountain
TransCanada Keystone, Keystone XL
Market Hub
Deep Water Port
In Service Pipeline
Proposed Pipeline
Hardisty or Common Carriage to Midwest / USGC
Cushing
Flanagan
HardistyEdmonton
Saint John
US Gulf Coast
Europe
Asia
Vancouver
Steele City
Asia SuperiorMontreal
Asia Europe
• Fort Hills partners have secured long-term pipeline access to Hardisty‒ Significant Canadian market hub‒ Access to common carriage and
contract capacity pipelines
• Will secure contracted pipeline access‒ North American refining centres &
deep water ports‒ Targeting contracts for 20-25 kbpd
of capacity on export pipelines
• Balance to be sold at Hardisty, or nominated on Enbridge
Portfolio Approach to Market Access
Access to deep water ports will add market capacity & diversification 99
Intra Alberta Logistics On Schedule For Fort Hills Commissioning
RailLocal Market
Pipeline LegendBitumenBlendDiluentExistingNew
East Tank Farm Blending w/Condensate
Wood Buffalo Extension
Norlite Diluent Pipeline
Cheecham Terminal
Hardisty Terminal
Wood Buffalo Pipeline
Athabasca Pipeline
Edmonton Terminal
Fort HillsMine Terminal
Northern CourierHot Bitumen Pipeline
Teck
OptionsExport Pipeline
Kirby Athabasca Twin Pipeline
Pipeline/Terminal OperatorPipelineCapacity
(kbpd)
Teck Capacity
(kbpd)
Project Construction Status*(% completion)
Northern Courier Hot Bitumen TransCanada 202 40.4 Pipeline and Facilities: Tank terminal:
East Tank Farm - Blending Suncor 292 58.4 Diluent terminaling and blending
Wood Buffalo Blend Pipeline Enbridge 550 65.3 In service
Wood Buffalo Extension Enbridge 550 65.3 Pipeline:Pump stations and facilities:
Norlite Diluent Pipeline Enbridge 130 18.0 Pipeline:Pumpstations and facilities:
Hardisty Blend Tankage Gibsons 425 kbbls 425 kbbls Tank completed
100%99%
100%
100%94%
99%
100%
99%
96%
*As of December 2016.100
Top Related