2016 compared to 2015 Ahafo, Ghana.
Gold production increased 5% due to higher throughput as a result of higher mill utilization and slightly higher mill recovery rates, partially offset by lower ore grade milled.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 44% primarily due to higher stockpile inventory adjustments as a result of lower grades on stockpiles, partially offset by higher ounces sold and lower oil prices.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 68% primarily due to higher stockpile inventory adjustments as a result of lower grades on stockpiles.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce sold increased 29% due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce, partially offset by lower sustaining capital spend.
Akyem, Ghana.
Gold production decreased 1% due to lower ore grade milled and a build-up of in-circuit inventory, partially offset by higher throughput and higher mill recovery rates.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 11% primarily due to a drawdown of ore stockpile inventory and higher milling costs, partially offset by lower oil prices.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 33% due to higher amortization rates as a result off higher ounces mined and increased equipment purchase.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 2% due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce, partially offset by lower sustaining capital spend.2015 compared to 2014 Ahafo, Ghana.
Gold production decreased 25% primarily due to lower ore grade milled, lower throughput as a result of load shedding requirements related to the power shortage in Ghana and lower mill recovery from changes in ore blend, partially offset by a reduction of in-circuit inventory.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 10% primarily due to lower ounces sold, partially offset by lower oil prices.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 18% due to lower ounces sold, partially offset by lower amortization rates.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 5% due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce, partially offset by lower sustaining capital spend.
Akyem, Ghana.
Gold production was in line with prior year mainly due to higher ore grade milled and a reduction of in-circuit inventory, offset by lower throughput as a result of load shedding requirements related to the power shortage in Ghana.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 18% due to higher mining and site support costs, partially offset by lower oil prices and milling costs.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 11% due to higher amortization rates.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 35% due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce and higher sustaining capital spend.
Discontinued Operations
## Table 0 ##
For additional information regarding our discontinued operation, see Note 3 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rates Foreign currency exchange rates can increase or decrease profit margins and Costs applicable to sales to the extent costs are paid in foreign currencies.
Such fluctuations have not had a material impact on our revenue since gold and copper are sold throughout the world principally in U. S.  dollars.
Despite selling gold in London, we have no exposure to the euro or the British pound.
Our foreign operations sell their gold and copper production based on U. S.  dollar metal prices.
Approximately 33%, 37% and 38% of our Costs applicable to sales were paid in currencies other than the U. S.  dollar in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, of which approximately 29% was denominated in the Australian dollar in the current year.
Variations in the local currency exchange rates in relation to the U. S.  dollar at our foreign mining operations decreasedd Costs applicable to sales by $2 per ounce, net of hedging losses,
Long Canyon, USA.
Gold production decreased 2% primarily due to lower ore grade mined.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 25% primarily due to lower ore grade mined.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 5% primarily due to lower ounces sold.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 39% primarily due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce and higher sustaining capital spend.
CC&V, USA.
Gold production decreased 20% primarily due to lower ore grades mined and lower leach tons placed at Valley Leach Fill 2.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 17% primarily due to lower ounces sold.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce decreased 15% primarily due to lower amortization rates.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 16% primarily due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce.2017 compared to 2016 Carlin, USA.
Gold production increased 3% primarily due to higher tons and ore grade mined at Leeville, partially offset by halted mining activity at the Silverstar mine due to the geotechnical issues in the fourth quarter of 2016.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce decreased 1% due to higher ounces sold.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 8% primarily due to lower surface grades mined resulting in inventory drawdowns.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce was in line with 2016.
Phoenix, USA.
Gold production increased 14% due to higher mill grades, and higher leach placement from mining in the Brooks pit at Lone Tree.
Copper pounds produced decreased 21% primarily due to lower copper leach placement and lower mill grade and throughput.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 7% primarily due to a higher co-product allocation of costs to gold, partially offset by higher ounces sold.
Costs applicable to sales per pound decreased 22% due to a lower co-product allocation of costs to copper and lower leaching costs as a result of lower acid consumption.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce decreased 10% due to lower amortization rates.
Depreciation and amortization per pound decreased 30% primarily due to lower amortization rates and a lower co-product allocation of depreciation and amortization to copper.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 9% primarily due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce and higher sustaining capital spend.
All-in sustaining costs per pound decreased 20% primarily due to lower costs applicable to sales per pound.
Twin Creeks, USA.
Gold production decreased 17% due to lower ore grade mined, lower mill throughput at the Juniper mill due to harder ore and lower ore grades processed at the Sage mill to optimize recovery rates.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 17% due to lower ounces sold and higher stockpile and leach pad inventory adjustments.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce increased 52% primarily due to lower ounces sold and higher stockpile and leach pad inventory adjustments.
All-in sustaining costs per ounce increased 20% due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce and higher sustaining capital spend.
Long Canyon, USA.
Long Canyon achieved commercial production in November 2016.
CC&V, USA.
Gold production increased 14% primarily due to a full year of ore placement at the Valley Leach Fill 2 leach pad and higher mill throughput.
Costs applicable to sales per ounce increased 13% primarily due to higher processing costs.
Depreciation and amortization per ounce decreased 1% primarily due to higher ounces sold.
All-in sustaining cost per ounce increased 16% primarily due to higher costs applicable to sales per ounce and higher sustaining capital.
South America Operations
## Table 1 ##
(1) Excludes Depreciation and amortization and Reclamation and remediation.
(2) All-In Sustaining Costs is a non-GAAP financial measure.
See Non-GAAP Financial Measures beginning on page 80.
(3) Commercial production at Merian was achieved in October 2016.
(4) All-In Sustaining Costs include expenses related to other regional projects that are designed to sustain current production and exploration, and Depreciation and amortization include expenses for other regional projects.
Table of Contents The following performance graph is not “soliciting material,” is not deemed filed with the SEC, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any of Valero’s filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, respectively.
This performance graph and the related textual information are based on historical data and are not indicative of future performance.
The following line graph compares the cumulative total return 1 on an investment in our common stock against the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Composite Index and an index of peer companies (that we selected) for the five-year period commencing December 31, 2007 and ending December 31, 2012.
Our peer group consists of the following ten companies: Alon USA Energy, Inc. ; BP plc (BP); CVR Energy, Inc. ; Hess Corporation; HollyFrontier Corporation; Marathon Petroleum Corporation; Phillips 66 (PSX); Royal Dutch Shell plc (RDS); Tesoro Corporation; and Western Refining, Inc.  Our peer group previously included Chevron Corporation (CVX) and Exxon Mobil Corporation (XOM) but they were replaced with BP, PSX, and RDS.
In 2012, PSX became an independent downstream energy company and was added to our peer group.
CVX and XOM were replaced with BP and RDS as they were viewed as having operations that more closely aligned with our core businesses.
COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN1 Among Valero Energy Corporation, the S&P 500 Index, Old Peer Group, and New Peer Group
## Table 2 ##
1 Assumes that an investment in Valero common stock and each index was $100 on December 31, 2007.
“Cumulative total return” is based on share price appreciation plus reinvestment of dividends from December 31, 2007 through December 31, 2012.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Gold or Copper Produced</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>GOLD</td><td colspan="3">(ounces in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Batu Hijau</td><td>701</td><td>676</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>Attributable to Newmont -48.5%</td><td>340</td><td>328</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>COPPER</td><td colspan="3">(pounds in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Batu Hijau</td><td>413</td><td>494</td><td>156</td></tr><tr><td>Attributable to Newmont -48.5%</td><td>200</td><td>240</td><td>76</td></tr><tr><td>COPPER</td><td colspan="3">(tonnes in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Batu Hijau</td><td>187</td><td>224</td><td>71</td></tr><tr><td>Attributable to Newmont -48.5%</td><td>91</td><td>109</td><td>34</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Gold Ounces Produced</td><td colspan="3">Costs Applicable to Sales-1</td><td colspan="3">Depreciation and Amortization</td><td colspan="3">All-In Sustaining Costs-2</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>GOLD</td><td colspan="3">(in thousands)</td><td>($ per ounce sold)</td><td colspan="2"></td><td>($ per ounce sold)</td><td colspan="2"></td><td>($ per ounce sold)</td><td colspan="2"></td></tr><tr><td>Yanacocha</td><td>515</td><td>535</td><td>655</td><td>$813</td><td>$939</td><td>$824</td><td>$207</td><td>$250</td><td>$427</td><td>$967</td><td>$1,150</td><td>$1,014</td></tr><tr><td>Merian-3</td><td>534</td><td>513</td><td>104</td><td>512</td><td>467</td><td>342</td><td>167</td><td>179</td><td>122</td><td>627</td><td>544</td><td>344</td></tr><tr><td>Total / Weighted Average-4</td><td>1,049</td><td>1,048</td><td>759</td><td>$660</td><td>$709</td><td>$759</td><td>$201</td><td>$229</td><td>$404</td><td>$804</td><td>$870</td><td>$932</td></tr><tr><td>Yanacocha -48.65%(5)</td><td>-244</td><td>-260</td><td>-319</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Merian -25.00%</td><td>-134</td><td>-128</td><td>-26</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Attributable to Newmont</td><td>671</td><td>660</td><td>414</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>12/2007</td><td>12/2008</td><td>12/2009</td><td>12/2010</td><td>12/2011</td><td>12/2012</td></tr><tr><td>Valero Common Stock</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$31.45</td><td>$25.09</td><td>$35.01</td><td>$32.26</td><td>$53.61</td></tr><tr><td>S&P 500</td><td>100.00</td><td>63.00</td><td>79.67</td><td>91.67</td><td>93.61</td><td>108.59</td></tr><tr><td>Old Peer Group</td><td>100.00</td><td>80.98</td><td>76.54</td><td>88.41</td><td>104.33</td><td>111.11</td></tr><tr><td>New Peer Group</td><td>100.00</td><td>66.27</td><td>86.87</td><td>72.84</td><td>74.70</td><td>76.89</td></tr></table>

Question: what was the mathematical range for all four groups in 12/2010 , assuming investments of $ 100 initially in 2008?
Answer: 56.66
Reasoning program: subtract(91.67,35.01)