An Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the
Rosemont Copper Project on the Economies of
the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study
Area, Arizona, and the United States
by Dr. Madan M. Singh
Arizona Department of Mines & Mineral Resources
Special Report 26
November 2009

State of Arizona
Jan Brewer, Governor
Phoenix, Arizona

ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF
MINES AND MINERAL RESOURCES
Dr. Madan M. Singh, Director

1502 West Washington
Phoenix, Arizona 85007
602 771-1600
Fax 602-771-1616
Toll-free in Arizona – 800-446-4259
www.mines.az.gov

Board of Governors
Dr. P. F. O’Hara - Prescott
Chairman

Dr. M. M. Poulton - Tucson
Vice-Chairman

R. L. Holmes - Phoenix
Secretary

P.K. Medhi - Casa Grande
Member

L.H. White - Phoenix
Member

Cover: Exposed mineralization at Rosemont copper deposit

An Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project
on the Economies of the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area,
the State of Arizona, and the United States

Arizona Department of Mines and Mineral Resources

November 2009

Prepared by the
L. William Seidman Research Institute
W. P. Carey School of Business
Arizona State University

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Arizona State University

Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................1
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................................6
1.1 Summary of the Results: Engineering/Construction Phase ....................................7
1.2 Summary of Results: Production/Post-Production Phase ......................................8
1.3 Comparison of Results with the Previous Analysis Based on a Pima/Santa
Cruz Counties Study Area .....................................................................................9
2. Economic/Financial Overview.....................................................................................10
3. Economic Impacts ........................................................................................................14
3.1 Direct Impacts ......................................................................................................15
3.2 Total Impacts ........................................................................................................18
4. Concluding Observations .............................................................................................27
4.1 Population Changes ..............................................................................................27
4.2 Residual Impacts ..................................................................................................29
References
................................................................................................................................33
Technical Appendix .......................................................................................................................35
A1. Economic Impact Analysis Using the REMI Model ..................................................35
A2. The REMI Model ........................................................................................................35
A3. Updating of the Baseline or Control Forecast .............................................................36
A4. Definition of the Local Study Area .............................................................................36
A5. Definition of the Study Period ....................................................................................37
A6. Calculation of the Direct Impacts ...............................................................................37
A7. Government Revenues ................................................................................................38
A8. Inconsistencies in the Results across the Three Regions .......................................... 38a

An Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project
on the Economies of the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area,
the State of Arizona, and the United States
Executive Summary
This report summarizes the results of an economic impact analysis of the Rosemont Copper
Project, an open-pit mining operation to be developed on a 15,000 acre site in Pima County
about 30 miles southeast of Tucson. The analysis employed the REMI PI+ regional economic
forecasting model to estimate the economic impacts of the Project for the Cochise/Pima
County/Santa Cruz Counties study area, for the State of Arizona, and for the United States.

Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties
Construction Phase


Construction of the Project will generate an average annual increase of $96 million (all
dollar-denominated figures refer to 2008$) in economic activity in the study area
(measured in terms of demand for goods and services from local suppliers) over a fouryear engineering/construction period.



The engineering/construction phase will provide a total of 3,600 person-years of
employment for local workers.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income (dividends, interest, rent, proprietors’ income,
and

net

profits)

produced

by

the

economic

activity

associated

with

the

engineering/construction phase will provide an average of $38 million per year in
additional income to area residents.


The engineering/construction phase will generate almost $5 million per year in
revenues for local governments in the study area.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 1 of 56



Over the entire engineering/construction period, impacts will total $385 million in
additional demand for goods and services from suppliers in the study area, $245 million
in gross regional product, $152 million in personal income, and $18 million in local
government revenues.

Production/Post-Production Phase


Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $701 million per year in
economic activity (measured in terms of incremental regional output) within the study
area over a 20-year production period.



Mine and mill operations will employ an average of 406 workers – with peak
employment of 444 – and will support an average of 1,700 other jobs – a total of
approximately 2,100 additional jobs for area residents.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will
provide an annual average of $143 million in additional income to area residents.



Production activities will generate an average of $19 million per year in incremental
revenues for local governments in the study area.



Over the entire expected production/post-production period, the overall impacts will be
$15 billion in additional output, $8 billion in gross regional product, $3 billion in
personal income, and $404 million in local government revenues.



The Rosemont Copper Project will have lasting positive effects on the economy of the
study area. Permanent changes to the regional economy would occur as a result of the
increased levels of economic activity associated with the development and operation of
the Rosemont mine. These changes will result in residual economic impacts in the
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties area that will persist after the end of the Project.
The forecast results indicate that the level of economic activity would be $52 million per
year higher, the area residents’ income $68 million per year higher, employment more
than 300 higher, and local government revenues $2 million per year more than if the
Rosemont Copper Project never existed.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 2 of 56

The State of Arizona
Construction Phase


Construction of the Project will generate an average annual increase of $122 million in
economic activity in the state (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from
Arizona suppliers) over a four-year engineering/construction period.



The engineering/construction phase will provide a total of 3,900 person-years of
employment for Arizona workers.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income resulting from the economic activity
associated with the engineering/construction phase will provide an average of $45
million per year in additional income to Arizona residents.



The engineering/construction phase will generate almost $6 million per year in
revenues during the engineering/construction period for state government.



Over the entire engineering/construction period, impacts will total $489 million in
additional demand for goods and services from Arizona suppliers, $317 million in gross
regional product, $182 million in personal income, and $23 million in state government
revenues.

Production/Post-Production Phase


Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $907 million per year in
economic activity (measured in terms of incremental regional output) in the state over a
20-year production period.



Mine and mill operations will support an average of 2,900 additional jobs for Arizona
workers.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will
provide an annual average of $218 million in additional income for Arizona residents.



Production activities will generate an average of $32 million per year in incremental
state government revenues.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 3 of 56



Over the entire expected production/post-production period, the overall impacts will be
$19 billion in additional output, $11 billion in gross regional product, $5 billion in
personal income, and $681 million in state government revenues.



The Rosemont Copper Project will have lasting positive effects on the Arizona economy.
Permanent changes to the state’s economy would occur as a result of the increased levels
of economic activity associated with the development and operation of the Rosemont
mine. These changes will result in residual economic impacts in the state after the end of
the Project. The forecast results indicate that the level of economic activity would be
$111 million per year higher, state residents’ income $96 million per year higher,
employment 500 higher, and state government revenues $4 million per year higher than
if the Rosemont Copper Project never existed.

The United States
Construction Phase


Construction of the Project will generate an average annual increase of $568 million in
economic activity in the nation (measured in terms of demand for goods and services)
over a four-year engineering/construction period.



The engineering/construction phase will provide a total of 11,600 person-years of
employment for U.S. workers.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income associated with the engineering/construction
phase will provide an average of $167 million per year in additional income to U.S.
residents.



The engineering/construction phase will generate $53 million per year in additional
revenues during the engineering/construction period for the federal government.



Over the entire engineering/construction period, the impacts will total $2.3 billion in
additional demand for goods and services, $1.2 million in gross domestic product, $668
million in personal income, and $210 million in federal government revenues.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 4 of 56

Production/Post-Production Phase


Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $1.3 billion per year in
economic activity in the nation (measured in terms of incremental output) over a 20-year
production period.



Mine and mill operations will support a total of 4,500 additional jobs for U.S. residents.



Wages and salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will
provide an annual average of $387 million in additional income to U.S. residents.



Production activities will generate an average of $128 million per year in incremental
revenues for the federal government.



Over the entire expected production/post-production period, the overall impacts will be
$27 billion in additional output, $15 billion in gross domestic product, $8 billion in
personal income, and $3 billion in federal government revenues.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 5 of 56

THE ROSEMONT COPPER PROJECT
1. INTRODUCTION
This report summarizes the results of an economic impact analysis of the Rosemont Copper
Project, an open-pit mining operation to be developed on a 15,000 acre site in Pima County
about 30 miles southeast of Tucson. The analysis employed the REMI PI+ regional economic
forecasting model to estimate the economic impacts of the Project for the Cochise/Pima
County/Santa Cruz Counties study area, for the State of Arizona, and for the United States.

At prices of $1.75/lb. for copper, $15.00/lb. for molybdenum, and $10.00/ounce for silver,
combined proven and probable sulfide mineral reserves total nearly 546 million tons grading
0.45 percent copper, 0.015 percent molybdenum, and 0.12 ounces/ton silver. Proven and
probable oxide mineral reserves total about 70 million tons grading 0.17 percent copper.
Contained metal in the sulfide mineral reserves (proven and probable) is estimated to be 4.9
billion pounds of copper, 161 million pounds of molybdenum, and 65 million ounces of silver.
Contained metal in the proven and probable oxide mineral reserves is estimated to be 241
million pounds of copper. The mining operation is projected to produce more than 200 million
pounds of copper per year. In addition to copper, it is also projected to produce an average of
4.7 million pounds of molybdenum and 2.7 million ounces of silver per year (M3 Engineering
and Technology Corp.).

The total cost of developing the site for mining and construction of the processing facilities will
be $897 million (2008$). When in operation, employment will average 406 per year, and total
annual production costs will average $301 million per year during the 20-year production
period (M3 Engineering and Technology Corp.).

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 6 of 56

1.1 Summary of the Results: Engineering/Construction Phase
The results of the economic impact analysis indicate that the engineering/construction phase
will generate an average annual increase of $96 million in economic activity in the three-county
study area (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from local suppliers) and will
provide a total of 3,600 person-years of employment for local workers during a four-year
engineering/construction period. The jobs and non-labor income (dividends, interest, rent,
proprietors’ income, and net profits) produced by the economic activity will also provide an
average of $38 million per year in additional income to area residents and $5 million per year in
incremental

revenues

to

local

governments

in

the

study

area.

Over

the

entire

engineering/construction period, impacts will total $385 million in additional demand for
goods and services, $245 million in gross regional product, $152 million in personal income, and
$18 million in local government revenues.

For

the

State

of

Arizona,

the

economic

impact

analysis

estimates

that

the

engineering/construction phase will generate an average annual increase of $122 million in
economic activity in the state (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from
Arizona suppliers) and will provide a total of 3,900 person-years of employment for Arizona
workers during a four-year engineering/construction period. The jobs and non-labor income
resulting from the economic activity will also provide an average of $45 million per year in
additional income to state residents and $6 million per year in incremental state government
revenues. Over the entire engineering/construction period, the impacts will total $489 million
in additional demand for goods and services from Arizona suppliers, $317 million in gross
regional product, $182 million in personal income, and $23 million in state government
revenues.

For the U.S. economy, the engineering/construction phase will generate an average annual
increase of $568 million in economic activity in the nation and will provide a total of 11,600
person-years of employment for U.S. workers during a four-year engineering/construction
period. The jobs and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will also provide an
average of $167 million per year in additional income to U.S. residents and $53 million per year

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 7 of 56

in incremental revenues to the federal government. Over the entire engineering/construction
period, impacts will total $2.3 billion in additional demand for goods and services, $1.2 billion
in gross domestic product, $668 million in personal income, and $210 million in federal
government revenues.

1.2 Summary of Results: Production/Post-Production Phase
The productive life of the Rosemont Copper Project is projected to be 20+ years. Based on the
cost analysis in the feasibility study, the total costs associated with the production/postproduction phase of the Project, including reclamation and costs related to closure of the mine
will total over $6 billion.

For the three-county study area, production activities will generate an average annual increase
of $701 million in economic activity (measured in terms of incremental regional output) and will
support an average of 2,100 jobs for residents of the study area. The wages and salaries and
non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $143 million
per year in additional income to area residents and $19 million per year in incremental revenues
to local governments in the region. Over the entire expected life of the Project, the overall
impacts will be $15 billion in additional output, $8 billion in gross regional product, $3 billion in
personal income, and $404 million in local government revenues.

For the State of Arizona, production activities will generate an average annual increase of $907
million in economic activity and will support an average of 2,900 jobs for Arizona workers. The
wages and salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an
average of $218 million per year in additional income for state residents and $32 million per
year in incremental state government revenues. Over the entire expected life of the Project, the
overall impacts will be $19 billion in additional output, $11 billion in gross regional product, $5
billion in personal income, and $681 million in state government revenues.

For the nation, production activities will generate an average annual increase of $1.3 billion in
economic activity and will support an average of 4,500 jobs for U.S. residents. The wages and

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 8 of 56

salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average of
$387 million per year in additional income to U.S. residents and $128 million per year in
incremental federal government revenues. Over the entire expected life of the Project, overall
impacts will be $27 billion in additional output, $15 billion in gross domestic product, $8 billion
in personal income, and $3 billion in federal government revenues.

1.3 Comparison of Results with the Previous Analysis Based on a
Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
All three parts of the economic impact analysis were prepared using the latest version of the
REMI regional economic forecasting model. The Seidman Institute previously conducted a
similar analysis of the economic impact of the Rosemont Copper Project based on a two-county
study area comprised of Pima and Santa Cruz Counties (Seidman Institute 2009). That study
did not include impact analyses for the state or for the nation. The earlier analysis employed a
different version of the REMI model.

As a consequence of using the new version of the REMI model, the results for the three-county
study area are not consistent with the previous estimates reported for the two-county study
area. The estimated impacts for the engineering/construction phase are all substantially higher
than the numbers reported in the previous study. For the production/post production phase,
the employment, income-related, and government revenue numbers are higher, while output
and gross regional product are somewhat lower than the earlier estimates.

Regional Economic Models Inc., the builder of the REMI model, has been in business for nearly
30 years and has a policy of continually updating their economic impact models based on the
latest available data and advances in economic analysis and econometric methods. The model
used for this analysis incorporates many changes to the previous version – including changes to
both individual equations and to its overall structure. The parameters in the model have been
re-estimated using a modified and updated dataset that included data through 2007. In
addition, the economic forecasts incorporated into the new model were updated to reflect more
recent views on future economic trends. The sum of these changes has resulted in somewhat

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 9 of 56

different results compared with the previous analysis. The fact that the numbers are different
should be interpreted in that context rather than in terms of which numbers are “right.” The
results of the current analysis should be taken as reasonable estimates of the economic impact of
the Rosemont Copper Project produced by a state-of-the-art regional forecasting model based
on the current state of the local, state, and national economies.

2. Economic/Financial Overview
The following discussion is based upon economic and financial information contained in the
Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study (M3 Engineering and Technology Corp.). All
dollar-denominated figures in this report are stated in terms of 2008$ to be consistent with the
cost/financial data in the feasibility study.

The total cost of construction is estimated to be $897 million. The cost figures for the
construction and development of the site for mining as reported in the feasibility study are
summarized in Table 1. Expenditures for goods and services, payrolls, and tax payments
associated with the engineering/construction phase will total $881 million over a four-year
period. Table 2 lists the total and yearly expenditures for the engineering/construction phase.

The productive life of the Rosemont Copper Project is projected to be 20+ years. Based on the
cost analysis presented in the updated feasibility study, the total costs associated with the
production/post-production phase of the Project, including reclamation and costs related to
closure of the mine will total over $6 billion. Table 3 summarizes the cost figures for a
representative year during the production phase as reported in the feasibility study. The total
cost figure translates to $5.1 billion in expenditures for goods and services, payrolls, and
government payments -- or approximately $252 million per year over the 20-year production
period. Table 2 lists the total and yearly expenditures during the production/post-production
phase of the Project. These figures include spending associated with the mining operations,
processing of the ore, maintenance/replacement of facilities and equipment, reclamation,
administration, taxes, and other outlays, but do not include accounting cost components such as
salvage value and depreciation.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 10 of 56

Table 1: Rosemont Copper Project - Construction Costs
(Millions of 2008$)
Cost Category
Site Development
Mine
Oxide Plant
Sulfide Plant
Power/Water Systems
Ancillary Facilities

8.5
214.6
53.6
327.3
82.0
26.9

Total Direct Cost

712.7

Indirect Costs (Field mobilization, EPCM, taxes,
commissioning, spare parts, contingency funds, etc.)

184.4

Total Costs

897.2

Column may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Table 1-40, Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study, 2009

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 11 of 56

Table 2: Rosemont Copper Project - Total Expenditures by Year
(Millions 2008$)
Engineering/Construction
Phase
Total
Annual Average*
Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
PP2
PP1
Production Phase
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Post-Production Phase
21
22
23

Production/Post-Production
Phase

880.6
220.2

5,138.2
252.2

60.1
272.5
488.9

8.7
37.6

59.1

231.5
275.6
262.9
276.9
279.5
281.3
280.4
261.8
255.7
263.1
274.4
240.4
260.1
261.2
252.5
235.4
211.8
213.1
221.1
205.7
42.9
3.9
0.9

*Annual average value for the Production/Post-Production Phase refers to years 1 - 20 when full
production activity will occur.
Columns may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Computed from information in the Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study, 2009

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 12 of 56

Table 3: Rosemont Copper Project - Annual Production Costs
(Millions of 2008$)
Cost Category

For Year 2

Mine Operations
Processing - Mill
Processing - SXEW
Other Operating Costs
Shipping, Refining, and Smelting
Taxes/Royalty
Pre-production Mining Costs
Reclamation Costs
Other Costs/Salvage Value
Depreciation

70.1
91.5
18.4
9.0
62.4
30.8
2.9
0.8
-2.1
173.4

Total Production Costs

457.1

The cost figures include financial and accounting cost components not
included in the annual expenditure figures reported in Table 2.
Column may not add to total due to rounding.
Source: Table 1-53, Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study, 2009

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 13 of 56

3. Economic Impacts
Economic impacts are measured as changes in economic activity attributable to an event or
policy change. Economists distinguish between direct impacts and total impacts. The direct
impacts are changes in the economy that are the direct result of the event or policy change. In
this study, the event being analyzed is the Rosemont Copper Project and the direct impacts of
the construction and operation of the Project will be the purchases of goods and services from
suppliers, the wages and salaries paid to mine employees, and the taxes and other payments to
governments. The total impacts of the Project will be the final changes in the area economy after
all of the indirect effects caused by the direct impacts have worked their way through the
economy. Conventionally, the total impacts are measured by the additional economic activity
that occurs as a result of the event or policy change – in terms of economic measures such as
output, income, employment, etc.

The estimates of the direct impacts and of the total impacts have been produced by very
different methods. The direct impacts have been calculated from information in the Rosemont
Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study in combination with other data from secondary sources.
The total economic impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project were estimated using three
different versions of the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model. These computer
models were developed by Regional Economic Models Inc. for use by a consortium of Arizona
state agencies, including Arizona State University. The estimates of the direct impacts were
used as inputs to the process, and the REMI models generated detailed estimates of the total
economic impacts. The methodology and data used to develop the estimates of the direct
impacts and the operation of the REMI PI+ model are described in the Technical Appendix.

The economic impacts for the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties study area were estimated
using a county-level version of the Arizona-specific REMI PI+ model. The economic impacts of
the Project for the State of Arizona were estimated using a state-level version of the model, and
the impacts for the U.S. economy were estimated using a national version of the REMI PI+
model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 14 of 56

3.1 Direct Impacts
3.1.1 Engineering/Construction Phase
Total spending associated with the engineering/construction phase will be $881 million.
However, much of the equipment and specialized services to be purchased is not produced
within the three-county study area or the State of Arizona. The total expenditures for goods and
services from local suppliers in Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties (including the local share
of the value of equipment ordered through local suppliers but produced elsewhere) are
estimated at $205 million. Annual spending levels over the four-year engineering/construction
period in the three-county study area are shown in Table 4. Most of these expenditures would
be focused in the construction, mining support, and business services sectors.

At the statewide level, total purchases of goods and services from Arizona suppliers would be
slightly higher at $221 million. Annual expenditures in Arizona for the four-year
engineering/construction period are listed in Table 5. Again, most of these expenditures would
occur in the construction, mining support, and business services sectors.

3.1.2 Production/Post-Production Phase
Total direct spending associated with the production/post-production phase (including
reclamation and mine closure activities) will be more than $5.1 billion over a 25-year period.
These expenditures will produce the following direct economic impacts within the
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties study area: $1.5 billion in purchases of goods and services
from local suppliers (shown as non-labor expenditures); an average of 406 jobs and $438 million
in wages and salaries paid to area workers; and $132 million in revenues to local area
governments. The annual figures for each of these measures are shown in Table 4.

The direct economic impacts of the production/post-production phase for the State of Arizona
will produce substantially larger amounts of purchases of goods and services from Arizona

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 15 of 56

Table 4: Rosemont Copper Project - Direct Impacts by Year
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions 2008$)
Total
Production/Post-Production
Expenditures
Engineering/
Construction
Non-Labor
Expenditures
Expenditures
Total
Annual Average*

204.9
51.2

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
14.2
PP2
63.1
PP1
113.8
Production Phase
1
13.9
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Post-Production Phase
21
22
23

Wages
&
Salaries

Local
Government
Revenues

Employment

2,101.1
100.8

1,531.4
74.4

437.8
20.2

132.0
6.2

406

11.2
39.9

4.8
20.7

5.4
17.2

0.2
1.0
2.0

158
341

96.5
106.9
103.1
103.7
104.1
106.0
103.6
98.6
103.5
106.0
109.2
101.8
105.9
106.2
104.6
97.5
89.1
89.3
90.6
88.8

69.9
79.9
76.8
76.7
77.7
79.2
76.8
72.3
75.8
78.0
80.8
74.3
77.7
77.7
75.9
72.9
65.6
65.7
67.5
66.1

20.9
20.9
21.0
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.9
21.9
21.9
21.9
21.9
17.9
16.5
16.4
16.3
16.5

5.7
6.1
5.3
5.9
5.3
5.7
5.7
5.2
6.6
7.0
6.6
5.7
6.3
6.7
6.8
6.7
7.0
7.2
6.8
6.2

421
422
426
426
426
426
426
426
426
426
444
444
444
444
444
354
326
326
326
326

33.4
1.1
0.1

17.4
1.1
0.1

11.5

4.4

326

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20 when full production activities will occur.
Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Computed from information in the results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 16 of 56

Table 5: Rosemont Copper Project - Direct Impacts by Year
State of Arizona
(Millions 2008$)
Total
Production/Post-Production
Expenditures
Engineering/
Construction
Non-Labor
Expenditures
Expenditures
Total
Annual Average*

221.4
55.4

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
15.3
PP2
68.1
PP1
123.0
Production Phase
1
15.0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Post-Production Phase
21
22
23

Wages
&
Salaries

State
Government
Revenues

Employment

2,584.9
124.1

1,922.3
92.9

437.8
20.2

224.8
11.0

406

14.9
52.6

9.5
34.6

5.4
17.2

0.0
0.9

158
341

118.4
132.5
127.5
129.1
129.5
132.2
128.4
120.9
128.3
132.4
137.5
123.8
131.1
131.4
128.1
118.9
107.2
107.7
110.5
106.6

89.3
100.9
98.8
98.1
100.8
102.0
98.1
91.5
94.4
97.3
103.1
92.9
97.8
96.7
93.0
88.2
77.0
77.0
81.2
79.6

20.9
20.9
21.0
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.1
21.9
21.9
21.9
21.9
21.9
17.9
16.5
16.4
16.3
16.5

8.2
10.7
7.7
10.0
7.6
9.2
9.3
8.3
12.8
14.0
12.4
9.0
11.4
12.8
13.2
12.7
13.8
14.3
13.0
10.6

421
422
426
426
426
426
426
426
426
426
444
444
444
444
444
354
326
326
326
326

32.8
1.1
0.1

18.3
2.2
0.3

11.5

2.9

326

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20 when full production activities will occur.
Numbers may not add to totals due to rounding.
Source: Computed from information in the results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 17 of 56

suppliers – $1.9 billion – and $225 million in state government revenues. The annual figures for
the direct impacts for the State of Arizona are shown in Table 5.

3.2 Total Impacts
This section summarizes the results from the REMI model. The total impacts of the Project are
measured in terms of:


Output – The dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region.



Gross Regional Product – The dollar value of all goods and services produced for final
demand in the region. It excludes the value of intermediate goods and services
purchased as inputs to final production.



Personal Income – The total income received by residents of the region from all sources.



Total Employment – the number of full- and part-time jobs by place of work.



Government Revenues – taxes and other payments received by the region’s
government(s).

3.2.1 Engineering /Construction Phase
3.2.1.A Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties

The

development

of

the

Rosemont

Copper

Project

site

over

a

four-year

engineering/construction period will produce substantial benefits for the Cochise/Pima/Santa
Cruz Counties study area. It will generate an average annual increase of $96 million in
economic activity in the area (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from local
suppliers) and will provide a total of 3,600 person-years of employment for local workers. The
wages and salaries and non-labor income (dividends, interest, rent, proprietors’ income and net
profits) produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $38 million per year in
additional income to area residents and $5 million per year in incremental revenues to local
governments in the region. Over the entire engineering/construction period, these impacts are
equivalent to $385 million in additional demand for goods and services from local suppliers,

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 18 of 56

$245 million in gross regional product, $152 million in personal income, and $18 million in local
government revenues (Table 6).

The economic impacts of the engineering/construction phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
will not be confined to the study area’s mining and construction industries. The overall
economic impacts (taking into account the combination of the direct and indirect effects) will be
felt across all sectors of its economy. The strongest impacts will be on the construction,
manufacturing, trade, business services, and health/social assistance sectors. Appendix tables
A1, A2, and A3 show the incremental private-sector economic activity in each of 19 major
industries in terms of output, employment, and earnings respectively.

3.2.1.B The State of Arizona

The development of the Rosemont Copper Project site will produce even larger benefits for the
State of Arizona. It will generate an average annual increase of $122 million in economic activity
in the state (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from Arizona suppliers) and
will provide a total of 3,900 person-years of employment for Arizona workers. The wages and
salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $45
million per year in additional income to state residents and $6 million per year in incremental
state government revenues. Over the entire engineering/construction period, these impacts are
equivalent to $489 million in additional demand for goods and services from Arizona suppliers,
$317 million in gross regional product, $182 million in personal income, and $23 million in state
government revenues (Table 7).

The economic impacts of the engineering/construction phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
will not be confined to Arizona’s mining and construction industries. The overall economic
impacts (accounting for both the direct and indirect effects) will be felt across all sectors of its
economy. The strongest impacts would be on the construction, manufacturing, trade, and
business services sectors. Appendix tables A4, A5, and A6 list the incremental private-sector
economic activity in each of 19 major industries in terms of output, employment, and earnings
respectively.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 19 of 56

Table 6: Rosemont Copper Project - Engineering/Construction Phase - Total Impacts by Year
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total*
Annual Average

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

Local
Government
Revenues

385.4
96.4

245.4
61.3

151.5
37.9

3,627
907

18.0
4.5

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
25.2
PP2
114.2
PP1
207.8
Production Phase
1
38.2

15.8
72.0
130.9

9.0
41.7
77.3

245
1,089
1,930

1.2
5.3
9.7

26.7

23.6

363

1.8

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well as value added.
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
* Total figure for employment is measured in terms of person-years of employment.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 20 of 56

Table 7: Rosemont Copper Project - Engineering/Construction Phase - Total Impacts by Year
State of Arizona
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total*
Annual Average

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

State
Government
Revenues

489.4
122.4

316.8
79.2

181.5
45.4

3,909
977

23.2
5.8

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
31.6
PP2
144.1
PP1
263.8
Production Phase
1
49.9

20.2
92.6
169.4

10.8
50.0
93.1

263
1,172
2,086

1.5
6.9
12.5

34.7

27.7

388

2.2

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well and value added (compensation and profit).
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
* Total figure for employment is measured in terms of person-years of employment.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 21 of 56

3.2.1.C The United States

The development of the Rosemont Copper Project site will also produce substantial benefits to
the national economy. It will generate an average annual increase of $568 million in economic
activity (measured in terms of demand for goods and services from U.S. suppliers) and will
provide a total of 11,600 person-years of employment for U.S. workers. The wages and salaries
and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $167
million per year in additional income to U.S. residents and $53 million per year in incremental
revenues to the federal government. Over the entire engineering/construction period, these
impacts are equivalent to $2.3 billion in additional demand for goods and services, $1.2 billion
in gross domestic product, $668 million in personal income, and $210 million in federal
government revenues (Table 8).

The overall economic impacts (taking into account the combination of the direct and indirect
effects) will be distributed broadly across all sectors of the U.S. economy. The strongest impacts
would be on the manufacturing, trade, and business services sectors. Appendix tables A7, A8,
and A9 show the incremental private-sector economic activity in each of 19 major industries in
terms of output, employment, and earnings respectively.

3.2.2 Production/Post-Production Phase
The economic benefits associated with the operation of the Rosemont Mine will be much larger
in scale than those generated by its construction for all three levels of geography.

3.2.2.A Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties

Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $701 million in economic
activity (measured in terms of incremental regional output) within the three-county study area
and will provide an average of 2,100 jobs for area residents. The wages and salaries and nonlabor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $143 million per

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 22 of 56

Table 8: Rosemont Copper Project - Engineering/Construction Phase - Total Impacts by Year
United States of America
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total*
Annual Average

Gross
Domestic
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

Federal
Government
Revenues

2,272.9
568.2

1,207.1
301.8

667.5
166.9

11,560
2,890

210.1
52.5

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
157.9
PP2
705.8
PP1
1,270.5
Production Phase
1
138.8

81.3
370.8
674.7

39.2
191.2
357.0

840
3,669
6,386

14.2
64.6
117.5

80.2

80.1

665

14.0

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well and value added.
Gross domestic product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
* Total figure for employment is measured in terms of person-years of employment.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 23 of 56

year in additional income to area residents and $19 million per year in incremental revenues to
local governments in the study area. (All measured over the 20-year production period.) Over
the entire production/post-production period, these impacts are equivalent to $15 billion in
additional output, $8 billion in gross regional product, $3 billion in personal income, and $404
million in local government revenues (Table 9).

The economic impacts of the production/post-production phase of the Rosemont Copper
Project will not be confined to the mining industry. The overall economic impacts (taking into
account both the direct and indirect effects) will be felt across all sectors of the study area’s
economy. The strongest impacts would be on the mining, utility, manufacturing, trade, real
estate/rental/leasing, and business services sectors. Appendix tables A10, A11, and A12 show
the incremental private-sector economic activity in each of 19 major industries in terms of
output, employment, and earnings respectively.

3.2.2.B The State of Arizona
Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $907 million in economic
activity (measured in terms of incremental output) within the State of Arizona and will provide
an average of 2,900 jobs for state residents. The wages and salaries and non-labor income
produced by the economic activity will provide an average of $218 million per year in
additional income to state residents and $32 million per year in incremental state government
revenues. (All measured over the 20-year production period.) Over the entire production/postproduction period, these impacts are equivalent to $19 billion in additional output, $11 billion in
gross regional product, $5 billion in personal income, and $681 million in state government
revenues (Table 10).

The economic impacts of the production/post-production phase of the Rosemont Copper
Project will not be confined to the state’s mining industry. The overall economic impacts (taking
into account the combination of direct and indirect effects) will be widely distributed across all
sectors of the Arizona economy. The strongest impacts would be on the mining, utility,
construction, manufacturing, trade, real estate/rental/leasing, and business services sectors.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 24 of 56

Table 9: Rosemont Copper Project - Production/Post-Production Phase - Total Impacts by Year
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total
Annual Average*

14,649.7
701.3

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
PP2
65.0
PP1
166.9
Production Phase
1
620.4
2
812.2
3
664.5
4
741.1
5
656.7
6
718.6
7
731.0
8
733.1
9
725.7
10
747.1
11
717.6
12
594.3
13
684.7
14
731.6
15
738.5
16
694.4
17
697.7
18
716.0
19
690.7
20
609.6
Post-Production Phase
21
286.5
22
57.3
23
48.6

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

Local
Government
Revenues

8,053.9
382.5

3,205.0
142.5

2,144

404.0
18.8

39.8
100.9

20.7
47.6

526
1,167

2.3
5.8

338.3
433.4
364.9
401.2
362.9
391.6
396.4
395.0
394.4
405.2
393.7
336.4
378.7
400.6
404.0
379.2
376.9
385.1
374.6
338.2

93.1
109.3
112.6
120.2
123.7
130.4
134.1
135.9
142.6
148.0
154.4
152.7
159.6
165.2
169.0
159.7
156.3
158.8
162.2
161.7

2,080
2,258
2,211
2,239
2,214
2,234
2,215
2,157
2,206
2,235
2,291
2,194
2,251
2,271
2,266
2,012
1,892
1,891
1,901
1,861

15.8
17.5
16.8
17.7
17.3
18.0
18.1
17.4
19.3
20.0
20.2
19.1
20.2
20.9
21.2
19.6
19.3
19.6
19.5
18.9

177.0
46.2
39.2

139.8
77.3
70.1

1,495
438
369

14.4
2.7
2.3

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well as value added.
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20 when full production activity will occur.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 25 of 56

Table 10: Rosemont Copper Project - Production/Post-Production Phase - Total Impacts by Year
State of Arizona
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total
Annual Average*

19,206.2
907.1

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
PP2
113.3
PP1
280.2
Production Phase
1
798.9
2
1,008.5
3
854.9
4
940.6
5
851.4
6
918.1
7
930.0
8
923.1
9
934.6
10
966.0
11
943.4
12
803.0
13
905.0
14
959.2
15
968.7
16
901.8
17
899.0
18
921.9
19
900.0
20
813.0
Post-Production Phase
21
450.0
22
119.8
23
101.9

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

State
Government
Revenues

10,833.3
508.5

4,896.5
218.1

2,946

681.4
31.9

68.4
166.0

35.4
78.9

724
1,591

4.2
11.1

444.7
553.0
477.1
522.2
477.5
510.7
515.6
506.4
524.4
543.1
532.6
460.4
512.4
540.8
546.4
509.0
505.9
517.6
506.7
463.1

146.0
171.5
172.8
187.2
188.0
198.3
203.2
201.5
220.2
231.3
238.5
228.8
240.4
250.9
257.4
242.8
240.9
246.5
249.8
245.4

2,847
3,145
2,966
3,082
2,942
3,005
2,974
2,819
3,078
3,170
3,180
2,905
3,048
3,127
3,131
2,806
2,710
2,731
2,696
2,559

25.6
29.9
26.7
29.7
27.3
29.4
29.5
28.1
33.8
35.7
35.1
30.8
34.1
36.2
36.9
34.0
34.0
35.0
34.1
31.6

274.2
83.9
71.0

209.5
111.7
99.6

1,981
632
525

19.4
4.9
4.2

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well and value added (compensation and profit).
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20 when full production activity will occur.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 26 of 56

Appendix tables A13, A14, and A15 present the incremental private-sector economic activity in
each of 19 major industries in terms of output, employment, and earnings respectively.

3.2.2.C The United States
Production activities will generate an average annual increase of $1.3 billion in economic
activity for the nation and will provide an average of 4,500 jobs for U.S. residents. The wages
and salaries and non-labor income produced by the economic activity will provide an average
of $387 million per year in additional income to U.S. residents and $128 million per year in
incremental revenues for the federal government. (All measured over the 20-year production
period.) Over the entire production/post-production period, these impacts are equivalent to $27
billion in additional output, $15 billion in gross domestic product, $8 billion in personal income,
and $3 billion in federal government revenues (Table 11).

The overall economic impacts (accounting for both the direct and indirect effects) will be widely
distributed across all sectors of the U.S. economy. The strongest impacts would be on the utility,
manufacturing, trade, finance/insurance, and business services sectors. Appendix tables A16,
A17, and A18 show the incremental private-sector economic activity in each of 19 major
industries in terms of output, employment, and earnings respectively.

4. Concluding Observations
4.1 Population Changes
Unlike most other regional economic impact models, REMI is a dynamic model that produces
integrated multiyear forecasts and accounts for dynamic feedbacks among its economic and
demographic variables.

As such, it provides forecasts of the demographic impacts of the

development and operation of the Rosemont mine in addition to forecasts of economic
variables.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 27 of 56

Table 11: Rosemont Copper Project - Production/Post-Production Phase - Total Impacts by Year
United States of America
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total
Annual Average*

27,267.7
1,309.4

Year
Engineering/Construction Phase
PP3
PP2
166.1
PP1
477.7
Production Phase
1
1,213.9
2
1,489.9
3
1,254.3
4
1,372.2
5
1,247.0
6
1,342.9
7
1,334.0
8
1,256.9
9
1,389.5
10
1,447.2
11
1,422.8
12
1,161.6
13
1,320.6
14
1,399.6
15
1,383.1
16
1,273.1
17
1,252.2
18
1,290.3
19
1,259.3
20
1,078.2
Post-Production Phase
21
497.3
22
-28.8
23
-33.4

Gross
Domestic
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

Federal
Government
Revenues

15,283.3
732.4

8,345.3
387.2

4,500

2,660.5
127.5

89.9
254.2

56.2
146.8

964
2,503

15.6
44.3

658.5
814.7
676.3
755.2
674.5
732.1
729.7
664.0
788.4
830.7
805.1
647.4
742.9
794.1
789.0
728.9
728.7
750.7
722.7
614.7

291.3
349.2
317.5
354.8
337.6
362.5
367.2
330.3
414.4
439.3
439.5
381.0
420.6
446.9
450.1
415.8
415.2
425.3
415.1
369.9

4,809
5,467
4,625
4,987
4,457
4,673
4,556
3,898
5,012
5,241
5,058
4,070
4,527
4,748
4,646
4,081
3,992
4,062
3,863
3,228

114.6
141.8
117.7
131.5
117.4
127.4
127.0
115.6
137.2
144.6
140.1
112.7
129.3
138.2
137.3
126.9
126.9
130.7
125.8
107.0

298.7
-1.6
-6.2

266.9
75.0
57.0

1,927
-238
-243

52.0
-0.3
-1.1

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well as value added.
Gross domestic product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20 when full production activity will occur.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 28 of 56

The results of the analysis indicate that net migration into the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz
Counties study area will increase by more than 300 per year in the early years of operation and
then lessen, with an annual average net migration figure of about 150 over the entire 20-year
production period. This increase in net migration would mean that the population of the study
area would be approximately 2,000 larger after five years and more than 4,000 larger by the end
of the production period compared with a situation in which the Rosemont Copper Project was
not developed.

Similarly, the results of the state-level analysis indicate that net migration into Arizona will
increase by more than 500 per year in the early years of operation and then lessen, with an
annual average net migration figure of about 230 over the entire 20-year production period.
This increase in net migration would mean that the state’s population would be approximately
3,000 larger after five years and 7,000 larger by the end of the production period compared with
a situation in which the Rosemont Copper Project had not been developed.

4.2 Residual Impacts
Results from the REMI forecasts of economic activity for the years after the closure of the mine
show that the Rosemont Copper Project would have lasting effects on the economy of the threecounty study area over and above the impacts during its 26-year ”active” period. Permanent
changes to the business community, to the labor market, to local governments, and to many
other aspects of the local economy would occur as a result of the development and operations of
the Rosemont mine. These changes will result in residual economic impacts in the
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties area. The forecast results indicate that the level of
economic activity would be $52 million per year higher, area residents’ income $68 million per
year higher, employment more than 300 higher, and local government revenues $2 million per
year higher than if the Rosemont Copper Project had never existed. Annual figures for each of
these measures for the ten years after closure are listed in Table 12.

The REMI state-level forecast for years after the closure of the mine show that the Rosemont
Copper Project would also have similar lasting effects on the Arizona economy. Permanent

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 29 of 56

Table 12: Rosemont Copper Project - Residual Impacts by Year
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total*
Annual Average
Year
Post-Closure
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

Local
Government
Revenues

518.4
51.8

382.3
38.2

675.6
67.6

347

22.9
2.3

45.1
44.5
45.4
47.3
50.0
52.7
55.1
57.4
59.5
61.4

36.0
34.9
34.9
35.7
36.9
38.4
39.6
40.9
42.0
43.1

65.9
63.6
62.8
63.1
64.5
66.6
68.6
70.9
73.4
76.2

338
326
325
331
340
350
357
363
368
371

2.2
2.1
2.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.4
2.5
2.6

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well as value added.
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
*Total figures refer to the sum of years 24-33. Residual impacts would continue after year 33.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 30 of 56

changes to the business community, to the labor market, to the state government, and to many
other aspects of the Arizona economy would occur as a result of economic activity induced by
the development and operation of the Rosemont mine, and these changes would result in
residual economic impacts within Arizona. The state-level forecast results indicate that the level
of economic activity would be $111 million per year higher, the state residents’ income $96
million per year greater, employment 500 higher, and state government revenues $4 million per
year higher than if the Rosemont Copper Project had never existed. Annual figures for each of
these measures for the ten years after the end of operations are provided in Table 13.

Results from the REMI national forecast do not show similar lasting effects for the overall U.S.
economy.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 31 of 56

Table 13: Rosemont Copper Project - Residual Impacts by Year
State of Arizona
(Millions 2008$)

Output
Total*
Annual Average
Year
Post-Production Phase
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33

Gross
Regional
Product

Personal
Income

Employment

State
Government
Revenues

1,111.6
111.2

655.6
65.6

956.4
95.6

498

43.7
4.4

94.8
94.1
97.2
102.0
107.7
113.1
118.8
123.5
128.2
132.3

58.8
57.8
59.0
61.2
63.9
66.4
69.0
71.2
73.4
75.1

92.5
89.2
88.3
89.2
91.3
94.0
97.4
100.8
104.9
109.0

474
458
462
475
490
504
518
526
534
539

3.9
3.9
3.9
4.1
4.3
4.4
4.6
4.7
4.9
5.0

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including intermediate goods
as well and value added (compensation and profit).
Gross regional product is the dollar value of all goods and services produced for final demands.
It excludes intermediate goods and services.
Personal income is the total income received by residents from all sources.
*Total figures refer to the sum of years 24-33. Residual impacts would continue after year 33.
Columns may not add due to rounding.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 32 of 56

REFERENCES
Arizona Department of Commerce (2009) 2008 Arizona Workforce Employment Report.

Arizona Department of Revenue (2008) FY2008 Annual Report.

Global Insight (2009) U. S. Economic Outlook: September 2009.

L. William Seidman Research Institute (2009) An Assessment of the Economic Impacts of the
Rosemont Copper Project.
M3 Engineering & Technology Corp. (2009) Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility Study.

Regional Economic Models Inc. (2007) REMI Policy Insight 9.5: Users Guide.

Regional Economic Models Inc. (2009) Introduction to PI+: The Next Generation of Policy Insight.
Regional Economic Models Inc. (2009) PI+: Changes from Policy Insight v9.5.

Tetra Tech Inc. (2008) Rosemont Copper Project: Mined Land Reclamation Plan.

Treyz, George (1993) Regional Economic Modeling: A Systematic Approach to Economic Forecasting
and Policy Analysis. Kluwer Academic Press.

U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2009) State Personal Income and Employment Database.
(www.bea.gov/regional/index.htm#state)

U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (2007) U.S. Benchmark Input-Output Accounts.
U. S. Census Bureau (2009) State and Local Government Finances Database.
(www. census.gov/govs/www/estimate.html)

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 33 of 56

U. S. Census Bureau (2009) 2009 Statistical Abstract.
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2009) Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages Database.
(www.bls.gov/cew)

WestLand Resources Inc. (2007) Mine Plan of Operations: Rosemont Project.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 34 of 56

TECHNICAL APPENDIX
A1. Economic Impact Analysis Using the REMI Model
This study used the REMI PI+ regional forecasting model to produce numeric estimates of the
economic impacts associated with the construction, operation, and closure of the Rosemont
mine. The general method for estimating impacts using the REMI model involves 4 steps:

1. Preparation of a baseline or control forecast for the study area – this baseline scenario
provides a forecast of the future path of the study area’s economy based on a
combination of the extrapolation of current economic conditions and an exogenous
forecast of relevant economic variables without any changes in public policy or other
external factors.
2. Development of a policy scenario – this policy scenario describes the direct effects that
the event(s) – in this case the construction, operation, and closure of the Rosemont mine
would have on the study area’s economy.
3. Preparation of a forecast simulation of the area economy based on the policy scenario –
this alternative forecast provides a forecast of the future path of the area economy
incorporating the effects of the changes specified in the policy scenario.
4. Comparison of the baseline and policy scenario forecasts – the differences between the
future values of each variable in the forecasts provide numeric estimates of the nature
and magnitudes of the economic impacts of Rosemont Copper Project on the study area.

A2. The REMI Model
REMI is an economic-demographic forecasting and simulation model developed by Regional
Economic Models Inc. REMI is designed to forecast the impact of public policies and external
events on an economy and its population. The REMI model is recognized by the business and
academic community as the leading regional forecast/simulation tool available. A complete
explanation

of

the

model

and

discussion

of

the

empirical

estimation

of

the

parameters/equations are given in Regional Economic Modeling: A Systematic Approach to

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 35 of 56

Economic Forecasting and Policy Analysis (Treyz), Policy Insight 9.5: Model Documentation (REMI),
Introduction to PI+: The Next Generation of Policy Insight (REMI), and PI+: Changes from Policy
Insight v9.5 (REMI).

The REMI models used for this analysis were all versions of Policy Insight Model PI+ Version
1.1 leased from Regional Economic Models Inc. by a consortium of State agencies, including
Arizona State University, for economic forecasting and policy analysis.

A3. Updating of the Baseline or Control Forecast
The PI+ v 1.1 models were delivered with national and local datasets containing data through
2007 and also with national and local baseline forecasts prepared by Regional Economic Models
Inc. The REMI model incorporates procedures for updating the datasets and the baseline
forecasts with more recent data. The research team performed these procedures to prepare
updated baseline forecasts for this study. In practice, the methodology requires first updating
the national baseline forecast since forecast values of national economic variables are important
inputs to the state-level and county-level forecasts.

The national forecast was updated by using 2008 data from the U.S. Bureau of Economic
Analysis and forecast data for the 2009–2017 period from the latest available Global Insight
national forecast (September 2009). The baseline forecast of the Arizona model was updated
based on 2008 employment data from the Arizona Department of Commerce.

A4. Definition of the Local Study Area
REMI is a county-based model, so that the study area must be defined in terms of one or more
Arizona counties. The site on which the Rosemont Copper Project is being developed is located
in Pima County southeast of the Tucson urbanized area, near the border with Santa Cruz
County, and also in relatively close proximity to Cochise County. The approved bounds of
analysis for the environment impact assessment have been defined by the U.S. Forest Service to
include three counties – Cochise, Pima, and Santa Cruz Counties. Based on this definition, the

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 36 of 56

combined three-county region was specified as the study area for the county-level REMI
economic impact analysis.

A5. Definition of the Study Period
REMI is a dynamic model that produces integrated multiyear forecasts. The analysis of the
economic impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project has employed this feature of the model. The
feasibility study provides annual information relating to both capital and operating costs for the
projected lifetime of the Project. The timeline for the Project in the study includes three preproduction years (designated years PP3 through PP1 in this report), a production period of 20
years (designated years 1 through 20), and a post-production period of three years (years 21
through 23). The first year of the post-production period (Year 21) includes some production
activity during the first part of the year. The economic impact analysis of the construction phase
provides estimates of the impacts over the four-year engineering/construction period specified
in the feasibility study (year PP3 to year 1). The analysis of the production/post-production
phase encompasses a 25-year period (years PP2 through year 23).

The REMI model requires specification of calendar year time periods for its forecast process.
Based on a timeline on the Rosemont Copper Project website, the study period starting date
(PP3) was assumed to be 2009.

A6. Calculation of the Direct Impacts
All of the estimates of the direct impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project were based on the
economic and financial information contained in the Rosemont Copper Project Updated Feasibility
Study (M3 Engineering and Technology Corp.). Information from two other reports relating to
the Rosemont Copper Project was also used to supplement the information in the feasibility
study:


Data relating to reclamation costs from the Mined Land Reclamation Plan (Tetra Tech Inc).



Information relating to various aspects of construction and operation from the Mine Plan
of Operations (WestLand Resources Inc).

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 37 of 56

The REMI model requires input data in very specific formats. In particular, the data must
conform to the 70 economic sectors in the model. In many cases the economic data provided by
the feasibility study and the other two reports were not sufficiently detailed to be used directly
as inputs for the REMI model. Detailed data from the direct requirements table in the U.S.
Benchmark Input-Output Accounts (U. S. Bureau of Economic Analysis) were used to convert the
information into a form usable by the model. The direct requirements coefficients for each
industry specify the dollar amount of inputs from each supplying industry needed to produce a
dollar of industry output.

A7. Government Revenues
Estimates of revenues received by each of the three levels of government from Rosemont
Copper operations were based on tax information contained in the Rosemont Copper Project
Updated Feasibility Study. The share of state transactions privilege tax, severance tax, and income
tax collections distributed to the area local governments was calculated from data in the
Arizona Department of Revenue FY2008 Annual Report.

Estimates of revenues received by area local governments and the state government as a result
of the incremental economic activity induced by Rosemont Copper operations and/or
construction activities were based on ratios of collections per dollar of gross regional product
calculated from data obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau’s State and Local Government Finances
database. Estimates of revenues received by the federal government as a result of the incremental
economic activity induced by Rosemont Copper operations and/or construction activities were
based on ratios of collections per dollar of gross domestic product calculated from data
obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2009 Statistical Abstract.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 38 of 56

A8. Inconsistencies in the Results across the Three Regions
The economic impacts for the Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties study area were estimated using a
county-level version of the Arizona-specific REMI PI+ model. The economic impacts of the Project for
the State of Arizona were estimated using a state-level version of the model, and the impacts for the
U.S. economy were estimated using a national version of the REMI PI+ model. The three sets of
economic impact estimates were based on the same input data relating to the direct impacts of the
construction and operation of the Mine, but were calculated independently using the three different
versions of the REMI PI+ model.

Logically, the magnitude of the economic impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project with respect to the
three-county study area should have been smaller than the impacts on the Arizona economy, because
at least some of the activity associated with the Project would be expected to affect the economies of
Arizona communities outside the study area – particularly the Metro Phoenix area. Similarly, the
magnitude of the Project’s impacts on the Arizona economy should have been smaller than the impacts
measured for the U. S. economy, since many of the goods and services needed for the construction and
operation of the Rosemont Mine would be supplied by economic agents located outside Arizona.
Comparison of equivalent economic measures across the three levels of geography shows that this was
true in most cases. In a few specific instances, however, the estimated values of the economic impacts
across the three geographic levels were not consistent. This situation is due to a combination of two
factors:

1. While the structures of the county-level model and state-level model are similar, the equations in the
models that specify the relationships between the economic variables were based on different sets of
data. The equations in the county-level model were developed based upon county-specific data. The
state-level model was developed using state-level information. In general, less economic data are
available at the county level than for states, and the county level data are often subject to larger
margins of error – this is particularly true for smaller counties, such as two of the three counties in the
study area. The numbers produced by the REMI model are “point estimates” of the magnitudes of the
economic impacts of the event being evaluated. As with all statistical models based on economic data
that are subject to measurement error, the estimates/forecasts produced by such models also have
margins of error. Given the relative quality of the data used to develop the county-level versus statelevel models, the estimates produced by the county-level model can be expected to have larger margins
of error.
Seidman Research Institute, W. P. Carey School of Business

Supplemental Page 38a

Factor #1 also applies in the comparison of county and state models versus national models.
Information relating to the national economy is much more prevalent and generally of higher quality
than sub-national data. In addition, there is another factor leading to inconsistencies between the U. S.
numbers and the county and state results.

2. The U. S. numbers in the report were produced using a national version of the REMI PI+ model that
is included as part of the county/state models. Although it can be used to evaluate the national level
economic impact of events such as the construction/operation of the Rosemont Mine, it was primarily
included in the state-level model to allow researchers to develop alternative national forecasts as inputs
to the state model. As such, the structure is somewhat different that the county/state-level models used
to produce the other two sets of estimates. These differences meant that (a) the input data specifying
the direct impacts of the Rosemont Copper Project had to be reformulated for use in the national
model, and (b) the format of results produced by the national model was somewhat different and not
as detailed as that in the county/state level models.

Seidman Research Institute, W. P. Carey School of Business

Supplemental Page 38b

Appendix Table A1: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Output by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
385.4
0.0
0.2
4.9
80.7
104.4
9.7
21.0
2.5
6.0
12.2
24.2
71.0
2.2
9.9
0.9
21.0
1.8
5.6
7.1

Annual
Average
96.4
0.0
0.0
1.2
20.2
26.1
2.4
5.3
0.6
1.5
3.1
6.0
17.8
0.6
2.5
0.2
5.3
0.4
1.4
1.8

PP3

PP2
25.2
0.0
0.0
0.3
4.9
7.4
0.6
1.3
0.2
0.4
0.9
1.4
4.7
0.2
0.6
0.0
1.4
0.1
0.3
0.5

114.2
0.0
0.1
1.4
22.9
32.2
2.9
6.0
0.7
1.7
3.9
6.6
21.5
0.7
2.9
0.2
6.4
0.5
1.5
2.1

PP1
207.8
0.0
0.1
2.5
42.8
58.3
5.2
10.9
1.3
3.1
6.7
12.3
38.9
1.2
5.3
0.4
11.2
0.9
2.8
3.8

1
38.2
0.0
0.0
0.8
10.0
6.6
1.0
2.9
0.3
0.8
0.8
3.8
5.9
0.2
1.1
0.2
2.0
0.3
0.9
0.8

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all
intermediate goods as well as value added.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 39 of 56

Appendix Table A2: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area

Industry/Year
Private Non-farm Employment
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Annual
Average
789
0
0
2
196
103
15
64
6
5
20
38
166
5
46
6
51
12
26
31

PP3

PP2
212
0
0
0
50
31
4
17
2
1
6
9
46
1
12
1
14
3
6
9

PP1
948
0
0
2
227
130
18
75
7
6
27
42
204
6
55
6
61
14
29
39

1

1,686
0
1
3
416
226
31
131
12
11
44
77
363
11
98
11
106
26
53
66

311
0
0
1
91
23
5
32
2
2
4
24
50
1
17
4
21
6
17
11

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors,
and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded.
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 40 of 56

Appendix Table A3: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total, Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
149.8
0.0
0.3
0.9
31.1
32.7
4.1
8.8
1.2
1.8
4.9
1.8
35.8
1.1
5.5
0.6
12.5
0.8
2.5
3.2

Annual
Average
37.4
0.0
0.1
0.2
7.8
8.2
1.0
2.2
0.3
0.5
1.2
0.5
9.0
0.3
1.4
0.2
3.1
0.2
0.6
0.8

PP3

PP2
9.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.9
2.1
0.2
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
2.4
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.2

42.9
0.0
0.1
0.2
8.7
9.5
1.2
2.4
0.3
0.5
1.5
0.5
10.8
0.3
1.5
0.2
3.5
0.2
0.6
0.9

PP1
79.3
0.0
0.1
0.4
16.3
18.1
2.1
4.4
0.6
0.9
2.6
0.9
19.4
0.6
2.8
0.3
6.3
0.4
1.2
1.6

1
18.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
4.2
3.1
0.6
1.5
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
3.2
0.1
0.8
0.1
1.8
0.1
0.5
0.5

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to
wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 41 of 56

Appendix Table A4: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Output by Industry
State of Arizona
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
489.4
0.0
1.0
6.2
99.5
127.0
20.6
27.2
7.2
9.9
22.9
34.4
70.0
5.6
12.6
1.8
23.8
3.1
7.7
8.8

Annual
Average
122.4
0.0
0.3
1.6
24.9
31.7
5.2
6.8
1.8
2.5
5.7
8.6
17.5
1.4
3.1
0.4
6.0
0.8
1.9
2.2

PP3

PP2
31.6
0.0
0.1
0.4
5.9
8.8
1.3
1.6
0.5
0.6
1.6
2.0
4.6
0.4
0.8
0.1
1.6
0.2
0.5
0.6

144.1
0.0
0.3
1.7
27.7
38.8
6.1
7.7
2.1
2.9
7.3
9.5
21.2
1.7
3.7
0.5
7.2
0.9
2.1
2.6

PP1
263.8
0.0
0.6
3.2
52.3
70.7
11.1
14.3
3.9
5.3
12.7
17.7
38.3
3.1
6.8
0.9
12.8
1.6
3.9
4.7

1
49.9
0.0
0.1
0.9
13.7
8.7
2.1
3.6
0.7
1.1
1.2
5.2
5.9
0.4
1.2
0.3
2.2
0.4
1.2
0.9

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all
intermediate goods as well and value added (compensation and profit).
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 42 of 56

Appendix Table A5: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
State of Arizona

Industry/Year
Private Non-farm Employment
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Annual
Average
858
1
1
2
199
123
23
72
13
9
30
36
157
7
44
8
53
13
32
38

PP3

PP2
229
0
0
0
49
37
6
19
3
2
9
9
43
2
12
2
14
3
8
11

1,029
1
1
2
226
155
28
85
16
11
39
40
193
9
54
8
64
15
35
47

PP1

1

1,832
1
2
4
418
270
48
150
28
18
66
73
344
15
96
15
113
26
65
80

341
0
0
1
102
30
8
35
5
3
5
22
49
2
15
5
20
6
20
13

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors,
and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded.
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 43 of 56

Appendix Table A6: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
State of Arizona
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total, Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
181.9
0.1
0.5
1.1
37.6
37.5
8.6
11.1
2.9
2.7
8.9
3.2
35.1
2.9
7.1
1.2
13.3
1.3
3.3
3.6

Annual
Average
45.5
0.0
0.1
0.3
9.4
9.4
2.2
2.8
0.7
0.7
2.2
0.8
8.8
0.7
1.8
0.3
3.3
0.3
0.8
0.9

PP3

PP2
11.3
0.0
0.0
0.1
2.2
2.4
0.5
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.6
0.2
2.3
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.8
0.1
0.2
0.2

PP1
52.0
0.0
0.1
0.3
10.3
11.0
2.4
3.0
0.8
0.8
2.6
0.8
10.6
0.8
2.0
0.3
3.8
0.4
0.9
1.0

1
95.8
0.0
0.2
0.5
19.5
20.6
4.5
5.6
1.5
1.4
4.7
1.6
18.9
1.5
3.7
0.6
6.8
0.7
1.6
1.9

22.8
0.0
0.1
0.2
5.6
3.5
1.2
1.8
0.4
0.4
1.0
0.6
3.2
0.3
1.0
0.2
1.8
0.2
0.6
0.5

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to
wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 44 of 56

Appendix Table A7: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Output by Industry
United States of America
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
2,272.9
1.9
82.4
22.2
98.0
1,079.2
115.6
69.2
53.7
77.9
139.5
94.8
179.1
60.3
43.5
6.8
79.0
11.4
24.2
34.4

Annual
Average
568.2
0.5
20.6
5.6
24.5
269.8
28.9
17.3
13.4
19.5
34.9
23.7
44.8
15.1
10.9
1.7
19.7
2.9
6.0
8.6

PP3
157.9
0.1
5.8
1.7
6.7
75.2
7.8
5.1
3.7
5.2
9.5
6.8
12.2
4.4
2.9
0.5
5.3
0.8
1.9
2.4

PP2
705.8
0.6
25.5
7.0
28.9
333.8
35.8
22.1
16.9
24.0
43.9
29.5
55.0
18.9
13.4
2.1
26.0
3.6
7.7
11.0

PP1
1,270.5
1.0
45.8
12.2
53.8
602.8
65.1
39.0
29.9
44.3
78.9
52.4
100.1
33.6
24.4
3.8
44.4
6.4
13.4
19.3

1
138.8
0.1
5.3
1.4
8.5
67.4
6.8
3.0
3.2
4.3
7.2
6.1
11.9
3.5
2.9
0.4
3.3
0.6
1.2
1.7

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all
intermediate goods as well as value added.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 45 of 56

Appendix Table A8: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
United States of America

Industry/Year
Private Non-farm Employment
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Annual
Average
2,862
6
85
6
212
822
127
198
104
50
135
69
327
56
165
28
183
45
96
152

PP3

PP2
832
2
25
2
60
244
38
63
29
15
38
20
91
17
45
8
51
12
29
43

3,634
7
106
8
252
1,045
162
260
132
64
174
87
404
71
206
35
242
58
122
199

PP1

1

6,325
13
186
14
462
1,798
281
439
230
111
301
151
727
124
365
62
410
99
214
338

657
3
21
1
72
199
27
31
24
10
25
16
85
13
42
7
27
9
19
26

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors,
and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded.
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 46 of 56

Appendix Table A9: Total Economic Impacts
Engineering/Construction Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project
Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
United States of America
(Millions of 2008$)

Industry/Year
Total, Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Total
770.4
0.9
31.5
4.7
41.1
279.9
45.1
29.3
22.1
23.3
55.2
8.5
96.1
28.3
22.9
4.7
46.0
5.2
10.4
15.4

Annual
Average
192.6
0.2
7.9
1.2
10.3
70.0
11.3
7.3
5.5
5.8
13.8
2.1
24.0
7.1
5.7
1.2
11.5
1.3
2.6
3.8

PP3

PP2
50.0
0.1
2.2
0.3
2.7
18.1
2.9
2.0
1.5
1.5
3.5
0.5
6.3
2.0
1.4
0.3
2.9
0.3
0.7
1.0

228.6
0.2
9.6
1.4
11.6
83.7
13.2
8.6
6.6
6.7
16.3
2.4
28.6
8.6
6.6
1.3
13.8
1.5
3.0
4.6

PP1
414.5
0.4
17.0
2.4
21.6
153.4
24.2
15.4
11.8
12.5
29.5
4.4
51.7
15.1
12.1
2.4
24.2
2.7
5.4
8.1

1
77.3
0.2
2.6
0.6
5.1
24.6
4.7
3.3
2.4
2.6
5.8
1.2
9.5
2.6
2.8
0.7
5.1
0.6
1.3
1.6

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to
wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.
Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 47 of 56

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 48 of 56

14,649.7
0.5
9,927.4
911.3
655.6
728.6
332.7
518.9
315.0
300.8
235.0
764.4
523.8
228.5
179.6
22.5
326.9
45.8
133.3
130.7

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

701.3
0.0
483.9
47.0
17.5
7.5
11.3
20.7
12.6
6.2
8.3
23.0
18.2
8.0
6.3
0.9
17.9
2.1
4.5
5.4

Annual
Ave.*
65.0
0.0
32.0
1.7
2.5
1.2
1.3
2.6
0.7
0.9
3.7
3.7
3.2
5.5
1.0
0.1
3.0
0.2
0.6
1.0

PP2
166.9
0.0
86.4
10.0
7.2
4.4
4.6
6.5
1.9
2.0
6.9
8.9
7.3
6.4
2.6
0.3
7.1
0.6
1.6
2.3

PP1
620.4
0.0
437.5
43.9
15.3
10.1
8.6
13.0
11.0
3.7
11.2
16.5
14.6
7.1
5.2
0.5
13.1
1.1
3.1
4.6

1
812.2
0.0
605.2
49.3
19.5
10.9
10.0
14.9
14.5
4.3
10.2
18.8
16.6
7.2
5.9
0.6
14.3
1.3
3.6
5.1

2
664.5
0.0
459.6
48.1
20.7
10.6
10.8
15.1
11.6
4.4
9.6
19.2
16.9
7.9
5.8
0.6
13.7
1.3
3.7
4.9

3
741.1
0.0
532.3
47.1
21.4
9.9
11.1
16.1
12.3
4.8
9.4
20.1
17.3
8.0
6.0
0.7
14.3
1.4
3.9
5.1

4
656.7
0.0
445.7
48.1
21.2
9.9
12.1
16.7
10.8
5.0
9.0
20.6
17.7
8.1
6.0
0.7
14.5
1.5
4.1
5.1

5
718.6
0.0
502.2
49.1
21.0
9.4
11.9
17.6
11.8
5.3
9.0
21.5
18.2
8.2
6.2
0.7
15.2
1.6
4.2
5.2

6
731.0
0.0
515.8
47.8
20.4
8.4
11.9
18.2
12.1
5.5
8.6
21.8
18.2
8.2
6.2
0.8
15.6
1.7
4.3
5.2

7
733.1
0.0
522.8
45.9
19.4
7.2
11.0
18.6
13.2
5.6
8.2
21.9
17.8
7.6
6.1
0.8
15.8
1.8
4.4
5.2

8

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all intermediate goods as well as value added.

Total

Industry/Year
725.7
0.0
508.3
47.2
19.2
7.2
11.6
19.7
13.3
5.9
8.3
22.9
18.5
7.7
6.3
0.8
16.8
1.9
4.6
5.4

9
747.1
0.0
523.6
47.6
18.9
7.5
12.3
20.7
13.9
6.2
8.3
23.7
19.1
7.8
6.5
0.9
17.6
2.0
4.7
5.5

10
717.6
0.0
484.3
48.8
18.8
8.5
14.1
22.0
13.4
6.6
8.6
24.9
20.2
8.1
6.8
0.9
18.7
2.2
4.9
5.7

11
594.3
0.0
369.7
49.0
17.7
6.8
12.1
22.0
11.2
6.7
8.1
24.7
19.4
8.1
6.6
1.0
18.6
2.3
4.9
5.6

12
684.7
0.0
450.7
48.8
17.5
7.5
13.3
23.4
12.9
7.0
8.3
25.8
20.2
8.2
6.9
1.0
19.9
2.4
5.1
5.8

13
731.6
0.0
493.2
48.8
17.4
7.2
13.0
24.5
13.8
7.4
8.3
26.5
20.4
8.3
7.0
1.1
20.9
2.6
5.2
6.0

14
738.5
0.0
499.0
49.0
17.1
6.5
12.2
25.4
13.9
7.6
8.2
27.0
20.4
8.3
7.0
1.1
21.7
2.7
5.2
6.0

15
694.4
0.0
471.4
47.4
15.1
5.1
10.8
24.4
12.7
7.4
6.9
25.2
18.5
8.0
6.4
1.1
20.7
2.6
5.0
5.6

16

Appendix Table A10: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Output by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions of 2008$)

697.7
0.0
487.9
43.2
13.4
3.7
9.0
24.2
12.8
7.3
6.2
24.3
17.1
7.9
6.0
1.0
20.7
2.7
4.8
5.4

17
716.0
0.0
503.9
43.0
12.6
4.0
9.1
25.0
13.1
7.5
6.2
24.6
17.2
8.0
6.1
1.1
21.5
2.8
4.9
5.5

18
690.7
0.0
472.7
43.2
12.1
4.9
10.2
26.0
12.6
7.8
6.4
25.1
17.6
8.9
6.2
1.1
22.4
2.9
4.9
5.6

19

609.6
0.0
392.4
44.1
11.4
5.1
10.1
26.3
11.0
7.9
6.2
25.1
17.5
9.0
6.1
1.1
22.7
3.0
4.9
5.6

20

286.5
0.0
139.7
13.5
7.8
1.0
6.7
22.7
3.9
7.1
4.1
21.2
13.0
8.8
4.7
1.0
20.0
2.8
4.2
4.3

21

57.3
0.0
0.7
1.9
-0.9
-3.3
2.9
13.9
0.4
4.5
-0.6
10.8
4.9
1.1
1.9
0.7
11.6
1.8
2.8
2.0

22

48.6
0.0
0.5
1.7
-4.5
-2.8
2.8
13.0
0.3
4.2
-0.6
9.7
4.2
0.1
1.7
0.7
11.5
1.7
2.6
1.9

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 49 of 56

1,781
1
417
54
144
17
41
163
83
12
42
125
144
58
90
22
165
45
83
75

Annual
Ave.*

462
0
160
2
25
5
8
33
5
3
30
22
30
50
20
3
29
7
12
18

PP2
1,012
0
349
14
69
16
27
78
14
7
52
51
68
57
48
7
66
18
30
41

PP1
1,742
1
433
59
147
34
49
151
84
12
79
96
135
62
95
14
123
31
58
79

1
1,887
1
433
66
183
36
54
166
109
13
67
109
150
62
103
16
134
35
67
83

2
1,853
1
437
63
191
34
55
161
85
13
60
110
150
66
100
16
129
35
69
78

3
1,871
1
437
61
194
30
54
165
89
13
57
114
151
65
100
17
135
36
74
78

4
1,854
1
437
61
188
29
56
164
77
13
53
116
152
65
98
18
137
37
76
76

5
1,866
1
437
61
183
26
52
167
83
13
50
120
154
64
98
19
143
39
79
77

6
1,848
1
437
58
175
22
49
166
84
13
47
121
152
64
96
19
147
40
81
76

7
1,804
1
437
55
163
17
43
163
90
12
43
121
146
57
91
20
149
41
82
73

8
1,827
1
437
56
159
16
43
166
90
12
42
125
149
57
93
21
157
43
85
75

9
1,848
1
437
55
154
16
44
169
92
12
40
129
152
57
94
22
165
45
88
76

10
1,901
1
455
55
150
18
48
173
87
13
40
134
159
58
97
23
173
48
91
78

11
1,826
1
455
55
139
13
39
166
70
12
36
132
151
57
91
24
172
48
90
75

12
1,869
1
455
54
136
13
41
170
81
12
36
137
155
57
93
25
182
51
93
77

13
1,882
1
455
53
132
12
38
172
85
12
35
140
155
56
93
26
191
53
95
78

14
1,877
1
455
52
128
9
34
172
85
12
34
143
152
56
91
27
197
55
96
78

15

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors, and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Industry/Year
1,657
1
362
49
111
5
28
159
76
11
27
133
135
52
81
26
188
52
90
71

16
1,551
1
334
44
96
1
22
152
76
11
23
128
122
50
74
25
187
51
87
67

17
1,550
1
334
43
88
1
21
152
77
10
23
129
121
50
73
26
193
53
88
67

18

Appendix Table A11: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area

1,565
1
334
43
83
3
23
152
72
10
23
132
123
56
74
27
199
54
88
68

19
1,537
1
334
43
77
3
22
149
61
10
22
131
121
55
72
27
200
55
87
67

20

1,239
0
333
12
49
-5
12
123
17
8
13
111
85
53
52
24
177
50
75
50

21

364
0
-7
1
-18
-13
4
68
-3
5
-4
60
25
5
15
16
111
30
49
20

22

304
0
-6
1
-43
-12
3
61
-3
4
-3
53
20
-1
13
15
108
29
46
19

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 50 of 56

2,358.2
0.6
647.1
135.7
160.5
102.6
101.8
201.2
101.6
41.4
78.2
37.9
203.8
82.7
80.0
13.8
246.6
20.1
46.3
56.4

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

108.1
0.0
29.5
6.6
7.7
5.1
4.7
8.8
4.9
1.8
3.6
1.7
9.5
3.6
3.7
0.6
10.8
0.9
2.1
2.5

Annual
Ave.*
21.7
0.0
8.9
0.2
1.0
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.3
0.3
1.4
0.3
1.7
2.5
0.6
0.1
1.6
0.1
0.3
0.4

PP2
49.2
0.0
19.8
1.4
2.9
1.9
1.8
2.6
0.8
0.6
2.7
0.7
3.9
2.8
1.4
0.2
3.9
0.3
0.7
1.0

PP1
85.4
0.0
24.8
5.9
6.2
4.3
3.3
5.2
4.1
1.1
4.3
1.2
7.6
3.1
2.8
0.3
7.3
0.5
1.3
1.9

1
96.2
0.0
25.4
6.7
8.1
5.2
4.0
6.2
5.5
1.3
4.0
1.4
8.8
3.2
3.3
0.4
8.3
0.6
1.6
2.2

2
98.4
0.0
26.2
6.5
8.7
5.6
4.4
6.4
4.5
1.4
3.9
1.5
9.1
3.6
3.4
0.4
8.4
0.6
1.7
2.2

3
101.8
0.0
26.8
6.4
9.1
5.7
4.6
6.9
4.8
1.5
3.9
1.6
9.3
3.6
3.5
0.5
8.9
0.6
1.8
2.3

4
103.7
0.0
27.3
6.6
9.1
5.9
5.0
7.2
4.3
1.6
3.9
1.6
9.5
3.6
3.6
0.5
9.1
0.7
1.9
2.3

5
106.5
0.0
27.9
6.7
9.1
6.0
5.0
7.6
4.7
1.7
3.9
1.7
9.7
3.7
3.7
0.5
9.6
0.7
2.0
2.4

6
107.3
0.0
28.5
6.6
8.9
5.8
5.0
7.9
4.8
1.7
3.8
1.7
9.7
3.7
3.7
0.5
9.8
0.7
2.0
2.4

7
106.8
0.0
29.2
6.4
8.5
5.4
4.7
8.1
5.2
1.7
3.6
1.7
9.5
3.4
3.6
0.6
10.0
0.8
2.0
2.4

8

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.

Total

Industry/Year
110.2
0.0
30.0
6.6
8.5
5.4
4.9
8.5
5.3
1.8
3.7
1.7
9.8
3.5
3.8
0.6
10.6
0.8
2.1
2.5

9
113.0
0.0
30.7
6.7
8.4
5.5
5.2
8.9
5.5
1.9
3.7
1.8
10.0
3.6
3.9
0.6
11.0
0.9
2.2
2.6

10
118.2
0.0
32.6
6.8
8.3
5.9
5.8
9.4
5.3
2.0
3.8
1.9
10.5
3.7
4.0
0.6
11.6
0.9
2.2
2.7

11
116.0
0.0
33.4
6.9
8.0
5.3
5.1
9.5
4.5
2.0
3.6
1.8
10.1
3.7
3.9
0.7
11.6
0.9
2.2
2.7

12
119.4
0.0
34.0
6.9
7.9
5.5
5.6
10.0
5.1
2.1
3.7
1.9
10.4
3.7
4.0
0.7
11.8
1.0
2.3
2.8

13
122.0
0.0
34.9
6.9
7.8
5.4
5.5
10.5
5.4
2.2
3.7
1.9
10.5
3.8
4.1
0.7
12.4
1.0
2.3
2.8

14
123.3
0.0
35.7
7.0
7.7
5.2
5.2
10.8
5.5
2.2
3.7
2.0
10.5
3.8
4.1
0.7
12.8
1.1
2.4
2.9

15
110.7
0.0
29.2
6.8
7.0
4.5
4.6
10.5
5.0
2.1
3.2
1.8
9.4
3.7
3.8
0.7
12.3
1.1
2.3
2.7

16
104.6
0.0
27.7
6.2
6.3
3.8
3.9
10.4
5.0
2.1
2.9
1.7
8.6
3.6
3.6
0.7
12.2
1.1
2.2
2.6

17

Appendix Table A12: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
Cochise/Pima/Santa Cruz Counties Study Area
(Millions of 2008$)

105.3
0.0
28.2
6.2
5.9
3.6
3.9
10.6
5.1
2.1
2.9
1.7
8.6
3.7
3.5
0.7
12.5
1.1
2.2
2.7

18
107.3
0.0
28.7
6.2
5.6
3.8
4.3
10.9
4.8
2.1
2.9
1.8
8.7
4.1
3.6
0.7
12.9
1.1
2.2
2.7

19
106.6
0.0
28.9
6.4
5.3
3.7
4.2
11.0
4.3
2.1
2.9
1.7
8.6
4.1
3.5
0.7
13.1
1.2
2.2
2.7

20

86.9
0.0
29.4
2.0
3.9
1.7
2.9
9.6
1.7
1.9
2.0
1.5
6.2
4.0
2.8
0.7
11.5
1.1
1.9
2.2

21

22.2
0.0
-0.5
0.3
0.2
-1.2
1.3
6.0
0.2
1.1
0.0
0.7
1.8
0.5
1.2
0.5
7.0
0.7
1.3
1.2

22

15.5
0.0
-0.5
0.3
-1.6
-2.1
1.0
5.3
0.1
0.9
-0.2
0.5
1.1
0.0
0.9
0.4
6.5
0.6
1.1
1.0

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 51 of 56

19,206.2
0.7
10,823.6
1,044.7
690.1
778.2
625.9
793.8
478.9
264.1
431.6
970.3
561.6
385.7
229.2
58.5
586.0
105.2
190.3
187.9

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

907.1
0.0
524.3
50.4
33.4
35.3
28.5
34.7
23.0
11.7
19.9
43.1
25.6
17.0
10.5
2.5
25.6
4.5
8.4
8.5

Annual
Ave.*
113.3
0.0
45.5
2.5
5.1
4.0
3.6
4.9
1.8
2.2
10.0
7.4
4.8
10.7
2.0
0.3
4.9
0.6
1.3
1.7

PP2
280.2
0.0
123.2
11.9
14.3
13.3
11.4
11.7
4.8
4.6
18.1
17.4
10.9
13.3
4.8
0.8
11.2
1.5
3.1
3.9

PP1

2

798.9 1,008.5
0.0
0.1
480.1 648.4
46.9
52.7
29.6
37.9
31.0
34.8
21.1
24.5
21.8
25.1
20.2
26.0
8.2
9.4
27.9
24.8
30.5
35.0
20.4
23.2
15.5
15.9
9.0
10.2
1.4
1.7
19.5
21.2
2.6
3.0
5.8
6.7
7.3
8.1

1
854.9
0.0
502.8
51.3
38.9
34.5
25.6
24.8
21.2
9.3
22.5
35.1
23.0
17.1
9.7
1.7
19.8
3.0
6.7
7.7

3
940.6
0.0
575.6
50.5
40.9
34.4
26.8
27.0
22.5
10.0
22.5
37.5
24.0
17.2
10.1
1.9
21.1
3.3
7.2
8.0

4
851.4
0.0
489.1
51.3
39.3
34.9
28.4
27.3
20.1
10.0
21.0
37.7
24.0
17.3
9.8
2.0
20.6
3.3
7.3
7.8

5
918.1
0.0
545.3
52.4
39.1
35.2
28.6
29.1
21.8
10.5
21.0
39.4
24.8
17.5
10.1
2.1
21.7
3.6
7.7
8.1

6
930.0
0.0
558.5
51.1
37.9
33.8
28.7
30.0
22.2
10.7
20.1
40.2
24.9
17.5
10.1
2.2
22.1
3.7
7.9
8.1

7
923.1
0.0
565.3
49.0
35.0
31.2
26.7
30.1
23.7
10.5
18.7
39.7
24.0
16.1
9.6
2.2
21.8
3.8
7.9
7.8

8
934.6
0.0
551.0
50.8
36.7
33.5
29.1
33.3
24.3
11.6
20.1
43.0
26.0
16.5
10.6
2.5
24.4
4.2
8.5
8.6

9
966.0
0.0
566.3
51.4
37.1
35.4
31.0
35.4
25.4
12.2
20.5
45.2
27.2
16.8
11.2
2.6
25.9
4.5
8.9
8.9

10
943.4
0.0
528.9
52.6
36.4
38.7
34.4
37.2
24.6
12.7
20.8
47.0
28.4
17.4
11.5
2.7
26.9
4.8
9.2
9.1

11

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all intermediate goods as well and value added (compensation and profit).

Total

Industry/Year
803.0
0.0
414.1
52.5
32.8
34.8
30.3
36.3
20.8
12.2
18.7
45.5
26.7
17.1
10.5
2.7
25.9
4.8
8.9
8.6

12
905.0
0.0
495.1
52.5
32.7
37.7
33.0
38.8
23.6
13.0
19.6
47.9
28.1
17.5
11.2
2.9
27.8
5.2
9.3
9.0

13
959.2
0.0
537.3
52.6
33.0
38.4
33.1
41.1
25.1
13.6
20.1
49.7
28.8
17.6
11.6
3.0
29.6
5.5
9.6
9.4

14
968.7
0.0
542.9
52.8
32.8
38.1
31.9
42.7
25.4
14.0
20.0
50.9
29.0
17.7
11.7
3.1
30.8
5.8
9.8
9.5

15
901.8
0.0
506.0
50.9
29.2
35.4
28.9
41.1
23.1
13.2
16.7
47.7
26.5
16.7
10.6
3.0
29.2
5.5
9.3
8.8

16

Appendix Table A13: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Output by Industry
State of Arizona
(Millions of 2008$)

899.0
0.0
518.9
46.6
26.9
33.2
25.7
41.4
23.1
13.0
15.5
46.9
25.1
16.3
10.2
3.1
29.6
5.6
9.2
8.6

17
921.9
0.0
534.6
46.5
25.7
34.7
26.3
43.0
23.8
13.4
15.8
47.8
25.5
16.4
10.4
3.1
31.0
5.9
9.3
8.8

18
900.0
0.0
503.1
46.6
24.3
37.6
28.4
44.4
22.9
13.8
16.0
48.5
25.9
18.3
10.6
3.2
31.9
6.1
9.3
8.9

19

813.0
0.0
422.7
47.4
22.0
38.4
28.0
44.4
20.3
13.7
15.3
47.8
25.4
18.4
10.3
3.2
31.8
6.2
9.1
8.7

20

450.0
0.0
167.8
16.2
14.3
27.0
20.4
38.3
8.7
11.5
9.9
40.7
19.5
17.4
7.8
2.9
27.4
5.6
8.0
6.7

21

119.8
0.0
0.7
3.1
-2.4
14.1
10.5
23.2
1.8
5.8
-2.0
22.2
8.2
2.7
2.9
2.0
15.2
3.5
5.3
3.0

22

101.9
0.0
0.6
2.7
-9.6
14.1
9.8
21.3
1.6
5.2
-1.8
19.7
7.1
0.7
2.6
1.9
14.8
3.4
4.9
2.8

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 52 of 56

2,454
1
427
51
226
68
74
240
154
24
79
163
199
71
113
42
215
57
135
116

Annual
Ave.*

648
0
164
3
42
14
17
54
14
8
60
30
44
56
29
6
44
11
21
31

PP2
1,416
1
357
14
114
45
50
123
36
16
103
68
97
67
67
14
98
25
52
69

PP1
2,429
2
445
54
232
97
88
222
154
27
151
120
181
77
124
25
170
42
95
123

1
2,654
2
445
60
293
104
97
245
197
29
126
138
203
77
136
30
185
46
110
131

2
2,549
2
449
57
296
100
96
233
158
27
110
138
198
82
125
30
173
45
110
120

3
2,604
2
449
56
305
94
95
243
165
27
105
146
204
80
127
33
184
48
119
122

4
2,525
2
448
56
287
92
95
236
144
26
95
146
201
79
120
33
180
48
121
116

5
2,552
2
447
56
280
87
91
242
155
26
92
152
205
78
120
36
188
50
127
118

6
2,516
2
447
54
267
79
87
240
156
25
84
154
203
77
117
37
191
51
129
116

7
2,413
1
447
51
241
68
76
232
164
23
76
152
192
69
108
37
188
51
128
109

8
2,535
1
447
52
250
70
79
247
166
24
79
164
206
70
118
41
209
55
139
118

9
2,590
1
447
52
249
70
80
254
171
25
78
171
213
70
121
44
220
58
145
121

10
2,636
1
466
52
240
74
85
257
163
25
77
177
220
71
122
46
228
61
149
122

11
2,453
1
466
51
211
61
70
241
134
22
67
171
204
68
109
45
218
59
143
112

12
2,536
1
466
50
208
63
74
249
152
23
68
179
212
68
114
48
233
62
149
117

13
2,577
1
466
50
208
60
70
255
160
23
67
185
215
68
116
50
245
65
153
120

14
2,571
1
466
49
203
54
64
256
159
23
65
189
213
67
115
52
253
67
155
120

15

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors, and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Industry/Year
2,288
1
372
47
176
45
55
237
142
20
52
178
191
62
101
50
240
63
147
109

16
2,174
1
343
42
159
37
45
230
140
19
47
175
178
59
95
50
242
63
144
105

17
2,185
1
343
41
150
37
45
231
143
19
47
177
179
59
95
51
251
65
145
106

18

Appendix Table A14: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
State of Arizona

2,184
1
343
41
139
39
46
230
135
19
46
179
181
65
95
52
256
66
145
106

19
2,107
1
343
41
123
37
44
222
116
18
43
176
175
64
90
52
253
66
142
101

20

1,661
0
341
13
73
16
28
183
41
14
27
151
129
59
64
47
218
58
123
76

21

534
0
-7
2
-31
-4
11
102
0
6
-7
88
45
7
16
32
129
35
81
29

22

440
0
-6
2
-73
-3
10
91
0
5
-5
78
37
0
14
30
125
33
75
27

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 53 of 56

3,884.4
1.5
928.9
149.3
277.3
244.0
260.9
325.5
181.0
72.0
188.8
85.1
286.1
174.9
136.3
36.8
334.3
40.7
81.3
79.5

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

177.9
0.1
42.3
7.2
13.6
11.5
12.0
14.3
8.7
3.3
8.7
3.8
13.2
7.7
6.3
1.6
14.7
1.8
3.6
3.6

Annual
Ave.*
38.1
0.0
13.1
0.4
2.0
1.2
1.4
1.9
0.7
0.6
3.7
0.7
2.5
4.7
1.1
0.2
2.6
0.3
0.5
0.7

PP2
84.4
0.0
28.7
1.7
5.8
4.0
4.4
4.6
1.9
1.2
6.6
1.5
5.7
5.9
2.6
0.5
5.8
0.6
1.3
1.6

PP1
142.2
0.1
36.0
6.3
11.8
9.3
8.2
8.6
7.1
2.2
10.2
2.7
10.6
6.8
4.9
0.9
10.3
1.1
2.3
2.9

1
160.7
0.1
36.9
7.2
15.4
11.1
9.9
10.2
9.3
2.6
9.4
3.2
12.4
7.1
5.8
1.1
11.7
1.2
2.8
3.3

2
162.3
0.1
38.0
7.0
16.1
11.5
10.6
10.4
7.9
2.7
9.0
3.3
12.4
7.7
5.8
1.2
11.4
1.3
2.9
3.2

3
169.6
0.1
38.8
7.0
17.0
11.9
11.2
11.3
8.4
2.9
9.2
3.5
12.9
7.8
6.1
1.3
12.2
1.4
3.2
3.3

4
170.1
0.1
39.5
7.1
16.5
12.3
11.9
11.5
7.6
3.0
8.8
3.5
12.9
7.8
6.0
1.3
12.2
1.4
3.2
3.3

5
174.8
0.1
40.2
7.3
16.5
12.5
12.0
12.2
8.3
3.1
9.0
3.6
13.3
7.9
6.2
1.4
12.7
1.5
3.4
3.4

6
175.6
0.1
41.1
7.2
16.1
12.1
12.1
12.7
8.4
3.1
8.7
3.7
13.3
7.9
6.2
1.4
13.0
1.5
3.5
3.4

7
172.2
0.1
42.1
6.9
15.1
11.3
11.5
12.7
9.0
3.0
8.3
3.6
12.7
7.3
6.0
1.5
12.9
1.5
3.4
3.3

8

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.

Total

Industry/Year
182.3
0.1
43.1
7.2
15.8
11.9
12.4
13.9
9.2
3.3
8.9
3.9
13.7
7.6
6.5
1.6
14.2
1.7
3.7
3.6

9
188.8
0.1
44.1
7.3
15.9
12.4
13.1
14.8
9.7
3.4
9.1
4.1
14.2
7.7
6.8
1.7
15.0
1.8
3.9
3.8

10
196.0
0.1
46.8
7.5
15.6
13.2
14.3
15.4
9.4
3.5
9.2
4.2
14.7
7.9
6.9
1.8
15.6
1.9
4.0
3.8

11
187.5
0.1
47.4
7.6
14.3
11.9
12.9
15.1
8.1
3.4
8.5
4.0
13.8
7.8
6.4
1.7
15.1
1.9
3.9
3.7

12
193.1
0.1
48.3
7.6
12.4
12.5
13.8
16.0
9.1
3.6
8.9
4.2
14.4
8.0
6.7
1.8
16.0
2.0
4.0
3.8

13
198.3
0.1
49.4
7.6
12.5
12.5
13.9
16.9
9.6
3.7
9.1
4.4
14.7
8.1
6.9
1.9
16.9
2.1
4.1
4.0

14
201.1
0.1
50.7
7.7
12.4
12.2
13.5
17.6
9.7
3.8
9.2
4.4
14.7
8.1
7.0
2.0
17.6
2.2
4.2
4.1

15
181.0
0.1
41.6
7.5
11.0
11.1
12.3
16.9
8.9
3.6
7.9
4.1
13.3
7.7
6.4
1.9
16.8
2.1
4.0
3.8

16
173.1
0.0
39.3
6.9
10.1
10.0
11.1
17.0
8.9
3.5
7.5
4.0
12.6
7.5
6.2
1.9
17.0
2.1
3.9
3.7

17

Appendix Table A15: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
State of Arizona
(Millions of 2008$)

175.4
0.0
40.1
6.9
9.5
10.0
11.2
17.6
9.1
3.6
7.6
4.1
12.6
7.5
6.2
1.9
17.6
2.2
3.9
3.8

18
178.2
0.0
40.8
6.9
8.9
10.5
11.8
18.0
8.7
3.6
7.6
4.1
12.7
8.3
6.2
2.0
17.9
2.3
3.9
3.8

19
175.3
0.0
41.7
7.0
8.0
10.4
11.5
17.9
7.7
3.5
7.4
4.0
12.3
8.3
5.9
1.9
17.8
2.3
3.8
3.7

20

142.4
0.0
42.4
2.5
5.0
6.4
8.5
15.5
3.5
2.9
5.1
3.4
9.1
7.9
4.6
1.8
15.5
2.1
3.4
3.0

21

37.1
0.0
-0.7
0.5
-1.8
1.4
4.1
9.2
0.7
1.3
0.1
1.6
2.8
1.2
1.8
1.2
8.8
1.2
2.2
1.5

22

24.7
0.0
-0.6
0.4
-4.8
0.4
3.2
7.7
0.4
1.0
-0.2
1.2
1.7
0.2
1.2
1.1
7.8
1.1
1.9
1.2

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 54 of 56

Annual
Ave.*

27,267.7 1,309.4
10.8
0.5
11,409.7
550.3
1,092.5
53.1
406.4
18.9
4,234.2
204.0
1,059.8
51.0
727.5
34.9
1,291.8
62.8
812.5
38.9
1,677.1
79.1
996.9
47.4
1,203.6
57.4
506.9
23.3
411.2
19.6
82.0
3.9
735.2
35.1
120.4
5.7
190.1
9.1
299.0
14.3

Total
166.1
0.1
59.1
3.0
2.5
21.4
5.7
5.4
4.8
5.4
20.0
7.9
8.0
8.4
2.8
0.5
6.3
0.9
1.6
2.4

PP2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

477.7 1,213.9 1,489.9 1,254.3 1,372.2 1,247.0 1,342.9 1,334.0 1,256.9 1,389.5 1,447.2 1,422.8 1,161.6 1,320.6 1,399.6 1,383.1 1,273.1 1,252.2 1,290.3 1,259.3 1,078.2
0.3
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.7
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
166.5 508.6 682.3 534.3 607.2 521.3 576.0 586.0 589.8 577.1 592.7 555.9 438.8 519.4 560.8 565.3 530.4 539.9 554.9 523.3 442.2
14.1
51.0
57.4
54.7
54.2
54.2
55.6
53.9
50.8
54.0
54.7
55.8
54.4
55.1
55.2
55.1
52.7
48.3
48.1
48.3
48.2
7.2
16.0
19.9
17.8
19.6
18.6
19.8
19.3
17.5
21.1
21.9
21.8
18.3
19.0
19.9
19.6
18.0
17.7
18.3
18.2
15.6
82.1 198.4 225.4 209.1 214.1 210.8 220.3 207.4 184.3 214.1 225.4 236.0 196.7 215.8 220.3 210.2 188.8 173.7 179.8 185.5 164.1
20.7
43.9
50.8
49.1
52.5
51.7
53.8
52.4
45.9
55.7
59.3
63.0
51.2
56.8
57.9
54.2
48.6
43.4
44.6
46.3
39.5
14.4
31.0
35.9
30.1
32.9
30.0
31.7
31.3
27.2
36.9
39.2
39.7
31.7
35.9
39.6
40.1
36.7
37.2
38.8
39.1
32.1
14.4
56.5
72.7
58.8
62.7
55.8
60.6
61.2
62.7
67.4
70.9
68.4
56.0
64.3
68.4
68.3
62.2
61.9
63.8
61.1
52.2
14.7
31.6
37.3
32.4
36.8
34.0
37.3
36.7
31.6
42.5
45.6
45.5
37.0
41.8
45.4
44.3
40.8
40.1
42.3
41.8
34.0
42.4
75.2
77.1
66.6
73.8
69.8
75.2
75.4
66.4
86.7
90.6
90.4
74.9
84.2
91.2
89.5
80.8
79.7
83.6
81.1
69.2
22.4
44.2
50.7
43.9
47.6
43.9
46.4
46.4
40.5
51.4
53.9
54.2
45.1
51.0
53.2
52.0
47.0
45.8
46.4
46.1
39.2
23.2
50.8
59.3
52.3
57.2
52.9
56.2
56.3
47.7
62.7
66.8
67.3
55.4
61.9
64.5
63.5
57.5
55.5
57.7
56.0
47.4
16.0
23.5
25.4
25.6
25.9
25.1
25.7
25.1
21.4
24.0
24.5
25.2
22.8
23.7
24.1
23.2
20.5
19.3
19.4
21.9
19.8
7.8
17.1
20.2
17.5
19.3
17.8
19.3
18.7
16.6
21.7
23.0
23.1
18.7
21.0
22.0
21.7
19.9
19.3
19.9
19.6
16.1
1.5
3.5
4.2
3.2
3.8
3.1
3.5
3.5
2.7
4.4
4.9
4.5
3.5
4.2
4.6
4.6
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.2
3.3
16.3
33.7
38.1
30.9
34.3
30.3
32.5
31.9
27.1
37.8
39.9
38.6
30.3
35.7
39.6
39.1
36.1
37.7
38.8
38.1
31.1
2.5
4.9
5.6
4.8
5.3
4.9
5.3
5.2
4.6
6.0
6.5
6.6
5.4
6.2
6.7
6.7
6.1
6.0
6.4
6.2
5.4
4.5
9.3
10.5
8.9
9.6
8.8
9.0
8.9
7.5
9.8
10.6
10.2
8.2
9.6
10.1
9.8
8.7
8.6
8.7
8.3
6.8
6.6
14.1
16.2
13.5
14.6
13.4
14.2
13.8
12.0
15.7
16.2
16.0
12.8
14.5
15.7
15.3
14.0
13.6
14.2
14.1
11.7

PP1

Output is the dollar value of all goods and services produced in the region, including all intermediate goods as well as value added.

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Industry/Year

Appendix Table A16: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Output by Industry
United States of America
(Millions of 2008$)

497.3
0.1
176.7
14.3
11.0
73.1
19.0
17.9
18.1
19.7
41.1
23.0
26.1
14.7
9.5
2.0
18.0
3.3
3.6
6.1

21

-28.8
0.0
0.9
-0.2
4.3
-11.2
-2.8
-3.2
-0.7
-3.0
-4.5
-2.2
-1.3
2.3
-0.6
-0.2
-3.8
-0.5
-0.9
-1.0

22

-33.4
0.0
0.4
-0.4
3.5
-11.2
-3.4
-4.0
-0.8
-3.0
-3.1
-3.1
-1.3
-0.6
-0.8
-0.3
-3.2
-0.5
-0.8
-0.7

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 55 of 56

4,081
8
852
52
146
326
141
272
386
62
212
116
390
75
252
66
296
74
141
214

Annual
Ave.*

964
2
332
4
21
54
26
64
36
15
92
24
60
33
44
9
61
15
26
46

PP2
2,503
4
816
16
63
191
92
168
106
38
178
65
172
60
119
25
154
40
73
123

PP1
4,547
9
909
58
139
433
185
346
395
77
297
126
376
88
259
59
314
75
149
253

1
5,057
11
923
65
172
479
205
387
500
87
284
145
438
94
301
71
357
85
171
282

2
4,422
10
919
61
151
433
189
314
401
71
236
122
383
93
256
55
283
73
144
228

3
4,618
10
915
59
165
427
193
330
421
77
251
131
414
93
277
65
313
78
156
243

4
4,266
9
914
58
156
407
180
287
371
68
228
116
382
88
250
53
270
71
141
217

5
4,388
10
907
58
163
404
179
291
397
71
237
122
402
89
267
59
287
74
144
227

6
4,249
9
895
56
157
371
166
277
395
67
227
120
398
85
254
60
279
73
143
217

7
3,783
8
886
52
140
315
138
229
397
54
191
102
333
72
225
46
232
63
118
182

8
4,473
9
889
54
166
351
160
303
422
71
243
130
434
79
285
75
326
80
156
240

9
4,596
9
889
53
171
355
162
311
439
72
245
135
458
79
297
83
342
84
166
246

10
4,550
8
926
54
167
362
165
303
419
69
233
133
455
80
292
77
328
84
159
236

11
3,797
7
919
51
138
290
126
230
337
53
185
105
369
71
233
58
250
67
124
184

12
4,101
7
917
51
142
307
134
250
381
58
201
120
410
73
257
70
295
76
147
205

13
4,223
7
915
50
146
299
129
270
399
60
208
123
423
72
267
77
324
80
153
221

14
4,087
6
912
49
142
273
116
260
392
56
198
117
410
69
257
77
316
79
148
210

15

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

*Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Employment includes full-time and part-time jobs by place of work. Employees, sole proprietors, and active partners are included, but unpaid family workers and volunteers are excluded
Public sector and farm workers are excluded.

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

Industry/Year
3,554
6
735
46
129
235
97
227
350
49
172
103
368
59
229
71
289
69
130
190

16
3,363
5
669
41
125
202
82
219
342
47
163
98
350
55
221
71
295
67
126
185

17
3,404
5
668
40
128
201
80
223
348
47
166
98
361
54
221
73
303
70
129
189

18

Appendix Table A17: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Private Non-Farm Employment by Industry
United States of America

3,314
5
666
40
125
202
80
217
329
44
155
95
346
60
217
69
291
67
122
184

19
2,830
4
665
39
105
175
63
168
276
34
126
75
287
53
173
55
230
56
100
146

20

1,712
3
640
11
72
67
24
80
92
18
67
34
152
38
99
31
127
32
50
75

21

-238
1
-2
-1
25
-22
-15
-39
-14
-6
-16
-27
-18
5
-12
-5
-43
-9
-19
-21

22

-243
1
-2
-1
20
-21
-15
-39
-13
-6
-13
-30
-20
-2
-13
-6
-39
-9
-17
-18

23

Seidman Research Institute, W.P. Carey School of Business

Page 56 of 56

7,807.8
8.3
1,206.3
198.0
256.7
1,257.2
510.4
376.9
541.4
302.3
759.5
109.5
794.8
275.2
262.6
69.6
545.7
66.2
104.1
163.3

Total Non-Farm Private Sector
Forestry, Fishing, Other
Mining
Utilities
Construction
Manufacturing
Wholesale Trade
Retail Trade
Transp, Warehousing
Information
Finance, Insurance
Real Estate, Rental, Leasing
Profess, Tech Services
Mngmt of Co, Enter
Admin, Waste Services
Educational Services
Health Care, Social Asst
Arts, Enter, Rec
Accom, Food Services
Other Services (excl Gov)

362.6
0.4
54.7
9.5
11.7
59.0
24.0
17.5
25.9
14.1
35.1
5.1
37.1
12.5
12.2
3.2
25.1
3.0
4.8
7.6

Annual
Ave.*
54.2
0.0
16.3
0.6
1.1
4.9
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.5
7.6
0.7
4.3
3.8
1.4
0.3
3.3
0.4
0.7
1.0

PP2
150.7
0.1
45.2
2.5
3.4
18.5
7.9
5.7
5.8
4.2
16.1
1.9
12.6
7.2
3.9
0.9
8.9
1.1
1.8
2.9

PP1
279.8
0.3
47.8
8.7
7.6
44.9
16.8
12.2
21.4
9.0
28.4
3.7
27.3
10.8
8.6
2.2
18.2
2.0
3.8
6.0

1
328.7
0.4
50.7
9.9
10.0
53.7
20.4
14.9
27.8
11.2
30.4
4.5
33.2
12.0
10.7
2.8
21.9
2.5
4.6
7.2

2
311.9
0.4
51.2
9.5
9.7
52.9
20.7
13.6
23.3
10.5
27.9
4.3
30.7
12.5
9.9
2.4
19.5
2.3
4.3
6.5

3
336.8
0.4
52.0
9.5
10.9
55.9
22.5
15.2
24.9
12.1
31.3
4.7
33.9
12.9
11.1
2.9
22.2
2.6
4.7
7.1

4
330.5
0.4
53.1
9.5
10.9
56.8
22.6
14.5
22.7
11.8
30.6
4.5
32.5
12.6
10.7
2.6
20.8
2.5
4.5
6.7

5
350.1
0.4
53.7
9.8
11.5
60.3
23.9
15.5
24.6
13.0
33.2
4.8
34.9
13.1
11.6
2.8
22.5
2.7
4.7
7.2

6
351.3
0.4
53.8
9.6
11.7
58.8
23.9
15.7
25.0
13.1
33.6
4.9
35.5
13.1
11.6
2.9
22.8
2.8
4.7
7.2

7
328.6
0.4
53.8
9.1
11.1
54.4
21.8
14.3
25.7
11.9
30.7
4.6
31.6
11.6
10.8
2.6
20.7
2.6
4.3
6.6

8

Source: Results from the REMI PI+ regional economic forecasting model.

Annual average values refer to years 1 - 20.

Earnings by place of work is the sum of wage and salary disbursements, supplements to wages and salaries, and proprietors’ income.

Total

Industry/Year
382.4
0.4
55.9
9.7
12.7
61.6
25.7
18.2
27.7
15.0
38.0
5.4
39.7
12.9
13.2
3.5
26.4
3.1
5.2
8.1

9
402.9
0.4
56.7
9.9
13.4
65.2
27.4
19.3
29.2
16.2
40.1
5.7
42.6
13.4
14.0
3.8
28.2
3.4
5.5
8.6

10
413.0
0.4
60.1
10.1
13.4
68.4
29.1
19.9
28.5
16.4
40.2
5.8
43.4
13.7
14.2
3.7
28.1
3.5
5.5
8.6

11
370.7
0.4
60.7
9.9
12.0
60.6
25.2
17.2
24.1
14.3
35.2
5.2
37.8
12.7
12.4
3.2
24.4
3.1
4.8
7.4

12
398.2
0.4
62.0
10.0
12.3
65.1
27.3
18.8
27.1
15.7
38.3
5.6
41.4
13.2
13.5
3.6
27.1
3.4
5.3
8.1

13
413.7
0.4
63.0
10.1
12.8
66.4
27.8
20.3
28.6
16.7
40.7
5.8
43.0
13.4
14.2
3.8
29.2
3.6
5.5
8.6

14
412.5
0.4
64.1
10.1
12.9
64.8
26.9
20.7
28.7
16.8
40.4
5.8
42.8
13.2
14.1
3.8
29.4
3.6
5.4
8.5

15
379.9
0.3
53.6
9.7
12.3
60.4
25.0
19.5
26.5
15.9
37.6
5.4
40.1
12.0
13.2
3.7
28.2
3.5
5.0
8.1

16
368.4
0.3
49.6
9.0
12.2
57.2
23.2
19.7
26.4
15.7
37.1
5.3
39.2
11.6
13.1
3.7
28.8
3.4
4.9
7.9

17

Appendix Table A18: Total Economic Impacts - Production/Post-Production Phase of the Rosemont Copper Project - Earnings by Place of Work by Industry
United States of America
(Millions of 2008$)

377.0
0.3
50.3
9.0
12.5
58.5
23.4
20.6
27.0
16.4
38.4
5.4
40.3
11.6
13.3
3.8
29.6
3.6
5.0
8.1

18
374.4
0.3
50.8
9.0
12.3
59.6
24.0
20.6
25.9
16.0
37.1
5.3
38.9
12.5
13.0
3.6
29.1
3.5
4.8
8.0

19
340.9
0.3
51.5
8.9
11.1
55.2
21.4
18.2
22.7
14.0
32.8
4.7
34.2
11.5
11.3
3.1
25.5
3.2
4.2
7.0

20

240.0
0.2
49.2
3.2
9.0
33.5
13.8
12.8
10.7
9.9
22.8
3.4
22.9
9.1
8.0
2.3
18.8
2.4
3.0
4.9

21

64.4
0.1
0.8
0.5
5.5
11.2
4.5
4.1
3.0
3.0
6.2
1.2
7.0
3.2
2.8
0.9
6.7
0.8
1.1
1.7

22

46.9
0.1
0.6
0.3
4.5
8.3
2.9
3.1
2.2
2.1
4.8
0.8
5.1
1.6
2.0
0.7
5.2
0.6
0.8
1.3

23