In 2019, Zimbabwe’s government announced a national objective to build a US$12 billion annual mining economy by the end of 2023, identifying lithium as one of the key minerals expected to contribute to that target. Premier African Minerals’ Zulu Lithium and Tantalum Project was subsequently referenced in public discourse as one of the projects aligned with this broader ambition, Mining Zimbabwe can report.
By Rudairo Mapuranga
As of 2026, the national target has not been achieved. The development path of the Zulu project—characterised by multiple processing plant configurations, extended commissioning and testing periods, and the absence of sustained commercial production to date—offers an illustrative example of the operational and strategic challenges that can arise during mine development, even where geological potential exists.
A review of Premier African Minerals’ publicly available disclosures indicates prolonged periods of operational review, testing, and reassessment at the project level. These disclosures reflect challenges that extended beyond typical start-up delays and instead required repeated technical evaluation and strategic adjustment, raising broader questions around project execution, sequencing, and decision-making frameworks rather than attributing fault to specific individuals.
One of the most visible features of the project’s evolution has been the use of two separate processing plant solutions over time, resulting in additional capital expenditure and extended development timelines.
The Initial Processing Plant
For more than two years, the company reported ongoing testing, optimisation, and modification of the original flotation plant. Public announcements referred to:
Extended optimisation programmes and laboratory and pilot-scale testing
Engagements with original equipment manufacturers regarding operational parameters such as reagent dosing, flow rates, and residence times
Engineering reviews and incremental process adjustments
Despite these measures, the company later disclosed that the plant had not achieved consistent commercial performance. The length of the optimisation phase, without a definitive production outcome, suggests that the technical challenges proved more complex than initially anticipated, or that the scale and configuration of the plant required reassessment over time.
Introduction of a Second Plant
In October 2025, Premier African Minerals announced the acquisition of a new 15–20 tonne-per-hour flotation plant from a different supplier. This decision represented a material change in processing strategy and followed several years of reported commissioning challenges.
By the time this adjustment was announced, company filings indicated that:
- Financial obligations had increased, including creditor-related matters
- Shareholders had experienced dilution through successive capital raises
- Competitive dynamics within Zimbabwe’s lithium sector had evolved
While the new plant may represent an appropriate technical response, its timing underscores the financial and strategic trade-offs associated with late-stage project modifications and raises legitimate questions about whether earlier intervention or alternative sequencing could have altered outcomes. These questions arise from observable timelines rather than assertions of negligence or intent.
Operational Progress and Outcomes
Throughout the project’s development, the company regularly communicated progress in the form of test work, optimisation initiatives, and engineering reviews. However, these activities did not translate into sustained commercial production within the expected timeframe.
The recurring technical issues disclosed—particularly around flotation performance, reagent regimes, and mass balance stability—are commonly encountered in complex metallurgical projects. Their persistence at Zulu suggests that the challenges were operational in nature rather than geological, and that their resolution required extended technical input and reassessment.
Public information does not indicate significant changes to operational leadership or technical advisory structures until later stages of the commissioning process. This observation is drawn solely from disclosures and does not infer causation, responsibility, or professional inadequacy.
Financial Implications
The operational delays had identifiable financial consequences, as reflected in the company’s public statements:
- Creditor actions, including the JR Goddard Contracting matter resolved through a structured settlement in late 2025
- Additional equity raisings that diluted existing shareholders
- Opportunity costs associated with delayed market entry during a period of heightened lithium sector activity
These outcomes reflect the interconnected nature of operational performance, financing structures, and market timing in capital-intensive mining projects.
Governance Adjustments
In late 2025 and early 2026, the company announced changes to its leadership and management structure, including appointments with a stronger operational focus. These changes were presented as part of an effort to strengthen execution as the project moved into its next phase.
Such adjustments are not uncommon in long-cycle mining developments and may be interpreted as a response to evolving project requirements rather than as an admission of prior failure.
Broader Context
The Zulu project underscores a well-established principle in the mining industry: geological endowment alone does not guarantee commercial success. Project outcomes are shaped by execution capability, technical alignment, capital availability, and timing. Public disclosures suggest that while the resource base and infrastructure remain in place, the project’s development trajectory has been more complex and protracted than initially anticipated.
For Zimbabwe’s wider mining ambitions, the experience highlights the importance of aligning national policy objectives with project-level execution realities. The success of resource-led economic strategies ultimately depends on the ability of individual projects to transition efficiently from development to production within evolving market and technical conditions.
This article is based exclusively on information available in the public domain, including corporate announcements, regulatory filings, and published reports. It analyses observable events and disclosed outcomes and does not speculate on the intentions, competence, or motivations of any individuals or entities involved.
