March 2020 Investor Meetings

Investor Meetings
March 3-6, 2020

Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
2
Both these slides and the accompanying oral presentations contain certain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and forward-looking information within
the meaning of the Securities Act (Ontario) and comparable legislation in other provinces (collectively referred to herein as forward-looking statements). Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as
“plans”, “expects” or “does not expect”, “is expected”, “budget”, “scheduled”, “estimates”, “forecasts”, “intends”, “anticipates” or “does not anticipate”, or “believes”, or variation of such words and phrases or state that certain actions,
events or results “may”, “could”, “should”, “would”, “might” or “will” be taken, occur or be achieved. Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results,
performance or achievements of Teck to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements concerning: the goals, targets and future expectations stated in the slide titled "Our Key Priorities"; EBITDA and other benefits and value to be generated
from our RACE21TM innovation-driven efficiency program and the associated implementation costs and timing; our intention to implement certain RACE21TM programs more broadly across other operations and to identify and
implement additional RACE21TM projects; expectations regarding the Neptune Bulk Terminals facility upgrade including costs, benefits and timing thereof; targeted cost reduction amounts and timing; all projections and expectations
regarding QB2 and QB3, including, but not limited to, those set out in the "QB2 Value Creation" and “Quebrada Blanca” Appendix (including, but not limited to, statements that QB2 will be a world class, low cost copper opportunity,
statements and expectations regarding the value and amount of contingent consideration, timing of first production, long-life and expansion potential, projected IRR, QB2 throughput, mine life, projected copper production including
Teck’s pro-forma copper exposure estimates, strip-ratios, costs (including C1 and AISC), reserves and resources, construction schedule and ownership of pipelines and port facilities, expansion and extension potential, all economic
and financial projections regarding the QB2 project including expected EBITDA from the project); Teck’s share of remaining equity capital and timing of contributions relating to our QB2 project; Teck's goal to be a carbon neutral
operator by 2050; availability of funding from our credit facilities; potential growth options; production, sales, unit costs and other cost guidance, expectations and forecasts for our products, business units and individual operations
and our expectation that we will meet that guidance; capital expenditure guidance and expectations; capitalized stripping guidance; mine lives and duration of operations at our various mines and operations; our ability to extend the
lives of certain mines and to increase production to offset the closure of other operations; objectives of Teck's capital allocation framework, including with respect to its dividend policy (including a base $0.20 per share annual
dividend), potential share repurchases and/or supplemental dividends, and maintenance of investment grade metrics; supply, demand and outlook regarding coal, copper, zinc and energy for Teck and global markets generally; our
reserve and resource estimates; all guidance including but not limited to production guidance, sales and unit cost guidance and capital expenditures guidance; future commodity prices; the benefits of our innovation strategy and
initiatives described under the “Technology and Innovation” Appendix and elsewhere, including regarding smart shovels, autonomous haul trucks and artificial intelligence, and the savings potential associated therewith; the coal
market generally; growth potential for our steelmaking coal production, including our expectation that our coal reserves support approximately 27+ million tonnes of production in 2020 and beyond; strip ratios; capital expenditures in
coal; West Coast port capacity increases and access; capital costs for water treatment; the copper market generally; copper growth potential and expectations regarding the potential production profile of our various copper projects;
the zinc market generally; anticipated zinc production, capital investments and costs; our potential zinc projects, including but not limited to the Red Dog extension project; benefits and timing of the Red Dog VIP2 project; the energy
market generally; the potential for significant EBITDA upside potential in our Energy unit and steady cash flow; anticipated Fort Hills production and cost estimates and debottlenecking opportunities; potential benefits and capacity
increase from debottlenecking opportunities at Fort Hills and costs associated with debottlenecking; production estimates and timing for regulatory approvals at Frontier; potential for longer term expansion opportunities at Fort Hills
and associated costs; Teck’s energy outlook; and the low carbon intensity of Fort Hills.
The forward-looking statements are based on and involve numerous assumptions, risks and uncertainties and actual results may vary materially. These statements are based on assumptions, including, but not limited to, general
business and economic conditions, interest rates, the supply and demand for, deliveries of, and the level and volatility of prices of, zinc, copper, coal, blended bitumen, and other primary metals, minerals and products as well as
steel, oil, natural gas, petroleum, and related products, the timing of the receipt of regulatory and governmental approvals for our development projects and other operations and new technologies, our costs of production and
production and productivity levels, as well as those of our competitors, power prices, continuing availability of water and power resources for our operations, market competition, the accuracy of our reserve estimates (including with
respect to size, grade and recoverability) and the geological, operational and price assumptions on which these are based, conditions in financial markets, the future financial performance of the company, our ability to successfully
implement our technology and innovation strategy, the performance of new technologies in accordance with our expectations, our ability to attract and retain skilled staff, our ability to procure equipment and operating supplies,
positive results from the studies on our expansion projects, our coal and other product inventories, our ability to secure adequate transportation for our products, our ability to obtain permits for our operations and expansions, our
ongoing relations with our employees and business partners and joint venturers, our expectations with respect to the carbon intensity of our operations, assumptions regarding returns of cash to shareholders include assumptions
regarding our future business and prospects, other uses for cash or retaining cash. Reserve and resource life estimates assume the mine life of longest lived resource in the relevant commodity is achieved, assumes production at
planned rates and in some cases development of as yet undeveloped projects. Assumptions are also included in the footnotes to various slides. Assumptions regarding the costs and benefits of the Neptune Bulk Terminals
expansion and other projects include assumptions that the relevant project is constructed and operated in accordance with current expectations. Our Guidance tables include footnotes with further assumptions relating to our
guidance. Our anticipated RACE21TM related EBITDA improvements and associated costs assume that the relevant projects are implemented in accordance with our plans and budget and that the relevant projects will achieve the

Caution Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
3
expected production and operating results, and are based on current commodity price assumptions and forecast sale volumes. Payment of dividends is in the discretion of the board of directors. Assumptions regarding QB2 include
current project assumptions and assumptions regarding the final feasibility study. Assumptions are also included in the footnotes to the slides.
Assumptions regarding our potential reserve and resource life assume that all resources are upgraded to reserves and that all reserves and resources could be mined. Our estimated profit and EBITDA and EBITDA sensitivity
estimates are based on the commodity price and assumptions stated on the relevant slide or footnote, as well as other assumptions including foreign exchange rates. Cost statements are based on assumptions noted in the relevant
slide or footnote. Statements regarding future production are based on the assumption of project sanctions and mine production.
Factors that may cause actual results to vary materially include, but are not limited to, changes in commodity and power prices, changes in market demand for our products, changes in interest and currency exchange rates, acts of
governments and the outcome of legal proceedings, inaccurate geological and metallurgical assumptions (including with respect to the size, grade and recoverability of mineral reserves and resources), unanticipated operational
difficulties (including failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate in accordance with specifications or expectations, cost escalation, unavailability of materials and equipment, government action or delays in the receipt of
government approvals, industrial disturbances or other job action, adverse weather conditions and unanticipated events related to health, safety and environmental matters), union labour disputes, political risk, social unrest, failure
of customers or counterparties (including logistics suppliers) to perform their contractual obligations, changes in our credit ratings, unanticipated increases in costs to construct our development projects, difficulty in obtaining permits,
inability to address concerns regarding permits of environmental impact assessments, and changes or further deterioration in general economic conditions. Certain operations and projects are not controlled by us; schedules and
costs may be adjusted by our partners, and timing of spending and operation of the operation or project is not in our control. Current and new technologies relating to our Elk Valley water treatment efforts may not perform as
anticipated, and ongoing monitoring may reveal unexpected environmental conditions requiring additional remedial measures. EBITDA improvements may be impacted by the effectiveness of our projects, actual commodity prices
and sales volumes, among other matters.
We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements except as required under securities laws. Further information concerning risks and uncertainties associated with these forward-looking statements and our business
can be found in our Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2018, filed under our profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR (www.sec.gov) under cover of Form 40-F, as well as subsequent filings that
can also be found under our profile.
QB2 Project Disclosure
All economic analysis with respect to the QB2 project based on a development case which includes inferred resources within the life of mine plan, referred to as the Sanction Case, which is the case on which Teck is basing its
development decision for the QB2 project. Inferred resources are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Inferred
resources are subject to greater uncertainty than measured or indicated resources and it cannot be assumed that they will be successfully upgraded to measured and indicated through further drilling. Nonetheless, based on the
nature of the mineralization, Teck has used a mine plan including inferred resources as the development mine plan for the QB2 project.
The economic analysis of the Sanction Case, which includes inferred resources, may be compared to economic analysis regarding a hypothetical mine plan which does not include the use of inferred resources as mill feed, referred
to as the Reserve Case, and which is set out in Appendix slides “QB2 Project Economics Comparison” and “QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison” and is further discussed in our 2018 Annual Information Form filed under our
profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR (www.sec.gov).
We are developing a new baseline schedule and updated capital cost estimate, which is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2020.
The scientific and technical information regarding the QB2 project and Teck's other material properties was prepared under the supervision of Rodrigo Marinho, P. Geo, who is an employee of Teck. Mr. Marinho is a qualified
person, as defined under National Instrument 43-101.

Our Key Priorities
4Forecast results. Scale not necessarily representative of EBITDA1 results or impact.
2019
Adjusted
EBITDA1
$4.3 billion
QB22
Neptune
• Our Neptune facility upgrade secures a long term, low cost
and reliable supply chain for our steelmaking coal business
• Helps us deliver on our commitments to shareholders
and customers
• Company-wide cost reduction program underway
• Increased target for total reductions to ~$610 million
through the end of 2020
• Accelerating RACE21TM our innovation-driven business
transformation program
• Targeting ~$1 billion in ongoing annualized EBITDA1
improvements by end of 2021
• QB2 is a long-life, low-cost operation with major
expansion potential
• Rebalances our portfolio over time
• QB3 has potential to become a top five global copper
producer
Focus on health and safety and sustainability leadership
Cost Reduction
Program4
RACE21TM 3

QB2 Value Creation
Delivers on Copper Growth Strategy
• Rebalances Teck's portfolio over time to make
the contribution from copper similar to
steelmaking coal
• World class, low cost copper opportunity in an
excellent geopolitical jurisdiction
• First production in late 2021
• Very attractive IRR1
‒ At US$3.00/lb copper, unlevered IRR is 19% and
levered IRR is 30%
• Vast, long life deposit with expansion potential
(QB3)
• QB2 partnership and financing plan dramatically
reduces Teck’s capital requirements
5
Based on Sanction Case (Including 199 Mt Inferred Resources)
Refer to “QB2 Project Economics Comparison” and “QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison” slides for Reserve Case (Excluding Inferred Resources)
The description of the QB2 project Sanction Case includes inferred resources that are considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that
would enable them to be categorized as mineral reserves. Inferred resources are subject to greater uncertainty than measured or indicated resources and it cannot be assumed that they
will be successfully upgraded to measured and indicated through further drilling.
Low Strip Ratio2
QB2 (0.7:1)
Antamina (2.9:1)3
Collahuasi (3.4:1)3
Escondida (2.6:1)3

• Implementing existing, proven technology
across the mining value chain to improve
productivity and lower costs
• Implemented initiatives aimed at achieving
$160 million1 in annualized EBITDA2
improvements as of the end of 2019
- Exceeded our initial target of $150 million
• Currently includes ~30 projects
- operations
6
RACE21TM
Our innovation-driven business transformation program
$160 million2
End 2019
$500 million
End 2020
$1 billion
End 2021
Targeting total of $1 billion of annualized
EBITDA2 improvements by end 2021
RACE21TM
Future Path to Value
Cumulative
AnnualizedEBITDA2
10% of
value created
Predictive MaintenanceProcessing Analytics Mining Analytics
25% of
value created65% of
value created
$160 million1 in annualized EBITDA2 improvements in 2019

• Secures a long term, low cost and
reliable supply chain for our
steelmaking coal business
• Facilitates market access through all
cycles
• Significant returns generated from
lower operating costs and increased
flexibility to respond to market
opportunities
• Expected completion in Q1 2021
7
Neptune Facility Upgrade

Cost Reduction Program
Implemented in Q3 2019 in response to global economic uncertainty
• Increased our total targeted reductions to ~$610 million of previously planned
spending through the end of 2020, vs. the previous target of $500 million
- In Q4 2019, achieved ~$210 million of capital and operating reductions,
exceeding our target of $170 million
- For 2020, expect ~$400 million of capital and operating reductions
• Expect to eliminate ~500 full-time equivalent positions by the end of 2020
8
Does not include initiatives that would reduce production volumes
or that could adversely affect the environment or health and safety

Preparing for the Future in Steelmaking Coal
1
. on-GAAP financial measures.
on-GAAP financial measure.
1. Forecast results. Scale not necessarily representative of results or impact. Expectations for 2021 production show the three-year average production guidance for 2021-2023.
2. Steelmaking coal unit costs are reported in Canadian dollars per tonne N See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides and “Use of Non-GAAP Financial
Measures” section of Teck’s Q4 2019 news release for further information.
3. 2021 adjusted site cost of sales are currently not expected to exceed $60 per tonne. Teck plans to issue official guidance for 2021 unit costs with its Q4 2020 report in February 2021.
N See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides and “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of Teck’s Q4 2019 news release for further information.
Expect to be well positioned in production and unit site costs from Q4 2020
25.7
2019A
23.0-25.0
2020E
26.0-27.0
2021-2023E
Production1 (Million tonnes) Adjusted Site Cost of Sales1,2 (C$/tonne)
Unit costs expected to fall
with higher production from Q4 2020
2020 guidance reflects rail and port constraints, Neptune
shutdown, extreme weather, and record site inventories
$65
2019A
$63-67
2020E
<$60
2021E
3

Focus on Sustainability Leadership
Teck’s performance on top ESG ratings
9
• Top-ranked mining
company 2019 World &
North American Indices
• In the index for 10
consecutive years
• “A” rating since 2013
(scale of CCC – AAA)
• Outperforming all 10 of our
largest industry peers
• Tied for 2nd in mining
& metals category
• Ranked in the 100th
percentile
• 2020 Global 100 Most
Sustainable Corporations
list ─ Corporate Knights
• Only mining company
• Environment and Social
Scores top 10% out of
all industries
• Listed on Index Series
• 91% percentile rank in
mining and metals industry

Low-Carbon Producer
10
GHG Emissions Intensity Ranges
Among ICMM Members1
(kgCO2e per tonne of product)
Teck in bottom
quartile for miners
Copper
Steelmaking
Coal
Well positioned for Low-Carbon
Economy
Carbon pricing already built into
majority of business
Among world’s lowest GHG
intensities for steelmaking
coal and copper production
Fort Hills – one of the lowest
carbon intensities among North
American oil sands producers on a
wells-to-wheels basis2
5
9
150
100
175
601

Carbon Neutral Operator by 2050
• Demonstrates Teck’s support of the
transition to a low-carbon economy and
worldwide efforts to meet the goal of the
Paris Agreement to limit global
temperature increase
• Aligns with commitments by Canada and
Chile to be carbon neutral by 2050
• Teck has set out an initial roadmap to
achieve carbon neutrality by first avoiding
emissions and then eliminating or
minimizing emissions
• Announced a long-term renewable power
purchase agreement with
AES Corporation for approximately half
the power required for operation of QB2
11

Global Tailings Review:
• Co-convened by ICMM,
UN Environment
Programme & Principles
for Responsible
Investment
• Goal of establishing an
international standard for
safe management of
tailings facilities
• Discussions on draft
standard with expert panel
and co-convenors ongoing
12
International Council on Mining & Metals
1. What are ICMM’s Mining Principles?
- Define what good practice in environmental,
social and governance looks like for industry
- 10 principles backed up by a comprehensive
set of performance expectations
- Required for all ICMM member companies
2. How are they implemented?
- Robust site-level validation
- Public disclosure of validation activities and
outcomes
3. What is the value?
- Demonstrate ESG performance at the asset
level
ICMM Mining Principles Launched

0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2029
2031
2033
2035
2037
2039
2041
2043
Strong Financial Position
• ~C$5.8 billion1 of liquidity; including $532 million1
in cash
• US$4.0 billion committed revolving credit facility
recently extended to November 2024
• Investment grade credit rating
• US$2.5 billion QB2 project finance facility closed
in Q4 2019; first borrowing expected in Q1 2020
• QB2 partnership and financing plan dramatically
reduces Teck’s capital requirements; No
contributions to project capital expected until
early 2021
• Shares outstanding reduced to 547 million1
13
Note Maturity Profile4 (C$M)
Notes outstanding reduced from
US$7.2 billion in September 2015
to US$3.2 billion2
No significant note maturities until 2035

A Perfect Storm
14
• Coronavirus
• QB2 project update
• Neptune facility upgrade
• Lower coal production
in H1 2020
• Q1 2020 logistics challenges
• Frontier
• ESG: Climate change
and steelmaking coal

Our Key Priorities
15Forecast results. Scale not necessarily representative of EBITDA1 results or impact.
2019
Adjusted
EBITDA1
$4.3 billion
QB22
Neptune
• Our Neptune facility upgrade secures a long term, low cost
and reliable supply chain for our steelmaking coal business
• Helps us deliver on our commitments to shareholders
and customers
• Company-wide cost reduction program underway
• Increased target for total reductions to ~$610 million
through the end of 2020
• Accelerating RACE21TM our innovation-driven business
transformation program
• Targeting ~$1 billion in ongoing annualized EBITDA1
improvements by end of 2021
• QB2 is a long-life, low-cost operation with major
expansion potential
• Rebalances our portfolio over time
• QB3 has potential to become a top five global copper
producer
Focus on health and safety and sustainability leadership
Cost Reduction
Program4
RACE21TM 3

Notes
Slide 4: Our Key Priorities
1. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
2. Scale suggests Teck’s potential attributable share of the first 5 full years of annual EBITDA, assuming a C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.33. Annual EBITDA for the project based on the first five full years of copper equivalent production is US$1.1
billion to US$1.4 billion based on feasibility price assumptions and production plans. Copper equivalent production calculated assuming US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver without adjusting for payability.
EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
3. Targeting total of $1 billion annualized EBITDA improvements by end of 2021. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
4. Targeting reductions of approximately $610 million of previously planned spending through the end of 2020.
Slide 5: QB2 Value Creation
1. As at January 1, 2019. Assumes optimized funding structure. Does not include contingent consideration. Assumes US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver.
2. 1 truck = a strip ratio of 0.1.
3. Source: Wood Mackenzie over 2021-2040.
Slide 6: RACE21TM
1. Based on commodity prices at December 31, 2019 and assumed to remain in effect through 2020: steelmaking coal US$136.50 per tonne, copper US$2.79 per pound, zinc US$1.04 per pound and a C$/US$ exchange rate of $1.30.
2. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides and “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of the Q4 2019 news release for further information.
Slide 10: Low-Carbon Producer
1. Source: ICMM Report “The cost of carbon pricing: competitiveness implications for the mining and metals industry”, April 2013.
2. Source: IHS Energy Special Report “Comparing GHG Intensity of the Oil Sands and the Average US Crude Oil” May 2014. SCO stands for Synthetic Crude Oil.
Slide 13: Strong Financial Position
1. As at February 20, 2020.
2. Public notes outstanding as at December 31, 2019.
Slide 15: Our Key Priorities
1. EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
2. Scale suggests Teck’s potential attributable share of the first 5 full years of annual EBITDA, assuming a C$/US$ exchange rate of 1.33. Annual EBITDA for the project based on the first five full years of copper equivalent production is US$1.1
billion to US$1.4 billion based on feasibility price assumptions and production plans. Copper equivalent production calculated assuming US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver without adjusting for payability.
EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
3. Targeting total of $1 billion annualized EBITDA improvements by end of 2021. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
4. Targeting reductions of approximately $610 million of previously planned spending through the end of 2020.
17

Quebrada Blanca
Photo: Concentrator
Grinding Area

QB2 Project Disclosure
All economic analysis with respect to the QB2 project based on a development case which includes inferred resources within the life of mine plan,
referred to as the Sanction Case, which is the case on which Teck is basing its development decision for the QB2 project. Inferred resources are
considered too speculative geologically to have the economic considerations applied to them that would enable them to be categorized as mineral
reserves. Inferred resources are subject to greater uncertainty than measured or indicated resources and it cannot be assumed that they will be
successfully upgraded to measured and indicated through further drilling. Nonetheless, based on the nature of the mineralization, Teck has used a
mine plan including inferred resources as the development mine plan for the QB2 project.
The economic analysis of the Sanction Case, which includes inferred resources, may be compared to economic analysis regarding a hypothetical
mine plan which does not include the use of inferred resources as mill feed, referred to as the Reserve Case, and which is set out in Appendix slides
“QB2 Project Economics Comparison” and “QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison” and is further discussed in our Annual Information Form filed
under our profile on SEDAR (www.sedar.com) and on EDGAR (www.sec.gov).
We are developing a new baseline schedule and updated capital cost estimate, which is expected to be completed in the first quarter of 2020.
The scientific and technical information regarding the QB2 project was prepared under the supervision of Rodrigo Marinho, P. Geo, who is an
employee of Teck. Mr. Marinho is a qualified person, as defined under National Instrument 43-101.
19

Workforce1,2
~7,500
QB2 Project Update
SAG Mill #1 Shell Lift, January 2020
Progress1
25%
Overall
20
Earthworks1
47%
Concrete1
29%
Engineering, Procurement &
Contract Formation1
>95%

 Vast, long life deposit in favourable jurisdiction
 Very low strip ratio
 Low all-in sustaining costs (AISC)1
 Will be a top 20 producer
 High grade, clean concentrates
 Significant brownfield development
 Community agreements in place and strong local relationships
 Fully sanctioned and construction well underway
 Expansion potential (QB3) with potential to be a top 5 producer
Highlights
Chile
Peru
Bolivia
Tarapacá
Region
Arica y
Parinacota
Region
Antofagasta
Region
Arica
Iquique
QB2
Teck, SMM, SC, ENAMI
Collahuasi
Anglo American,
Glencore, Mitsui
El Abra
Freeport-McMoRan,
Codelco
Radomiro
Tomic
Codelco Chuquicamata
Codelco
Ministro
Hales
Codelco
Cerro
Colorado
BHP
Spence
BHP
Centinela
Antofagasta, Marubeni
Gabriela Mistral
Codelco
Escondida
BHP, Rio Tinto, Mitsubishi Argentina
Sierra Gorda
KGHM, SMM, SC
Location
QB2 Project
Executing on a world class development asset
21

QB2 Rebalances Teck’s Portfolio
Delivers on copper growth strategy
• Rebalances Teck's portfolio over time to make the
contribution from copper similar to steelmaking
coal
• On a consolidated basis copper production is
doubled
• On an attributable basis copper production
increases by ~60%
• Based on expected long term prices for copper
and steelmaking coal, increased copper
production could reduce steelmaking coal to below
50% of EBITDA3 over time
• QB3 and other copper development projects could
further increase copper exposure and
diversification
22
294
174
116
2018A Pro Forma
QB2 Consolidated
(100%)
QB2 Attrib. (60%)
Teck 2018A
2
Teck's Annual Copper Production (kt Cu)
290 kt2
1
2941
584

QB2 is a World Class Copper Opportunity
23
Project Metrics1
(100%)
US$2.4-$4.2B
After-Tax NPV8%
2,3
14%-18%
Unlevered After-Tax IRR2,3
US$1.1-$1.4B
First 5 Full Years Annual EBITDA2
316 kt
First 5 Full Years Annual CuEq Production4
US$1.28/lb
First 5 Full Years C1 Cash Cost (net of by-products)5
US$1.38/lb
First 5 Full Years AISC (net of by-products)6
QB2 Uses <25% of R&R
Continuing to Grow
US$4.7B
Capital Cost (100%)7
Transaction
Metrics1
~US$3B
Implied Value of Teck's 90% Ownership
Prior to Sumitomo Transaction8
30%-40%
Teck's Levered After-Tax IRR Post Transaction2,3,9

473228
236
1,782 683
2019E Pre
Close
2019E Post
Close
2020E 2021E 2022E
Teck Contribution Sumitomo Contribution Project Finance
Increasing Teck's Returns on QB2
Enhancing IRR Reducing Teck's Equity Contributions
24
Teck's Post Transaction After-Tax IRR1 (%)
19%
30%
21%
35%
24%
40%
Unlevered Levered
US$3 US$3.25 US$3.50
• Transaction with Sumitomo and US$2.5 billion
project financing significantly enhances Teck's
IRR
• Transaction proceeds and project financing
reduce Teck's equity contributions to ~US$693
million3 with no contributions required
post-closing until late 20204
QB2 Funding Profile Before Escalation2 (US$M)
Sumitomo
true-up post
closing
$138
$1,062
$2,052
$1,392
$95

QB2’s Competitive Cost Position
Competitive Operating Cost &
Capital Intensity Low Cash Cost Position
25
C1 Cash Cost3 & AISC4 Curve1 (US$/lb, 2023E)• Given the exceptionally low strip ratio, consistent grade
profile, compact site layout, and high level of automation,
QB2 is expected to have attractive and relatively stable
operating costs
• Exceptional strip ratio of 0.70 LOM, meaning for every one
tonne of ore mined, only 0.70 tonnes of waste need to be
mined (0.44 over first 5 full years)
− Compares to other world class asset strip ratios of 3.5
for Antamina, 3.1 for Collahuasi, and 2.5 for Escondida1
− Major benefit to sustaining capital since it reduces
mobile fleet size and replacement costs
• Capital intensity of ~US$15k/tpa copper equivalent is in line
or lower than recent comparably sized projects with the
ability to amortize these costs over a very long mine life2
Antamina
Escondida
Collahuasi
-
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
- 25% 50% 75% 100%
US$/lb
Cumulative Paid Metal (%)
AISC C1 Cash Cost
QB2
(first 5 full years)
US$1.38/lb
QB2
(first 5 full years)
US$1.28/lb

Vast, Long Life Deposit at QB
QB2 Uses Less than 25% of R&R Extension Potential
• Resource exclusive of Reserve increased 40% since
2017
• Initial 28 year mine life processes <25% of the currently
defined Reserve and Resource Tonnage
• Deposit is capable of supporting a very long mine life
based on throughput rate of 143 ktpd by utilizing further
tailings capacity at already identified sites
• Actively evaluating potential options to exploit value of
full resource through mill expansion and / or mine life
extension
• Beyond the extensive upside included in the defined QB
deposit, the district geology is highly prospective for
exploration discovery and resource addition
− Mineralization is open in multiple directions with
drilling ongoing
26.
1,202 1,259 1,202
1,325 1,472
199
2,141
3,393
Sanction Case
Mine Plan
Tonnage
2017 Annual
Information Form
2018 Updated
Resource
Tonnage
Inferred
M&I (Exclusive)
P&P
1
+40%
Reserve and Resource Tonnage (Mt)
<25% of current
Reserve and
Resource
Tonnage

QB3 – Long-Term Growth
Expansion potential to realize full potential of the orebody
• QB2 utilizes less than 25% of resource
• QB3 evaluating options to exploit the full value of the
resource through mill expansion and / or mine life extension
• Scoping Study underway to be followed by a Prefeasibility
Study
27.
• 2018 drilling returned long intervals of +0.5% Cu, with
predictable sulfide zonation patterns
Key Valuation Drivers
• Defining the full size of the deposit through drilling
• Proactive evaluation of long-term options for production
• Maximizing the performance of the QB2 plant
• Leveraging the QB2 infrastructure to target production
increases at a lower capital intensity
Copper Mineralization from 2018 Drilling1

Clear Path to Production at QB2
Construction Approach Operational Readiness
• Key project elements are segregated by area and can be managed more
efficiently reducing risk:
– Open pit mine (120 Mtpa peak);
– Concentrator (143 ktpd);
– Tailings storage facility (1.4 Bt capacity);
– Concentrate and water supply pipelines (165 km); and
– Port facility (including a desalination plant and concentrate filtration plant)
• QB will own and operate its pipelines and port facilities
28
• Early focus on operational readiness and commissioning to ensure a
seamless transition to operations
• Organizational design incorporating Integrated Operations and Business
Partner Model
– Driving value by linking process, people and workplace design
• Engagement of experienced consultants to support detailed plan
development and execution, integrated operations design and systems,
and commissioning planning
Port and Desalination
Power
Pipelines
TMF
Mill Mine
Water Pipeline Concentrate Pipeline Power Line Roads

QB2 Project Economics Comparison
29
Mine Life years 25 28 28
Throughput ktpd 140 143 143
LOM Mill Feed Mt 1,259 1,400 1,400
Strip Ratio
First 5 Full Years 0.40 0.16 0.44
LOM 0.52 0.41 0.70
Copper Production
First 5 Full Years ktpa 275 286 290
LOM ktpa 238 228 247
Copper Equivalent Production
First 5 Full Years ktpa 301 313 316
LOM ktpa 262 256 279
C1 Cash Cost
First 5 Full Years US$/lb $1.28 $1.29 $1.28
LOM US$/lb $1.39 $1.47 $1.37
AISC
First 5 Full Years US$/lb $1.34 $1.40 $1.38
LOM US$/lb $1.43 $1.53 $1.42
Annual EBITDA
First 5 Full Years US$B $1.0 $1.0 $1.1
LOM US$B $0.8 $0.7 $0.9
NPV @ 8% US$B $1.3 $2.0 $2.4
IRR % 12% 13% 14%
Payback Period years 5.8 5.7 5.6
Mine Life / Payback 4.3 4.9 5.0
Sanction
Case
Reserve
Case
2016 FS
(Reserves)
After-Tax
Economics
General
OperatingMetrics
(AnnualAvg.)
4
6
5
2
2
2
2
2
7 8
3
2
11
Sensitivity Analysis1Changes Since Feasibility Study1
RESERVE CASE8 US$3.00 US$3.25 US$3.50
Annual EBITDA11 (US$B)
First 5 Full Years $1.0 $1.2 $1.3
Payback Period (Years)6 5.7 5.0 4.4
NPV at 8% (US$B) $2.0 $2.9 $3.7
Project Unlevered IRR (%) 13% 16% 17%
Teck’s Unlevered IRR (%)9 18% 21% 23%
Teck’s Levered IRR (%)10 29% 35% 40%
SANCTION CASE8 US$3.00 US$3.25 US$3.50
Annual EBITDA11 (US$B)
Payback Period (Years)6 5.6 4.9 4.4
NPV at 8% (US$B) $2.4 $3.3 $4.2
Project Unlevered IRR (%) 14% 16% 18%
Teck’s Unlevered IRR (%)9 19% 21% 24%
Teck’s Levered IRR (%)10 30% 35% 40%

QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison
Reserve Case (as at Nov. 30, 2018)1,2 Sanction Case (as at Nov. 30, 2018)2,4
30
RESERVES Mt Cu
Grade %
Mo
Grade %
Silver
Grade
ppm
Proven 409 0.54 0.019 1.47
Probable 793 0.51 0.021 1.34
Reserves 1,202 0.52 0.020 1.38
RESOURCES
(EXCLUSIVE OF
RESERVES)5
Mt Cu
Grade %
Mo
Grade %
Silver
Grade
ppm
Measured 36 0.42 0.014 1.23
Indicated 1,436 0.40 0.016 1.13
M&I (Exclusive) 1,472 0.40 0.016 1.14
Inferred 3,194 0.37 0.017 1.13
+ Inferred in SC pit 199 0.53 0.022 1.21
RESERVES Mt Cu
Grade %
Mo
Grade %
Silver
Grade
ppm
Proven 476 0.51 0.018 1.40
Probable 924 0.47 0.019 1.25
Reserves 1,400 0.48 0.018 1.30
RESOURCES
(EXCLUSIVE OF
RESERVES)3
Mt Cu
Grade %
Mo
Grade %
Silver
Grade
ppm
Measured 36 0.42 0.014 1.23
Indicated 1,558 0.40 0.016 1.14
M&I (Exclusive) 1,594 0.40 0.016 1.14
Inferred 3,125 0.38 0.018 1.15

ENAMI Interest in QB
Organizational Chart
• The government of Chile owns a 10% non-funding
interest in Compañía Minera Teck Quebrada Blanca
S.A. (CMTQB) through its state-run minerals company,
Empresa Nacional de Minería (ENAMI)
• ENAMI has been a partner at QB since 1989 and is a
10% shareholder of Carmen de Andacollo
• ENAMI is not required to fund QB2 development costs
• Project equity funding in form of:
- 25% Series A Shares
- 75% Shareholder Loans
• Until shareholder loans are fully repaid, ENAMI is
entitled to a minimum dividend, based on net income,
that approximates 2.0-2.5% of free cash flow1
- Thereafter, ENAMI receives 10% of dividends / free
cash flow1
• ENAMI is entitled to board representation
31.
CMTQB
TRCL
ENAMI
Teck
10%
(Series B)
100%
90%
(Series A)
JVCo
SMM
66.67%
100%
33.33%
SC
83.33% 16.67%
Chile HoldCo
QB1 / QB2 / QB3

Quebrada Blanca Accounting Treatment
Balance Sheet Cash Flow
• 100% of project spending included in property, plant and
equipment
• Debt includes 100% of project financing
• Total shareholder funding to be split between loans and
equity approximately 75%/25% over the life of the project
• Sumitomo (SMM/SC)1 contributions will be shown as
advances as a non-current liability and non-controlling
interest as part of equity
• Teck contributions, whether debt or equity eliminated on
consolidation
• 100% of project spending included in capital
expenditures
• In 2019, Sumitomo1 contribution recorded within
financing activities and split approximately 50%/50% as:
‒ Loans recorded as “Advances from Sumitomo”
‒ Equity recorded as “Sumitomo Share
Subscriptions”
• 100% of draws on project financing included in financing
activities
• After start-up of operations
‒ 100% of profit in cash flow from operations
‒ Sumitomo’s1 30% and ENAMI’s 10% share of
distributions included in non-controlling interest
32
Income Statement
• Teck’s income statement will include 100% of QB’s
revenues and expenses
• Sumitomo’s1 30% and ENAMI’s 10% share of profit will
show as profit attributable to non-controlling interests

Notes - Appendix: Quebrada Blanca
Slide 20: QB2 Project Update
1. Project progress as at January 31, 2020.
2. Number of active workers versus employees on payroll.
Slide 21: QB2 Project
1. All-in sustaining costs (AISC) are net cash unit costs (also known as C1 cash costs) plus sustaining capital expenditures. Net cash unit costs are calculated after cash margin by-product credits assuming US$10.00/lb molybdenum and
US$18.00/oz silver. Net cash unit costs for QB2 include stripping costs during operations. AISC, Net cash unit cost and cash margins for by-products are non-GAAP financial measures which do not have a standardized meanings prescribed by
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) or Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States. These measures may differ from those used by other issuers and may not be comparable to such measures as reported by
others. These measures are meant to provide further information about our financial expectations to investors. These measures should not be considered in isolation or used in substitute for other measures of performance prepared in
accordance with IFRS. For more information on our calculation of non-GAAP financial measures please see our Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2018, which can be found under our profile on SEDAR
at www.sedar.com.
Slide 22: QB2 Rebalances Teck’s Portfolio
1. We include 100% of the production and sales from QB and Carmen de Andacollo mines in our production and sales volumes because we fully consolidate their results in our financial statements. We include 22.5% of production and sales from
Antamina, representing our proportionate equity interest in Antamina. Copper production includes cathode production at QB.
2. Based on QB2 Sanction Case first five full years of copper production.
3. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
Slide 23: QB2 is a World Class Copper Opportunity
US$18.00/oz silver. Net cash unit costs for QB2 include stripping costs during operations. AISC, Net cash unit cost and cash margins for by-products are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
2. Range based on US$3.00-$3.50/lb copper price. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
3. As at January 1, 2019. Assumes optimized funding structure.
4. Copper equivalent production calculated assuming US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver without adjusting for payability.
5. C1 cash costs (also known as net cash unit costs) are presented after by-product credits assuming US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver. C1 cash costs for QB2 include stripping costs during operations. Net cash unit costs and C1
cash costs are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
7. The valuation of approximately ~US$3 billion for Teck’s 90% interest prior to the Sumitomo transaction is based on a transaction value of US$1 billion comprising an earn-in contribution of US$800 million and assumed contingent consideration
proceeds with a present value of approximately US$200 million. The undiscounted contingent consideration is estimated at US$300 million and comprises: (a) US$50 million relating to achieving the mill throughput optimization target, assumed
to be received in 2024; and (b) 8% of the net present value of the QB3 expansion at sanction, assuming an expansion sanctioned in 2024 which doubles QB2 throughput with further tailings facility construction deferred. At a real copper price of
US$3.00/lb, the payment is estimated at approximately US$250 million. Using a real discount rate of 8%, the present value of the contingent consideration, based on the above assumptions is estimated at approximately US$200 million. This
estimate is based on a number of significant assumptions in addition to those described above. There can be no assurance that the contingent consideration will approximate the amounts outlined above, or that it will be received at all.
8. Does not include contingent consideration.
9. Assumes US$2.5 billion in project finance loans without deduction of fees and interest during construction, and US$1.2 billion contribution from Sumitomo. Does not include contingent consideration.
Slide 24: Increasing Teck's Returns on QB2
1. As at January 1, 2019. Assumes optimized funding structure. Does not include contingent consideration. Assumes US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver.
2. On a 100% go forward basis from January 1, 2019 in constant Q2 2017 dollars and a CLP:USD exchange rate of 625, not including escalation (estimated at US$300 - $470 million based on 2 - 3% per annum inflation), working capital or interest
during construction. Includes approximately US$500 million in contingency. At a spot CLP/USD rate of approximately 675 capital would be reduced by approximately US$270 million.
3. On a go forward basis from January 1, 2019.
4. Assumes US$1.2 billion of Sumitomo contributions associated with purchase price spent before first draw of project finance facility. Thereafter, project finance facility used to fund all capital costs until target debt : capital ratio achieved on a
cumulative basis, after which point project finance and equity contributions are made ratably based on this same debt : capital ratio.
33

Slide 25: QB2’s Competitive Cost Position
1. Source: Wood Mackenzie.
2. Based on first five full years of copper equivalent production. Copper equivalent production calculated assuming US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver without adjusting for payability.
3. C1 cash costs (also known as net cash unit costs) are presented after by-product credits assuming US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver. C1 cash costs for QB2 include stripping costs during operations. Net cash unit costs and C1
cash costs are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
Slide 26: Vast, Long Life Deposit at QB
1. Resources figures as at November 30, 2018. Resources are reported separately from, and do not include that portion of resources classified as reserves. See “QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison” slide for further details.
Slide 27: QB3 – Long-Term Growth
1. DDH-756 @176.6m, Field of view 2cm.
Slide 29: QB2 Project Economics Comparison
1. All metrics on 100% basis and assume US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver unless otherwise stated. NPV, IRR and payback on after-tax basis.
2. Life of Mine annual average figures exclude the first and last partial years of operations.
3. Copper equivalent production calculated assuming US$3.00/lb copper, US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver without adjusting for payability.
4. C1 cash costs are presented after by-product credits assuming US$10.00/lb molybdenum and US$18.00/oz silver. Net cash unit costs are consistent with C1 cash costs. C1 cash costs for QB2 include stripping costs during operations. Net cash
unit costs and C1 cash costs are non-GAAP financial measures. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
6. Payback from first production.
7. Based on go-forward cash flow from January 1, 2017. Based on all equity funding structure.
8. Based on go-forward cash flow from January 1, 2019. Based on optimized funding structure.
9. Does not consider contingent consideration.
10. Includes impact of US$2.5 billion project financing. Does not consider contingent consideration.
Slide 30: QB2 Reserves and Resources Comparison
1. Mineral reserves are constrained within an optimized pit shell and scheduled using a variable grade cut-off approach based on NSR cut-off US$13.39/t over the planned life of mine. The life-of-mine strip ratio is 0.41.
2. Both mineral resource and mineral reserve estimates assume long-term commodity prices of US$3.00/lb Cu, US$9.40/lb Mo and US$18.00/oz Ag and other assumptions that include: pit slope angles of 30–44º, variable metallurgical recoveries
that average approximately 91% for Cu and 74% for Mo and operational costs supported by the Feasibility Study as revised and updated.
3. Mineral resources are reported using a NSR cut-off of US$11.00/t and include 23.8 million tonnes of hypogene material grading 0.54% copper that has been mined and stockpiled during existing supergene operations.
4. Mineral reserves are constrained within an optimized pit shell and scheduled using a variable grade cut-off approach based on NSR cut-off US$18.95/t over the planned life of mine. The life-of-mine strip ratio is 0.70.
5. Mineral resources are reported using a NSR cut-off of US$11.00/t outside of the reserves pit. Mineral resources include inferred resources within the reserves pit at a US$ 18.95/t NSR cut-off and also include 23.8 million tonnes of hypogene
material grading 0.54% copper that has been mined and stockpiled during existing supergene operations.
34

Slide 31: ENAMI Interest in QB2
Slide 32: Quebrada Blanca Accounting Treatment
1. Sumitomo Metal Mining Co. Ltd. and Sumitomo Corporation are collectively referred to as Sumitomo.
35

Consistent Long-Term Strategy
37
• Diversification
• Long life assets
• Low cost
• Appropriate scale
• Low risk jurisdictions

Attractive Portfolio of Long-Life Assets
Low risk jurisdictions
38

Global Customer Base
Revenue contribution from diverse markets (2019)
39
1
1

Diverse Pipeline of Growth Options
40
In Construction
Energy
Building a new business
through partnership
Frontier
Lease 421
Future OptionsMedium-Term
Growth Options
Zinc
Premier resource with
integrated assets
Red Dog
Satellite Deposits
Cirque
Red Dog VIP2 Project Teena
Steelmaking Coal
Well established with capital
efficient value options
Elk Valley Replacement
Brownfield
Quintette/Mt. Duke
Elk Valley Brownfield
Neptune Terminals
Expansion
Coal Mountain 2
Copper
Strong platform
with substantial
growth options
San Nicolás (Cu-Zn)
QB2
Zafranal
Mesaba
NuevaUnión
HVC Brownfield
Schaft Creek
Antamina Brownfield
Galore Creek
Fort Hills Debottlenecking
& Expansion
QB3

Disciplined Approach to M&A
41
CdA Gold
Stream1,
$206M Project Corridor
/Nueva Union,
$0
Antamina
Silver Stream2
$795M
Osisko
Royalty
Package,
$28M
Sandstorm
Royalty
Package3
$32M
HVC Minority,
($33M)
Teena
Minority4,
($11M)
AQM
Copper,
($25M)
Wintering Hills,
$59M
San Nic
Minority5,
($65M)
IMSA’s stake
in QB, ($208M)
Waneta Dam,
$1,200M6
QB2 Divestment
(30%)7
$1,072M
($500)
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
July10
Aug27
Oct7
Oct25
Jan19
July5
Oct18
Nov21
Jan26
Oct18
Apr4
Jul26
Mar29
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total net proceeds of C$3.1B:
• Balance sheet strengthened by divestment of non-core assets at high EBITDA8 multiples
• Modest ‘prudent housekeeping’ acquisitions to consolidate control of attractive copper and
zinc development assets
• Innovative NuevaUnión joint venture to create world scale development opportunity
Recent Transaction History
NetProceeds(Cost)(C$M)

Production Guidance
42
2019 RESULTS 2020 GUIDANCE1
3-YEAR GUIDANCE1
(2021-2023)
Steelmaking Coal 25.7 Mt 23.0-25.0 Mt 26.0-27.0 Mt
Copper2,3,4,6
Highland Valley Concentrate 121.3 kt 133-138 kt 155-165 kt
Antamina Concentrate 100.9 kt 88-92 kt 90 kt
Carmen de Andecollo Concentrate + Cathode 54 kt 57-62 kt 55-60 kt
Quebrada Blanca Cathode 21.1 kt 7-8 kt -
Total Copper Concentrate + Cathode 297.3 kt 285-300 kt 300-315 kt
Zinc2,3,5
Red Dog Concentrate 552.4 kt 500-535 kt 500-540 kt
Antamina Concentrate 68.3 kt 100-105 kt 90-100 kt
Pend Oreille Concentrate 19.4 kt - -
Total Zinc Concentrate 640.1 kt 600-640 kt 590-640 kt
Refined Zinc - Trail Refined 287.4 kt 305-315 kt 310-315 kt
Bitumen - Fort Hills3,7
12.3 Mbbl 12-14 Mbbl 14 Mbbl
Lead - Red Dog2
Concentrate 102.8 kt 95-100 kt 80-90 kt
Refined Lead - Trail Refined 69 kt 60-70 kt 65-70 kt
Molybdenum2,3
Highland Valley Concentrate 6.6 Mlbs 4.5-5.5 Mlbs 3.5-5.0 Mlbs
Antamina Concentrate 1.8 Mlbs 2.0 Mlbs 2.0-3.0 Mlbs
Total Molybdenum Concentrate 8.4 Mlbs 6.5-7.5 Mlbs 5.5-8.0 Mlbs
Refined Silver - Trail Refined 14.0 Moz 10-12 Moz N/A-

Sales and Unit Cost Guidance
43
2019 RESULTS 2020 GUIDANCE1
Steelmaking Coal
Adjusted site cost of sales2
C$65/t C$63-67/t
Transportation costs2
C$39/t C$40-43/t
Inventory write-down C$1/t -
Unit costs2
C$105/t C$103-110/t
Copper
Total cash unit costs3
US$1.68/lb US$1.55-1.65/lb
Net cash unit costs3
US$1.39/lb US$1.25-1.35/lb
Zinc
Total cash unit costs4
US$0.51/lb US$0.55-0.60/lb
Net cash unit costs4
US$0.34/lb US$0.40-0.45/lb
Bitumen
Adjusted operating costs5
C$29.24/bbl C$26-29/bbl
Unit Costs
Sales
Q4 2019 RESULTS Q1 2020 GUIDANCE1
Steelmaking Coal 6.3 Mt 4.8-5.2 Mt
Zinc - Red Dog Zinc in Concentrate 174 kt 135-140 kt

Capital Expenditures Guidance
44
(Teck’s share
in CAD$ millions) 2019
2020
Guidance1
Sustaining
Steelmaking coal2 $ 403 $ 475
Copper 184 175
Zinc 138 160
Energy 45 100
Corporate 16 10
Total Sustaining $ 786 $ 920
Major Enhancement
Steelmaking coal2 $ 347 $ 530
Copper 46 50
Zinc 90 15
Energy 105 50
RACE21TM 4 6 85
$ 594 $ 730
New Mine Development
Copper3 $ 115 $ 50
Zinc 32 5
Energy 41 25
$ 188 $ 80
Sustaining, Major Enhancement, New Mine Development
(Teck’s share
2020
Guidance1
Total Sustaining, Major Enhancement, and New Mine Development
Steelmaking coal2 $ 750 $ 1,005
Copper3 345 275
Zinc 260 180
Energy 191 175
Corporate 16 10
RACE21TM 6 85
$ 1,568 $ 1,730
Total

(Teck’s share
2020
Guidance1
QB2 Capital Expenditures $ 1,220 $ 2,420
Total capex, before SMM/SC contribution $ 2,788 $ 4,150
Estimated SMM/SC contributions2 (1,035) (660)
Estimated QB2 project financing draw - (1,760)
Total Teck spend $ 1,753 $ 1,730
Quebrada Blanca Phase 2
(Teck’s share
2020
Guidance1
Capitalized Stripping
Steelmaking coal $ 443 $ 370
Copper 192 200
Zinc 45 55
$ 680 $ 625
Capitalized Stripping
Capital Expenditures Guidance (continued)
45

Commodity Price Leverage1
46
MID-POINT OF 2020
PRODUCTION
GUIDANCE2 CHANGE
ESTIMATED EFFECT ON
ANNUALIZED PROFIT3
ESTIMATED EFFECT ON
ANNUALIZED EBITDA3
$C/$US C$0.01 C$37M /$0.01∆ C$58M /$0.01∆
Coal [24] Mt US$1/tonne C$18M /$1∆ C$28M /$1∆
Copper 292.5 kt US$0.01/lb C$5M /$0.01∆ C$8M /$0.01∆
Zinc4 930 kt US$0.01/lb C$10M /$0.01∆ C$13M /$0.01∆
WCS5 13 Mbbl US$1/bbl C$12M /$1∆ C$17M /$1∆
WTI6 - US$1/bbl C$9M /$1∆ C$12M /$1∆

Capital Allocation Framework
47
1. For this purpose, we define available cash flow as cash flow from operating activities after interest and finance charges, lease payments and distributions to non-
controlling interests less: (i) sustaining capital and capitalized stripping; (ii) committed enhancement and growth capital; (iii) any cash required to adjust the capital
structure to maintain solid investment grade credit metrics; and (iv) our base $0.20 per share annual dividend. Proceeds from any asset sales may also be used to
supplement available cash flow. Any additional cash returns will be made through share repurchases and/or supplemental dividends depending on market
conditions at the relevant time.
BASE
DIVIDEND
COMMITTED
ENHANCEMENT
& GROWTH
CAPEX
CAPITAL
STRUCTURE
SUSTAINING
CAPEX
(including stripping)
SUPPLEMENTAL
SHAREHOLDER
DISTRIBUTIONS
Plus at Least 30%
Available Cash Flow1
The balance of remaining
cash is available to finance
further enhancement or
growth opportunities.
If there is no immediate need
for this capital for investment
purposes, it may be used for
further returns to
shareholders or retained as
cash on the balance sheet.

Strong Track Record of Returning Cash to Shareholders
~$6.5 billion returned from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2019
48
Dividends
• $4.4 billion since 2003,
representing ~28% of
free cash flow1
Share Buybacks
• $2.1 billion since 2003,
representing ~14% of
free cash flow1

Tax-Efficient Earnings in Canada
~C$3.4 billion in available tax pools1
• Includes:
‒ $2.6 billion in net operating loss carryforwards
‒ $0.5 billion in Canadian Development Expenses (30% declining balance p.a.)
‒ $0.3 billion in allowable capital loss carryforwards
• Applies to cash income taxes in Canada
• Does not apply to:
‒ Resource taxes in Canada
‒ Cash taxes in foreign jurisdictions
49

Share Structure & Principal Shareholders
50
SHARES HELD PERCENT
VOTING
RIGHTS
Class A Shareholdings
Temagami Mining Company Limited 4,300,000 55.4%
SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 1,469,000 18.9%
Other 1,996,503 25.7%
7,765,503 100.0%
Class B Shareholdings
Temagami Mining Company Limited 725,000 0.1%
SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 295,800 0.1%
China Investment Corporation (Fullbloom) 59,304,474 11.0%
Other 479,202,460 88.8%
539,527,734 100.0%
Total Shareholdings
Temagami Mining Company Limited 5,025,000 0.9% 32.7%
SMM Resources Inc (Sumitomo) 1,764,800 0.3% 11.1%
China Investment Corporation (Fullbloom) 59,304,474 10.8% 4.5%
Other 481,198,963 87.9% 51.6%
547,293,237 100.0% 100.0%
Teck Resources Limited1

Notes: Appendix – Strategy and Overview
Slide 39: Global Customer Base
1. Gross profit before depreciation and amortization is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
Slide 41: Disciplined Approach to M&A
1. Carmen de Andacollo gold stream transaction occurred in USD at US$162 million.
2. Antamina silver stream transaction occurred in USD at US$610 million.
3. Sandstorm royalty transaction occurred in USD at US$22 million.
4. Teena transaction occurred in AUD at A$10.6 million.
5. San Nicolàs transaction occurred in USD at US$50 million.
6. Waneta Dam transaction closed July 26, 2018 for C$1.2 billion.
7. QB2 Partnership (sale of 30% interest of project to Sumitomo; SMM and SC) for total consideration of US$1.2 billion, including US$800 million earn-in and US$400 million matching contribution; converted at FX of 1.34 on March 29, 2019.
Slide 42: Production Guidance
1. As at February 20, 2020. See Teck’s Q4 2019 press release for further details.
2. Metal contained in concentrate.
3. We include 100% of production and sales from our Quebrada Blanca and Carmen de Andacollo mines in our production and sales volumes because we fully consolidate their results in our financial statements. We include 22.5% and 21.3% of
production and sales from Antamina and Fort Hills, respectively, representing our proportionate ownership interest in these operations.
4. Copper production includes cathode production at Quebrada Blanca and Carmen de Andacollo.
5. Total zinc includes co-product zinc production from our 22.5% proportionate interest in Antamina.
6. Excludes production from QB2 for three-year guidance 2021–2023.
7. The 2021–2023 bitumen production guidance does not include potential near-term debottlenecking opportunities. See energy business unit in quarterly press releases for more information.
Slide 43: Sales and Unit Cost Guidance
1. As at February 20, 2020. See Teck’s Q4 2019 press release for further details.
2. Steelmaking coal unit costs are reported in Canadian dollars per tonne. Adjusted site cost of sales includes site costs, transport costs, and other and does not include deferred stripping or capital expenditures. Adjusted site cost of sales is a
non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
3. Copper unit costs are reported in U.S. dollars per payable pound of metal contained in concentrate. Total cash unit costs are before co-product and by-product margins. Copper net cash unit costs are after by-product margins and include
adjusted cash cost of sales and smelter processing charges, less cash margin for by-products including co-products. Assumes a zinc price of US$1.05 per pound, a molybdenum price of US$11 per pound, a silver price of US$16.00 per ounce,
a gold price of US$1,300 per ounce and a Canadian/U.S. dollar exchange rate of $1.32. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
4. Zinc unit costs are reported in U.S. dollars per payable pound of metal contained in concentrate. Total cash unit costs are before co-product and by-product margins. Zinc net cash unit costs are after by-product margins and are mine costs
including adjusted cash cost of sales and smelter processing charges, less cash margin for by-products. Assumes a lead price of US$0.90 per pound, a silver price of US$16.00 per ounce and a Canadian/U.S. dollar exchange rate of $1.32.
By-products include both by-products and co-products. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
5. Bitumen unit costs are reported in Canadian dollars per barrel. Adjusted operating costs represent costs for the Fort Hills mining and processing operations and do not include the cost of diluent, transportation, storage and blending. See
“Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
51

Notes: Appendix – Strategy and Overview
Slide 44: Capital Expenditures Guidance
1. As at February 20, 2020. See Q4 2019 press release for further information.
2. Steelmaking coal sustaining capital guidance includes $290 million of water treatment capital. 2019 includes $176 million of water treatment capital. Steelmaking coal major enhancement capital guidance includes $390 million relating to the
facility upgrade at Neptune Bulk Terminals.
3. Copper new mine development guidance for 2020 includes studies for QB3, Zafranal, San Nicolás and Galore Creek.
4. RACE21TM capital expenditures for 2020 include $65 million relating to steelmaking coal, $5 million relating to copper, $5 million relating to zinc and the remainder relating to corporate projects. We also expect to spend approximately $70
million on RACE21TM for research and innovation expenses and intangible assets in 2020.
Slide 45: Capital Expenditures Guidance (Continued)
1. As at February 20, 2020. See Q4 2019 press release for further information.
2. Total estimated contributions from Sumitomo Metal and Mining (SMM) and Sumitomo Corporation (SC) were $1.7 billion.
Slide 46: Commodity Price Leverage
1. As at February 20, 2020. Before pricing adjustments, based on our current balance sheet, our expected 2020 mid-range production estimates, current commodity prices and a Canadian/U.S. dollar exchange rate of $1.32. See Teck’s Q4 2019
press release for additional information.
2. All production estimates are subject to change based on market and operating conditions.
3. The effect on our profit attributable to shareholders and on EBITDA of commodity price and exchange rate movements will vary from quarter to quarter depending on sales volumes. Our estimate of the sensitivity of profit and EBITDA to changes
in the U.S. dollar exchange rate is sensitive to commodity price assumptions. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
4. Zinc includes 310,000 tonnes of refined zinc and 620,000 tonnes of zinc contained in concentrate.
5. Bitumen volumes from our energy business unit.
6. Our WTI oil price sensitivity takes into account our interest in Fort Hills for respective change in revenue, partially offset by the effect of the change in diluent purchase costs as well as the effect on the change in operating costs across our
business units, as our operations use a significant amount of diesel fuel.
Slide 48: Strong Track Record of Returning Cash to Shareholders
1. From January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2019. Free cash flow is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides.
Slide 49: Tax-Efficient Earnings In Canada
1. As at December 31, 2019.
Slide 50: Share Structure & Principal Shareholders
1. As at December 31, 2019.
52

Focus on Sustainability Leadership
Sustainability strategy
• Sustainability reporting for 19 years
• Established ambitious sustainability
strategy and goals in 2010
• Strategy focused on developing
opportunities and managing risks
• Implementing a sustainability strategy
with short-term, five-year goals and
long-term goals stretching out to 2030
• New goal on climate action launched and
other strategic sustainability priorities to
be launched in March 2020
54
Our People
Biodiversity
Energy and
Climate Change
Air
Community
Water

Why Sustainability Matters
55
• Increased access to capital at a lower cost
• Increased cost savings and productivity
• Higher financial returns
• Brand value and reputation
• Reduced risk of operations disruption
• Efficient project and permit approvals
• Meet rising supply chain and societal expectations
• Employee retention and recruitment
Driving growth and managing risk

Health and Safety Performance
• Safety performance in 2018
- 28% reduction in High-Potential
Incidents
- 21% decrease in Lost-Time Injury
Frequency
• Conducted Courageous Safety
Leadership training with 97% of
employees
• Two fatalities in 2018: one at Fording
River Operations and one at Elkview
Operations. Carried out in-depth
investigations into the incidents to learn
as much as possible and implement
measures to prevent a reoccurrence
56
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
2015 2016 2017 2018
High-Potential Incident Frequency
Serious High-Potential Incident Frequency
Potentially Fatal Occurrence Frequency
Incident Frequency (per 200,000 hours worked)
62% reduction in High-Potential Incident
Frequency rate over past four years

Reducing Freshwater Use
Teck top of 50+ companies ranked by DJSI
• Water recycled average of 3
times at mining operations in
2018
• Target to reduce freshwater
use at Chilean operations by
15% by 2020
• Desalinated seawater for
Quebrada Blanca 2 project in
place of freshwater; 26.5
million m3 per year
57
Related SASB1 Metric: EM-MM-140a.1 | Link to Data
DJSI Water Related Risk Assessment
2019 Percentile Rankings2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
percentilerankings:
lowesttohighestscores
Teck
(100th percentile)

Taking Action on Climate Change
Teck in top 3 of 50+ companies ranked by DJSI
• Commitment to be a carbon neutral
operator by 2050
• Goal to reduce GHG emissions by 450,000
tonnes by 2030 and have already reduced
289,000 tonnes of emissions as a result of
projects implemented since 2011
• Advocating for climate action – member of
Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition
• Released second Climate Action and
Portfolio Resilience report in 2019, which is
structured to align with the
recommendations from the Task Force on
Climate Related Financial Disclosure
58
DJSI Climate Strategy Assessment
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
percentilerankings:
Teck
(98th percentile)

Low-Carbon Producer
59
Scope 1+2 emissions per copper equivalent ranking1
(tCO2e/t CuEq, 2017)
CO2 emissions per unit of energy consumed1
(CO2t/GJ)

Lower-Risk Jurisdictions, Comprehensive Assessments
Teck in top 3 of 50+ companies ranked by DJSI
• All operations in countries with
well-developed mining industries:
Canada, United States, Chile, Peru
• Robust regulatory regimes and rule of law
in place
• Strong foundation for protection of human
rights
• Human rights assessments conducted at
all operations in 2018
60
Related SASB1 Metric: EM-MM-210b.1 | Link to Data
Teck
(97th percentile)
DJSI Human Rights Assessment
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
percentilerankings:

• Agreements in place at all mining
operations within or adjacent to
Indigenous Peoples’ territories
• Achieved agreements with all Indigenous
communities near the QB2 project
‒ 8 of 8 agreements with Indigenous
communities; 7 of 7 agreements with
fishermen’s unions
• Achieved agreements with 14 out of 14
potentially affected Indigenous groups
near our Frontier project
• Working with UN Women in Chile to
advance economic opportunities for
Indigenous women
61
Strengthening Relationships with Indigenous Peoples

• 57% of our employees are
unionized
• Focused on strengthening diversity,
with women making up 31% of new
hires in 2018
• In 2018, 9% of total hires self-
identified as Indigenous from our
Red Dog, Highland Valley Copper
and steelmaking coal operations in
the Elk Valley
62
Employee Relations and Diversity
18%
women in our
workforce
29%
Board of
Directors are
women
Related SASB1 Metrics: EM-MM-310a.1 | Link to Data
20%
management
positions held
by women

Collective Agreements
OPERATION EXPIRY DATES
Line Creek May 31, 2019
Elkview October 31, 2020
Fording River April 30, 2021
Antamina July 31, 2021
Highland Valley Copper September 30, 2021
Trail Operations May 31, 2022
Cardinal River June 30, 2022
Quebrada Blanca
January 31, 2022
March 31, 2022
November 20, 2022
Carmen de Andacollo
September 30, 2022
December 31, 2022
63

Notes: Sustainability
Slide 57: Reducing Freshwater Use
1. Sustainability Accounting Standards Board Standards. https://www.sasb.org/
2. SAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment 2018.
Slide 58: Taking Action on Climate Change
Slide 59: Low Carbon Producer
1. Source: Barclays Research, Teck.
Slide 60: Lower-Risk Jurisdictions, Comprehensive Assessments
Slide 61: Strengthening Relationships with Indigenous Peoples
Slide 62: Employee Relations and Diversity
64

RACE21TM
Our innovation-driven business transformation program
66
• Implementing existing, proven technology across the mining value
chain to improve productivity and lower costs
• Initial target of $150 million in annualized EBITDA1 improvements by
the end of 2019; focused on delivering significant value by 2021
• More than 40 different projects implemented across our operations
Renew Automate Connect Empower

RACE21TM
67
• Unify and modernize Teck’s core systems
• Establish technology foundation that facilitates
deployment of Connect and Automate reliably and at
scale
• For example: Wireless site infrastructure to support
automation, sensing, site communications, information
access, pit-to-port integration and advanced analytics
• Accelerate and scale autonomy program
• Transformational shift in safety
• Reduce per-tonne mining costs with smaller fleets
• Provide innovation platform to enable implementation
of advanced analytics to drive cycle time improvement
& predictive maintenance
Renew Automate

RACE21TM
68
• Link disparate systems into a collaborative digital
platform with powerful tools for sensing and analyzing
in real time
• For example: Dynamic and predictive models to
reduce variability, leading to significant improvements
in throughput and recovery
• The natural implication of Renew, Automate, and
Connect is we can re-imagine what it means to work
at Teck and re-design our operating model to attract,
recruit, train and retain the workforce of the future
Connect Empower

Significant Value To Be Captured
69
COST
Reduced
operational costs
by achieving
manufacturing
levels of variability
PROFITABILITY
Step-change
impact to
profitability
SAFETY
Transformational
safety impact with
fewer people in
high risk
environments
PRODUCTIVITY
Increased
productivity through
new technologies
and internal
innovation
Example value capture areas: Autonomy, Integrated Operations, Advanced Analytics, Real Time Data Systems
A Sustainable Future

Electrification of Mining
Teck is taking steps to reduce its carbon footprint by starting to electrify the fleet.
70
Electric crew buses at our
steel making coal
operations.
Electric boom vehicles to be
tested in pit.
Working with OEMs through
ICMM to develop zero-GHG
surface mining vehicles

Notes: Technology and Innovation
Slide 66: RACE21TM
1. EBITDA is a non-GAAP financial measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measures” slides and “Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures” section of the Q4 2019 news release for further information.
71

Steelmaking Coal
Business Unit & Markets

Steelmaking Coal Market
• Growing demand, especially in Southeast Asia
and India
‒ Teck’s sales to India surpassed China
from 2018
• Raw materials pricing under pressure due to
weak steel margins
• Capital markets are rationing capital to coal,
which is directed at thermal coal but impacts
steelmaking coal; will constrain supply and
increase the value of existing assets
• Investment remains modest; permitting is
challenging
• Chinese safety checks and coronavirus
containment measures restrict domestic coal
production
73
50
100
150
200
250
300
Argus Premium HCC FOB Australia
12-Month Moving Average
Steelmaking Coal Prices1 (US$/t)
Steelmaking coal price has averaged
US$180/t1 since January 1, 2008

Our market is seaborne hard coking coal2: ~205 million tonnes
Steelmaking Coal Facts
Global Coal Production1:
~7.8 billion tonnes
Steelmaking Coal Production2:
~1,150 million tonnes
Export Steelmaking Coal2:
~355 million tonnes
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal2:
~315 million tonnes
74
• ~0.7 tonnes of steelmaking coal is used to
produce each tonne of steel3
• Up to 100 tonnes of steelmaking coal is required
to produce the steel in the average wind turbine4

Steelmaking Coal Demand Growth Forecast
Southeast Asia and India are growth drivers
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Imports1 (Mt)
Change 2020 vs. 2019
75
Includes:
• Southeast Asia: Growth from Indonesia and Vietnam
• India: Driven by secular demand and government
growth targets
• Brazil & Europe: Steel production recovery
• India: Analyst views range from +1 Mt to +3 Mt2
• China: Analyst views range from -2 Mt to +3 Mt2
• JKT: Analyst views range from -2 Mt to +3 Mt2
315
320
316-329
3 1 1 2 1 0.1
280
290
300
310
320
330
2019 SE Asia Brazil Europe 2020, ex.
India, China
& JKT
India China JKT 2020

Indian Steelmaking Coal Imports
Imports supported by secular demand and government growth targets
76
Indian Seaborne Coking Coal Imports2 (Mt)Indian Crude Steel Production1 (Mt)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70

Chinese Steelmaking Coal Imports
2019 seaborne imports up by +4 Mt
77
Chinese Coking Coal Imports2 (Mt)
Chinese Crude Steel Production (CSP), Hot Metal
Production (HMP) and Coal Production (Mt)1
400
420
440
460
480
500
520
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
CSP (LHS) HMP (LHS) Coking Coal Production (RHS)
32
25
34
60
48
35 36
44
37 41 42
15
20
19
16
15
13
24
26
28
34 35
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Mongolian Coking Coal Imports Seaborne Coking Coal Imports

Large Users in China Increasing Imports
~2/3 of China crude steel produced on coast; projects support imports
78
Seaborne Coking Coal Imports1 (Mt)
HBIS LAOTING PROJECT
• Inland plant relocating to coastal area
• Capacity: crude steel 20 Mt
• Status: Construction started in 2017; completion
in 2020
ZONGHENG FENGNAN PROJECT
• Capacity: crude steel 8 Mt
• Status: Construction started in 2017; 2 of 5 blast
furnaces (BFs) completed by May 2019;
remaining 3 BFs to complete in 2020
SHOUGANG JINGTANG PLANT
• Expansion
• Capacity: crude steel 9.4 Mt (phase 2)
• Status: Construction started in 2015; 1 of 2 BFs
completed in Apr 2019
LIUSTEEL FANGCHENG PROJECT
• Greenfield project
• Capacity: Phase 1 crude steel ~10 Mt
• Status: Construction started in 2017;
1 of 4 BFs completed in Dec 2019
BAOWU ZHANJIANG PLANT
• Expansion
• Capacity: crude steel 3.6 Mt (phase 2)
• Status: Construction started in Apr 2019;
completion in 2021
BAOWU YANCHENG PROJECT
• Capacity: crude steel 20 Mt (phase 1: 8-10 Mt)
• Status: Phase 1 construction started in May 2019
11 6 10
21 21 22 25 25 24 25
21
19
25
39
26
13 11 18 13 16
0
20
40
60
80
15 users Non-15 users

Chinese Steel Margins
Margins have declined but remain positive
China Hot Rolled Coil (HRC) Margins and Steelmaking Coal (HCC) Prices1
(US$/t)
79
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Jan-15
Mar-15
May-15
Jul-15
Sep-15
Nov-15
Jan-16
Mar-16
May-16
Jul-16
Sep-16
Nov-16
Jan-17
Mar-17
May-17
Jul-17
Sep-17
Nov-17
Jan-18
Mar-18
May-18
Jul-18
Sep-18
Nov-18
Jan-19
Mar-19
May-19
Jul-19
Sep-19
Nov-19
Jan-20
China HRC Gross Margins China Domestic HCC Price Argus Premium HCC CFR China

Chinese Scrap Use to Increase Slowly
EAF share in crude steel production to recover only to 2012’s level
80
78% 72%
55%
40% 39% 35% 32%
23%
37%
18%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
China’s Scrap Ratio was ~1/2 of World Average
in 20171 (%)
Crude Steel
Electric Arc Furnace
Hot Metal
China Steel Use By Sector
(2000-2018)2
Crude Steel and Electric Arc Furnace Production3 (Mt)
Construction
50-60%
Machinery
15-20%
Auto
5-10%
Others
15-25%
0
200
400
600
800
1000
2012 2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024

Steelmaking Coal Supply Growth Forecast
Growth comes mostly from Australia
Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Exports1 (Mt)
Change 2020 vs. 2019
81
Includes:
• Australia: Growth from existing and restarted
mines
• Indonesia: Ramp up of Bumi Barito Mineral
(BBM) mine
• USA: Lower production from existing mines
• Mozambique: Analyst views range from flat to +1 Mt2
• Russia: Analyst views range from -1 Mt to +1 Mt2
315
3183 1 1 316-3201 0.1
280
290
300
310
320
330
2019 Australia Indonesia USA 2020, ex. Mo
& Ru
Mozambique Russia 2020

US Coal Producers are Swing Suppliers
82
US Steelmaking Coal Exports2 (Mt)Australian Steelmaking Coal Exports1 (Mt)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200

Canadian & Mozambique Steelmaking Coal Exports
83
Mozambique Exports2 (Mt)Canadian Exports1 (Mt)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

2nd Largest Seaborne Steelmaking Coal Supplier
Competitively positioned to supply steel producers worldwide
84
CHINA
2013: ~30%
2017: ~15%
2019: ~10%
INDIA
2013: ~5%
2017: ~10%
2019: ~15%
Sales Distribution
AMERICAS
~5%
EUROPE
2013: ~15%
2017: ~20%
2019: ~15%
ASIA EXCL. CHINA & INDIA
2013: ~40%
2017: ~45%
2019: ~55%
Sales to India exceeded China from 2018

An Integrated Long Life Coal Business
85
Prince Rupert
Ridley
Terminal
Vancouver
Prince George Edmonton
Calgary
Westshore
Terminal
Quintette
Cardinal River
Elk Valley
Kamloops
British Columbia
Alberta
Seattle
Elkford
Sparwood
Hosmer
Fernie
Fording
River
Greenhills
Line
Creek
Elkview
Coal
Mountain
Elco
ELK VALLEY
1,150 km
Neptune
Terminal
Coal
Mountain
Phase 2
• 940 million tonnes1 of
reserves support ~27 Mt of
production for many years
• Geographically concentrated
in the Elk Valley
• Established infrastructure and
capacity with mines, railways
and terminals

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Teck Coal BU CMO Closure CRO Closure EVO 8M EVO 9M
Long Life with Growth Potential in Steelmaking Coal
27 million tonnes of annual
production capacity in 2021 and
beyond
− Investment in plant throughput capacity
at Elkview to capitalize on lower strip
ratio beginning in 2020
Investing in low capital intensity production
capacity to maximize long term profit and
generate production capacity
Annual Production Capacity
(Million tonnes)
86

6
8
10
12
Clean Strip Ratio1
6 Year Average 5 Year Average
Setting Up for Strong Long-Term Cash Flows
In Steelmaking Coal
Executing on four structural pillars to reduce
costs and optimize margins
• Strip ratio decreasing over next four years
‒ Future strip ratio on par with historical average
• Strategically replacing high cost tonnes with low
cost tonnes
‒ Cardinal River closure offset with Elkview expansion in 2020
• Investing in RACE21TM technology and digital
transformation
‒ Lowering operating costs and increasing EBITDA1
• Increasing Neptune capacity to >18.5 Mt
‒ Lowering port costs and increasing logistics chain flexibility
87

$-
$2
$4
$6
$8
$10
$12
$14
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Sustaining Excl. Water 2010-2016 Avg $/t
Reinvesting to Maintain Productivities
And Manage Costs in Steelmaking Coal
Maintaining historical dollar per tonne
sustaining investment levels
2010-2016: Average spend of ~$6 per tonne1
• Reinvestment in 5 shovels, 50+ haul trucks
2017-2023: Average spend of ~$6 per tonne1
• Reinvestment in equipment fleets and
technology to increase mining productivity and
processing capacity
88
Sustaining Capital, Excluding
Water Treatment1 ($/t)
Long term run rate for sustaining capital is ~$6 per tonne

-
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Major Enhancement Castle
Baldy Ridge EVO 9M
2010-2016 Avg
Major Enhancement Capital Expenditures1,2 ($M)
Investing In Production Capacity in Steelmaking Coal
Major enhancement projects increasing long-term
production capacity:
• Castle at Fording River Operations
• Baldy Ridge Extension at Elkview Operations
• 9 Million project at Elkview Operations
2010-2016: Average spend of ~$160 million2 per year
• Increased production capacity by ~3.5 million tonnes
2017-2023: Average spend of ~$142 million2 per year
• Increasing production capacity for 2020-2026 production
by ~2.5 million tonnes per year
‒ Increasing plant capacity at Elkview Operations
(EVO 9M)
89

Progress on Elk Valley Water Quality Plan
• Spent ~ $437 million on the implementation of the
Elk Valley Water Quality Plan as of year-end 2019
• West Line Creek water treatment facility is
operating and successfully treating 7.5 million
litres per day
• Construction of the Fording River South water
treatment facility to treat 20 million litres per day
continued in 2019 and the project is targeting
completion for the end of 2020
• Since January 2018, our first Saturated Rock Fill
facility has been successfully treating up to
10 million litres of mine-affected water per day at
Elkview Operations, and achieving near-complete
removal of selenium and nitrate
90
We expect to have the capacity to treat up to 47.5 million litres per day by the end of 2020

SALES MIX
• ~40% quarterly contract price
• ~60% shorter than quarterly pricing mechanisms
(including “spot”)
PRODUCT MIX
• ~75% of production is high-quality HCC
• ~25% is a combination of SHCC, SSCC, PCI and a
small amount of thermal
• Varies quarter-to-quarter based on the mine plans
KEY FACTORS IMPACTING TECK’S AVERAGE
REALIZED PRICES
• Variations in our product mix
• Timing of sales
• Direction and underlying volatility of the daily price
assessments
• Spreads between various qualities of steelmaking coal
• Arbitrage between FOB Australia and CFR China pricing
Teck’s Pricing Mechanisms
Coal sales book generally moves with the market
91
Index Linked Sales
• Quarterly contract sales index linked
• Contract sales index linked
• Contract sales with index fallback
• Spot sales index linked
Fixed Price Sales
• Contract sales spot priced
• Contract sales with index fallback
• Spot sales with fixed price
80%
20% Index
Linked
Fixed
Price
Pricing Mechanisms (%)

Quality and Basis Spreads
Impact Teck’s average realized steelmaking coal prices
92
HCC FOB / CFR Prices and Spread2 (US$/t)HCC / SHCC Prices and Spread1 (US$/t)
0
25
50
75
100
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
HCC (LHS) SHCC (LHS) HCC / SHCC spread (RHS)
-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
HCC FOB Australia (LHS) HCC CFR China (LHS)
CFR / FOB spread (RHS)

West Coast Port Capacity
93
0
10
20
30
40
Neptune Ridley Westshore
Current Capacity Planned Growth
• Current capacity 35 Mtpa
• Teck contracted capacity 19 Mtpa
• Contract expires March 31, 2021
WESTSHORE TERMINALS
• Planned capacity growth to >18.5 Mtpa
• 100% ownership of coal capacity
• Current coal capacity 12.5 Mtpa
• Significant investment to upgrade and rejuvenate
NEPTUNE COAL TERMINAL
• Current capacity 18 Mtpa
• Teck contract:
‒ 3 Mtpa until December 2020
‒ 6 Mtpa with option to extend up to 9 Mtpa
from January 2021 to December 2027
• Planned growth to >20 Mtpa
RIDLEY TERMINALS
Port Capacity
(Nominal Mt)

Notes: Appendix – Steelmaking Coal
Slide 73: Steelmaking Coal Market
1. Source: Argus, Teck. Plotted to February 20, 2020.
Slide 74: Steelmaking Coal Facts
1. Source: IEA.
2. Source: Wood Mackenzie (Long Term Outlook H2 2019).
3. Source: World Coal Association. Assumes all of the steel required is produced by blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace route.
4. Source: The Coal Alliance. Assumes all of the steel required is produced by blast furnace-basic oxygen furnace route.
Slide 75: Steelmaking Coal Demand Growth Forecast
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020).
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020) and CRU (Coal Market Outlook November 2019).
Slide 76: Indian Steelmaking Coal Imports
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from WSA and Wood Mackenzie. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Long Term Outlook H2 2019).
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Global Trade Atlas and Wood Mackenzie. 2019 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020). 2020 is data compiled by Teck based on information
from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020) and CRU (Coal Market Outlook November 2019).
Slide 77: Chinese Steelmaking Coal Imports
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from NBS, Wood Mackenzie and Fenwei. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Long Term Outlook H2 2019) for crude steel and hot metal production and is based on
information from Fenwei for coking coal production.
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from China Customs and Fenwei. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020) for Mongolia and based on information from Wood Mackenzie
(Short Term Outlook January 2020) and CRU (Coal Market Outlook November 2019) for seaborne imports.
Slide 78: Large Users in China Increasing Imports
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from China Customs, Fenwei and internal sources.
Slide 79: Chinese Steel Margins
1. Source: China HRC Gross Margins is estimated by Mysteel. China Domestic HCC Price is Liulin #4 price sourced from Sxcoal and is normalized to CFR China equivalent. Seaborne HCC Price (CFR China) is based on Argus Premium HCC
CFR China. Plotted to February 3, 2020.
Slide 80: Chinese Scrap Use to Increase Slowly
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from WSA.
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from China Metallurgy Industry Planning and Research Institute.
3. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Long Term Outlook H2 2019) and CRU (Crude Steel Market Outlook October 2019).
Slide 81: Steelmaking Coal Supply Growth Forecast
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020).
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020) and CRU (Coal Market Outlook November 2019).
Slide 82: US Coal Producers are Swing Suppliers
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Global Trade Atlas, Wood Mackenzie. 2019 is November year-to-date annualized. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020).
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Global Trade Atlas and Wood Mackenzie. 2019 is November year-to-date annualized. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020) .
Slide 83: Canadian & Mozambique Steelmaking Coal Exports
1. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Global Trade Atlas and Wood Mackenzie. 2019 is November year-to-date annualized. 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term Outlook January 2020).
2. Source: Data compiled by Teck based on information from Wood Mackenzie and CRU. 2010-2019 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Long Term Outlook H2 2019). 2020 is based on information from Wood Mackenzie (Short Term
Outlook January 2020) and CRU (Coal Market Outlook November 2019).
94

Notes: Appendix – Steelmaking Coal
Slide 85: An Integrated Long Life Coal Business
1. Sites at 100% tonnes as at January 1, 2019. Source: Teck AIF.
Slide 86: Long Life with Growth Potential in Steelmaking Coal
1. Subject to market conditions and obtaining relevant permits.
Slide 87: Setting Up for Strong Long-Term Cash Flows in Steelmaking Coal
1. Reflects weighted average strip ratio of all coal operations.
Slide 88: Reinvesting to Maintain Productivities and Manage Costs in Steelmaking Coal
1. Historical spend has not been adjusted for inflation or foreign exchange. 2020-2023 assumes annualized average production of 26.9 million tonnes. Capital spending excludes capitalized leases in all periods. All dollars referenced are Teck’s
portion net of POSCAN credits for Greenhills Operations at 80% and excludes the portion of sustaining capital relating to water treatment and Neptune Terminal.
Slide 89: Investing In Production Capacity in Steelmaking Coal
1. Historical spend has not been adjusted for inflation or foreign exchange. Capital spending excludes capitalized leases in all periods.
2. All dollars referenced are Teck’s portion net of POSCAN credits for Greenhills Operations at 80% and excludes the portion of major enhancement capital relating to the Neptune Facility Upgrade.
3. Castle, Baldy Ridge Extension, and Elkview 9M project spending in 2020 is noted to illustrate the peak in major enhancement spending. All projects have spending prior and subsequent to 2020.
Slide 92: Quality and Basis Spreads
1. HCC price is average of the Argus Premium HCC Low Vol, Platts Premium Low Vol and TSI Premium Coking Coal assessments, all FOB Australia and in US dollars. SHCC price is average of the Platts HCC 64 Mid Vol and TSI HCC
assessments, all FOB Australia and in US dollars. Source: Argus, Platts, TSI. Plotted to February 4, 2020.
2. HCC FOB Australia price is average of the Argus Premium HCC Low Vol, Platts Premium Low Vol and TSI Premium Coking Coal assessments, all FOB Australia and in US dollars. HCC CFR China price is average of the Argus Premium HCC
Low Vol, Platts Premium Low Vol and TSI Premium JM25 Coking Coal assessments, all CFR China and in US dollars. Source: Argus, Platts, TSI. Plotted to February 4, 2020.
95

Copper
Business Unit & Markets

Supply Fundamentals Offset
Weaker Copper Demand
• Cathode market balanced for next 2 years,
with potential risks to supply
• Global macro concerns affected demand in
2019; potential upside in 2020 on improved
trade outlook and lower US$
• Concentrate market tightness continues into
2020; lowest annual TC/RC since 2011
• Copper metal stocks continue to fall
• Mine growth to resume in 2021; peak in
2023
• Longer term mega-trends supportive of
demand
97

• Chinese mine production growth flat at 100 kmt/yr
• Total probable projects: 950 kmt
Mine kmt
PT – Freeport (vs 2019) 450
Kamoa – Kakula 350
Quebrada Blanca 300
Quellaveco 300
Cobre Panama (vs 2019) 272
China to 2023 300
All others (Spence, Chuqui UG, Escondida) 1,480
SXEW Reductions to 2023 (290)
Reductions & Closures (1,460)
Mine Production Set To Increase 1.7 Mt By 20231
Includes:
98
Global Copper Mine Production Increasing Slowly
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
22,000
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Other China
PT Freeport Cobre Panama
Quellaveco Quebrada Blanca
Kamoa-Kakula New Mines
Global Copper Mine Production2 (kt contained)

99
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
$100
$110
$120
Annual/Mid Year Spot -1,200
-1,000
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017
Q3
2019
Disruptions (kt)2;TC/RCs Spot and BM Falling1 (US$/lb)
3.0%
4.5%
2.8%
5.0%
YTD
Copper Disruptions Return To Impact Mines

0
100
200
300
400
Rapid Growth in Chinese Copper Smelter Capacity
Limited domestic mine projects and lots of delays
100
+3.0 Mt of Smelting Projects in the Pipeline2
(kt blister)
Chinese Copper Mine Growth1
(kt)
0
100
200
300
400
2019
49 kt
2020
61 kt
2020 – 2023
240 kt
2018/2019
2,030 kt
2020
520 kt
2020 – 2023
480 kt

0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Pumpkin Hollow Spence Mirador
Dikuluwe OT UG Kamoa
Lone Star Aktogay Anto Exp
Mina Justa Quellaveco QB2
Salobo III Timok Others
Copper Supply
Mine production rising and scrap availability falling
101
Sanctioned Projects Since 20171 (kt)
Chinese Imports Shift to Concentrates3
(Copper content, kt)
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Concentrates Blister Scrap Cathode
New mines commissioned will
add 2.5 Mt from 2017-2025
Chinese Scrap/Blister Imports Fall2
(Copper content, kt)
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Blister Scrap

Copper Metal Stocks
Better than expected demand; smelter disruptions
• Exchange stocks have fallen 498,000 tonnes since
March 2018, now equivalent to 6.1 days of global
consumption
• SHFE stocks increased ~72,000t in first reporting
week after Lunar New Year (LNY) stocks in line with
post-LNY build in previous years
• Transportation issues limiting deliveries of metal to
customers, late return of manufacturers could delay
stock declines
• Prices decrease -10% between January 16, 2020 to
February 7, 2020
- Largest drop in prices since the beginning of the China/US
Trade dispute back in July 2018
102
Daily Copper Prices (US$/mt) and Stocks1 (kt)
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
LME Stocks Comex
SHFE Bonded Estimate
Price

March 2020 Investor Meetings

More Related Content

March 2020 Investor Meetings