Mukondo mine
copper and cobalt mine in Katanga Province, the Congo
Mukondo Mine (French: Mine de Mukondo) is a copper and cobalt mine in Katanga Province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. As of 2011 it was operated by the Central African Mining and Exploration Company (CAMEC; Société Centrafricaine d’Exploration et d’Exploitation Minière). It may be the richest cobalt reserve in the world.
Location
In July 2008 CAMEC said the resource estimate at Mukondo was 70 million tons of ore containing 1.5 million tons of copper and 500,000 tonnes of cobalt. The cobalt grade averages 1.2%, an exceptionally high concentration.
The Mukondo mountain has a height of over 1,700 metres (5,600 ft).
Mining is relatively cheap since waste rock can simply be pushed off the mountain rather than hauled away.
Ownership changes
In January 2001 the Kababancola Mining Company (KMC) was established as a copper and cobalt mining partnership for a 25-year term.
Tremalt, controlled by the Zimbabwean businessman John Bredenkamp, held 80% of KMC while the state-owned Gécamines held 20%
In June 2006 Dan Gertler bought Tremalt for about $60m.
The sale was to Prairie International, of which Dan Gertler's family trust was a major shareholder.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Mukondo mine” is copper and cobalt mine in Katanga Province, the Congo. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Mukondo, mine and copper, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “copper and cobalt mine in Katanga Province, the Congo” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 7, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6933573. Authority coordinates are -10.725, 26.346. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 2011, 2008, 2001 and 2006.
Modern boundaries and familiar names can conceal earlier jurisdictions or structures that do not align with the present site. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Mukondo mine”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Mukondo mine primary sources, Mukondo mine archive and Mukondo research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Mukondo mine”?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Mukondo mine” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.