Currently mineral resources evaluation is firstly expressed in terms of volume. Next the resources are transformed into tonnes by using an average bulk density applied to the whole deposit or, in some other circumstances, various different densities to distinct geological domains. Previous work in uranium, copper and nickel deposits used linear correlation between grades and bulk density to derive the density. Geophysics methods are also another good way to obtain density indirectly.These approaches do not take into account that two samples with the same grade but with different bulk densities can characterise different sample supports, leading to severe bias in grade and tonne estimates. It is important that the systematic measurements of bulk density are included into the estimation process, particularly when density is not correlated with the grades. Additionally, the extra time and costs involved in obtaining the bulk density data have made the mining industry disregard it.This study reports the impact in resource estimates by using a methodology that includes the bulk density variability. It involves the determination of a variability model for the bulk density and another model for the composite that was weighted by density as well as by its length. Next, these variables are estimated by kriging and the final grade estimates are obtained. The tonnages are obtained with the bulk density estimates. The conventional methodology was also applied and both estimates are compared to the reconciliation data from a major copper deposit. The results show a significant difference between the tonnage and grade estimates obtained from these two methodologies.The results show that considering density variability when compositing leads to a more accurate methodology resulting in better grade and tonnage estimates locally and globally.