AmmLeach - Independent Technical Expert Report

23 March 2010

Alexander Mining plc

("Alexander" or the "Company")

Independent Technical Expert's Report -

Substantial Capital/Operating Cost Savings for a Typical Copper/Cobalt Mine Using AmmLeach®

Alexander Mining plc has received the independent technical expert's report it commissioned to examine the potential capital and operating cost savings for building and running a typical 50,000 & 100,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) copper/cobalt mine in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) using AmmLeach®, compared with the conventional method using sulphuric acid.

The capital and operating cost savings are shown in the table below as percentages:

Martin Rosser, CEO, said: "The report clearly shows that under the two scenarios used of heap leaching and agitated leaching, there should be substantial capital and operating cost savings by using Alexander's AmmLeach® technology. For example, the savings range from U$94-177m for capital and US$29-51m per annum for operating costs. Moreover, these figures are for one medium sized copper mine only, and amply illustrate the major potential commercial value of our AmmLeach® technology for the copper industry alone."

Heap Leaching

The comparison assumes the treatment of a typical DRC carbonate hosted oxide ore body with 100kg/t of ore acid consumption and with a head grade of 2% copper and 0.2% cobalt.

Certain aspects of the project were assumed to be common to both leach systems, i.e. recoveries (as testwork recently undertaken by AmmLeach® has shown the recoveries from the two leach regimes to be similar, i.e. 85% and 80% for copper and cobalt respectively), mining, mine infrastructure, mine waste disposal, process plant residue disposal, project buildings (administration, laboratories, workshop, warehouse etc), site access roads, the power transmission line and the water supply line.

In the context of this comparison, the reagent consumptions drive the capital and operating cost differential, along with the much simpler and lower cost cobalt process circuit.

Capital costs

The capital costs of the two options for a 50,00tpa copper mine are compared in the table below:

Heap Leaching 50,000tpa DRC Copper Mine

Capital Cost Summary of AmmLeach® cf. Acid

The capital cost differential is US$94m in favour of AmmLeach®. The main reasons are that the AmmLeach® option does not require an acid plant and the cost of the ammonia plant to generate the reagent from urea is significantly lower. Also the costs of the cobalt circuit associated with the AmmLeach® process are lower than those of the acid route.

Operating costs

The table below shows a comparison of operating costs for the two processes.

Heap Leaching 50,000tpa DRC Copper Mine

Operating Cost Summary of AmmLeach® cf. Acid

Again it can be seen that the major differential is associated with reagents and, in particular, the differential costs of ammonia and sulphuric acid.

The operating cost saving in favour of AmmLeach® is US$29m per year or, over a 15 year mine life, a saving of approximately US$435m at a production rate of 50,000tpa of copper (plus cobalt).

Agitated Leaching

The comparison was undertaken to compare the costs of the AmmLeach® process to those of conventional acid agitated leaching for a DRC copper /cobalt oxide ore with a head grade of 3% copper and 0.4% cobalt. The base case is the production of 100,000tpa copper and assumes overall copper and cobalt recoveries of 95% and 90% respectively (again as testwork recently undertaken by AmmLeach® has shown the recoveries from the two leach regimes to be similar).

Capital costs

The capital costs of the two options are compared in the table below:

Agitated Leaching 100,000tpa DRC Copper Mine

Capital Cost Summary of AmmLeach® cf. Acid

The cost differential is US$ 177m in favour of AmmLeach®. The main determinants of this are similar to that for the heap leaching option, i.e. the AmmLeach® option does not require an acid plant, the cost of the ammonia plant to generate the reagent from urea is significantly lower, and the costs of the cobalt circuit associated with the AmmLeach® process are lower than those of the acid route.

Operating costs

The table below shows a comparison of operating costs for the two processes.

Agitated Leaching 100,000tpa DRC Copper Mine

Capital Cost Summary of AmmLeach® cf. Acid

The saving in favour of AmmLeach® is US$51m per year or, over a 15 year mine life, a saving of approximately US$765m. Again, it can be seen that the major differential is associated with reagents and, in particular, the differential costs of ammonia and sulphuric acid.

Aside from the very substantial capital and cost savings, AmmLeach® has several major advantages over conventional acid leaching technology, specifically;

·; Much simpler process circuits because of the low level of impurities in the leach solutions, and hence lower capital to clean up;

·; Much less complex cobalt winning circuits.

The substantial potential cost savings should, in turn, lead to much lower cut-off grades, particularly for heap leach projects. Current cut-off grades in the DRC using AmmLeach® and heap leaching should drop to less than 1% copper (agitated leaches are currently around 2% copper cut-off) resulting in a substantial increase in reserves.

The report, in two parts, was prepared by consultant David Lunt of Stirling Process Engineering Pty Ltd. (Stirling), Perth, Australia. David Lunt holds a Bachelor degree with Honours in Chemical Engineering and a Bachelor degree in Commerce. He has worldwide experience in the design of metal extraction projects for gold, base metals, particularly for copper/cobalt in the DRC, and diamonds and has published numerous papers in this field. His background includes a long association with GRD Minproc, where he most recently held the position of Chief Technical Officer for 10 years until 2005, when he established his own consultancy firm.

For further information please contact:

Alexander Mining plc

1st Floor

35 Piccadilly

London

W1J 0DW

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7292 1300

Fax: +44 (0) 20 7292 1313

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.alexandermining.com

Nominated Advisor and Broker

Alasdair Younie/John Prior

Arbuthnot Securities Limited

Arbuthnot House

20 Ropemaker Street

London

EC2Y 9AR

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7012 2000

Public/Media Relations

Tim Blackstone

Britton Financial PR

62 Britton Street

London

EC1M 5UY

Tel: +44 (0) 20 7242 9786

Mobile: +44 (0) 7957 140 416

Email: [email protected]

Appendix

Background notes for editors

Alexander Mining plc

Alexander, through its wholly owned subsidiary MetaLeach Limited, is solely focused on the commercialisation of its proprietary mineral processing technologies. Alexander has already received test-work payments and the pipeline of amenability test-work programmes is increasing steadily. A major campaign to grow this revenue stream is under way, with the aim of securing future royalties and/or free carried equity interests in attractive base metals projects and/or mines.

AmmLeach®, for which patents are pending, has the potential to revolutionise the extraction processes for high acid consuming copper and zinc oxide deposits. The operating cost differential between AmmLeach® and conventional heap and agitated leaching treatment methods for high sulphuric acid consuming ores and the AmmLeach® ammonia process is a significant order of magnitude in AmmLeach®'s favour.

The AmmLeach® process was developed as a result of Alexander's successful pilot plant demonstration at its Leon copper project in Argentina and subsequent research and development. As well as copper oxides, AmmLeach® has excellent potential for developing a new SX-EW process for producing high purity zinc metal or an intermediate product at the mine.

The zinc process has been trialled successfully on a bench scale and larger scale test-work is planned. The AmmLeach® process leaches common zinc oxide minerals with high extraction efficiencies and offers a potentially economic processing route for many zinc oxide deposits that are currently not economic.