Major banks pull out from net-zero initiatives as energy demand soars

At start of a new year, we normally take a step back from our weekly focus on the granular details of specific metals, individual policies, etc, and take a macro view, examining the bigger picture and underlying trends.

At the start of 2023, we projected the world had reached peak green and that “for the energy transition, 2024 will be a year of retrenchment” with:

• further pushback on net-zero deadlines
• increased tariffs vs China
• nuclear power will continue to rise as a priority
• a shift back towards traditional fossil fuel energy

This year we go further.

2025 will be a make-or-break year for many geopolitical gambits played over the past 30 years, but we want to focus on a single one projection for 2025:

The end of net-zero targets.

The end of net-zero targets will have a significant impact across the energy and mining industry.

And it has already started with major banks, including Morgan Stanley, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, CitiGroup, Bank of America and Wells Fargo, announcing they have left the Net-Zero Banking Alliance; and BlackRock announcing they have left the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative, one of the world’s biggest climate-investor groups, which has now announced its suspended activities.

There are five main factors driving this trend:

• AI
• high energy costs in Europe
• China (and coal)
• Interest Rates, higher for longer
• Donald Trump

Net-zero targets

The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change, adopted by 196 Parties at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris, France, on 12 December 2015.

Its primary goal is to hold “the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels”, with global leaders stressing the need for greenhouse gas emissions to peak before 2025 and decline 43% by 2030.

The nationally determined contributions to meet net-zero targets include:

• European Union (EU)’s legally binding target of climate neutrality by 2050, with an interim target of 55% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 1990 levels
• the US rejoined the Paris Agreement in 2021 and has pledged (not legally-binding) to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 50-52% in 2030 and reach net-zero by 2050
• China has pledged (not legally-binding) to be carbon neutral by 2060
• India has pledged to reach net-zero by 2070

These net zero targets may not be “officially” removed from legislation, but their practical relevance is likely to critically diminish as countries struggle to meet ambitious climate goals amidst economic and political pressures.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

For the first time in decades, demand for energy is increasing exponentially. The reason is energy demand for data centers to run Artificial Intelligence (AI), estimated to increase 160% by 2030. Data centers worldwide currently consume 1-2% of overall power, but this percentage is expected to increase 3-4% by 2030.

What sets this growth in AI apart is that it is driven by consumer and business demand on the tech corporations, facilitated by governments, all who want to maintain their global cutting edge.

For example, Microsoft expects to spend US$80 billion on AI-enabled data centers in 2025. And, coinciding with the rise in AI energy demands, in July 2024, Google stopped claiming its operations are carbon neutral after it ended the purchase of carbon offsets.

McKinsey forecasts generative AI has the potential to generate value equivalent to US$2.6 trillion to US$4.4 trillion in global corporate profits annually.

High energy costs in Europe

Since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, and the subsequent restrictions on natural gas exports from Russia (most recently with the halt of gas exports through Ukraine), Western Europe has been significantly impacted by volatile energy prices – a problem exacerbated by renewable energy investments that do not provide baseload electricity.

The result is that Europe is paying high electricity prices and seeing a wave of heavy industry leaving the region.

For example, the German economy is facing the longest recession since World War II, primarily due to high energy prices. And, in the UK, in January 2025, the country’s largest gas storage site warned only a week of natural gas supply remained after wind capacity across the continent fell in winter weather as the country came within a “whisker” of power blackouts.

There are a lot of dynamics behind the decline of Europe but, to put quite starkly: the countries that are benefiting from the de-industrialization of Europe (the US, China, India) as industry looks for a new home, need more energy to meet the new demand — and see the decline of the European economy due to its vulnerability to high energy costs as a warning.

China (and coal)

October 1, 2024, was the first day in nearly 150 years that power plants in the UK did not burn any coal to generate electricity.

But, China is burning record amount of coal, despite the country’s pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and its investment in renewable energy — accounting for more than 50% of global coal demand.

The IEA has revised up its forecast for China’s coal demand, expecting it to hit a record every year until at least 2027.

And it’s not just in China. Global operating coal capacity grew by 2% in 2023, with a small increase from countries other than China, for the first time since 2019; in particular, in Indonesia, India, Vietnam, Japan, Bangladesh, Pakistan.

As demand for cheap energy increases in China (and elsewhere) with AI and manufacturing demands, an economic slowdown, as well as geopolitical tensions and tariffs from the US, coal consumption will be a very difficult stop.

Interest rates

Higher interest rates disproportionately affect renewable energy projects (and nuclear power) due to the high capital intensity and low returns of the projects, despite government subsidies.

For example, analysis by Wood MacKenzie shows that a 2%-point increase in the risk-free interest rate pushes up the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) by as much as 20% for renewables. The comparative increase in LCOE for a combined-cycle gas turbine plant is only 11%.

In North America and Europe the cost of debt for renewables was x4 higher in 2023 than in 2020, driven by increases in base interest rates.

The zero interest-rate policies deployed across the US, EU and Japan, from 2008 to 2022 saw some of the highest investments in renewable energy — hitting a record US$358 billion H1 2023, a 22% increase of H1 2022.

Despite the 25 basis point interest rate cut by the Federal Reserve on November 7, 2024, many other countries did not follow, for example, the Bank of England voted to hold rates at 4.75% in December 2024.

Barring a global financial event, we expect interest rates to hold, if not rise, over the next year or more. We are not alone: the Bank of America has revised its forecast, stating the rate cutting cycle has ended, with the next move is up, not down. Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan have also revised their expectations to reduct the number of cuts expected this year.

With all the other headwinds facing the industry, high interest rates will significantly impact investment into renewable energy.

Donald Trump

Donald Trump has pledged to redirect financing for what he described as “the green new scam” to roads, bridges and other infrastructure, promising to “drill, baby drill.”

In 2017, Trump pulled the US out of the Paris Agreement and his re-election campaign promised to do the same again in a second term.

And it’s not just Trump with concerns about net zero targets.

According to Pew Research, 87% of Republicans are concerned a transition away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy sources would be very or somewhat likely to lead to unexpected problems for the country. Only 12% of Republicans and Republican leaners say dealing with climate change should be a top priority for the president and Congress.

As we have outlined in our recent analysis — Trump wants to make mining American again — on the significance of the re-election of Trump for the energy transition and mining, there are significant complexities to any agenda to completely dismantle the energy transition in the US.

For example, 92% of investments from the Inflation Reduction Act went primarily into Republican states.

However, the priorities of the new Trump administration for the next four years are clear.

Geopolitical tensions between the US and China will also disrupt energy transition supply chains.

Trump has pledged 60-100% tariffs on imports from China (Biden already put a 100% tariffs on EVs from China) — a move supported by many in the industry, for example, a US graphite association has called for 920% tariffs on Chinese imports.

We expect the rollout of tariffs to develop into a highly complex negotiation between the US and the rest of the world, especially China. But, ultimately, we believe the tariffs will (continue to) pull more investment into the US (especially the dollar).

Supply chains, already vulnerable after Covid, the Ukraine war, and escalating export restrictions between the US and China over semiconductors — are expected to intensify, especially in the first half of the year.

China has already responded, with restrictions on critical minerals such as gallium, germanium and antimony, as well as possible lithium processing technology and graphite.

With China dominating much of the critical mineral mining and processing supply chain, any tariffs by Trump may accelerate the move across the West to onshore/friend-shore supply chains but, at least in the short-term, there will be significant disruption across critical mineral supply and renewable energy exports.

Conclusion

This is not the end of net-zero or the renewable energy industry, in fact, far from it.

We expect significant investment across the electric battery and electric vehicle sectors, as well as nuclear energy and some of renewable energy sectors (in particular solar, less so wind energy).

Demand for critical minerals to build out the renewable energy sector will therefore continue to grow, but there will be new dynamics including longer-term horizons, splitting of supply chains between the US and China, and new priority demands from industries such as data centers.

However, a combination of urgent, massive demand for new energy supply to power AI, just as costs are rising across the renewable sector — as well as general living costs across the world — mean governments, companies and voters have other increasingly urgent priorities.

No, this isn’t another article bemoaning China’s strategic maneuvers in the critical mineral sector or the West’s failure to plan more than one election cycle out. But it does seem China always is at least one step, and usually several steps, ahead. It’s as if China is playing the long game. This article asks a different question, namely, what if China is playing an even longer end game than currently thought.

There is a popular (and likely incorrect) anecdote that Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai in 1972 declared it “too soon to tell” the significance of the French Revolution of 1789. Whether he was referring to that Revolution or the Paris Riots of 1968, it is demonstrative of the West’s perception of the Chinese as wise long-term planners.

China has established itself as the most dominant force in the critical mineral supply chain. Blessed with abundant large mineral deposits hosting some of the rarest industrial minerals, China also possesses significant portions of global processing capacity for minerals like cobalt, copper, and rare earth elements. This dominance provides China with substantial political leverage, as other countries need these minerals for their own technologies in defense, clean energy, and electronics.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative has facilitated extensive investments in critical mineral mines worldwide, particularly in Africa’s Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), where China controls most cobalt mining operations. In fact, globally, China owns or controls roughly 44% of the cobalt supply.

Additionally, China has imposed export restrictions on minerals like gallium and germanium, which are crucial for semiconductor production. Predictably, in return, limits were imposed on China’s access to chips and semiconductors.

In the face of China’s relentless advances, the rest of us are spending heavily to play catch-up. We’re running a race where the other runner left the starting line thirty years ago. Countries like the United States and Canada are now ‘investing’ furiously to diversify their supply chains and reduce dependency on Chinese minerals, which by necessity diverts funds from other science. Canada’s budget in March, 2023 allocated $70 billion to support investments in clean electricity and clean growth, in addition to the $2.5 billion for Environment and Climate Change Canada.

In comparison, Canada committed $30 billion over 5 years to establish a national child care system. (I realize $30 billion is an unimaginable amount of money, but that works out to only $6 billion a year, or roughly 8% of allocation to clean electricity investments.)

And what if that was the point all along?

I remember reading a short story some years back (I can’t find it and I don’t remember the title). The plot went like this. American scientists today realize the space race with Russia in the 1950s and 60s yielded very little by way of usable science, but at the time, many high-quality research programs went unfunded as resources were poured into beating Russia to the Moon. It was all about national pride and ego, regardless of the cost, with little to show for it.

In the story, there are rumours that China will fund a program allowing it to be the first nation on Mars. The American scientists with pending research are terrified, not because of China going to Mars but the potential impact it could have on the American government’s ego, who would in turn spend uncountable dollars in a new space race to Mars. The Chinese program to Mars is announced, days later a rival American program is announced. The American scientists see their carefully planned research programs go unfunded as all resources are suddenly concentrated on beating China to Mars, for the good of pride and ego, with a Chinese diplomat laughing quietly in the background.

A situation that may not be entirely different from what is happening today in the critical minerals space.

Here’s a thesis into the longer Chinese game.

We start with the observation that our world will change. It’s inevitable. This blue dot of ours has seen five major mass extinctions. We had very little oxygen in the atmosphere for 4 billion of our 4.5 billion year history, until cyanobacteria released oxygen into seawater and then into the atmosphere, fundamentally changing the nature of life. The magnetic poles have reversed positions roughly 171 times in the past 71 million years, with the most recent reversal coming a mere 780,000 years ago. Falling sea levels helped create the Bering Land Bridge roughly 36,000 years ago, and rising levels covered it 12,000 years ago. There is nothing to be done to compete against these large scale natural events. They are going to happen regardless of how smart we think we are or what technologies we invent.

But a great deal can be done to address the effects of change. Look at the province of Manitoba. The Winnipeg Free Press criticized Wab Kinew’s budget for not doing anything to battle climate change. The government’s response was that fighting climate change was a national and international issue, not one for a provincial government to address on its own. However, it is up to the province to combat the local effects of change, hence the rebates for electric vehicle purchase, investments in local zero-emission bus manufacturing, and support for cleaner energy solutions like heat pumps.

In 2024, Manitoba budgeted over $51 million for wildfire suppression, with another $19 million to support Manitoba’s firefighters. If there will be fires due to climate change, Manitoba intends to be ready to fight them.

Is it possible China, taking the long term view, knows that the climate will change, in some places for better and some places for much worse, but most importantly sees such change as inevitable. It is instead looking at how to place China in a globally superior position once such massive changes are underway. One way to do that is to encourage other countries to expend vast resources on battling climate change, which by necessity takes funds away from other projects like helping people deal with the results of climate change. Meanwhile, behind the Big Red Wall and with its authoritarian government, China could be getting ready to benefit from the consequences of change. The Great Chinese Headfake.

---

The upcoming CMI Summit IV, themed The War for Critical Minerals and Capital Resources, is scheduled to take place in Toronto, Ontario, on May 13-14, 2025. The CMI Summit aims to foster strategic partnerships and develop actionable solutions that support the growing demand for critical minerals, crucial for the advancement of clean energy, technology, and national security.

To secure a CMI Membership, click here or to secure a CMI Summit IV 2-day Delegates Pass, click here

Welcome to the latest issue of the Technology Metals Report (TMR), brought to you by the Critical Minerals Institute (CMI). In this edition, we compile the most impactful stories shared by our CMI Directors over the past week, reflecting the dynamic and evolving nature of the critical minerals and technology metals industry. Among the key stories featured are the UK’s bold initiative to increase financial support for critical minerals imports, the approval of a major lithium project in Nevada aimed at reducing U.S. reliance on Chinese supply chains, and Eramet’s strategic acquisition of the Centenario lithium project in Argentina. These developments are reshaping the critical minerals landscape and influencing global supply chains for industries dependent on these materials.

This week’s TMR also highlights the growing tensions in Myanmar’s rare earth mining regions, where an armed group has seized control of a key mining hub, disrupting critical mineral supplies to China. We cover the increase in U.S. copper imports following a recent CME squeeze, as well as the U.S. government’s $428 million investment in clean energy projects to support coal-reliant communities. Additionally, Brazil’s new rare earths project, endorsed by the U.S.-led Minerals Security Partnership, illustrates efforts to diversify supply chains and reduce dependence on China’s critical minerals.

We also feature insights from Melissa Sanderson’s recent article, The US Presidential Election: A Tight Race with Big Stakes for Clean Energy and Critical Minerals. Sanderson explores how the outcome of the election could dramatically affect the clean energy agenda and the critical minerals sector, depending on which party wins. With policy shifts on decarbonization and energy independence on the line, the stakes for the sector have never been higher. As geopolitical and economic factors continue to evolve, the critical minerals industry remains at the center of these global transformations.

To become a CMI member, click here: Join CMI.

The US Presidential Election: A Tight Race with Big Stakes for Clean Energy and Critical Minerals (October 25, 2024, Source) —The upcoming US presidential election, described as one of the most consequential in recent history, is poised to significantly impact the clean energy and critical minerals sectors. Melissa Sanderson of the Critical Minerals Institute highlights the starkly different paths each party could take, influencing policies on energy independence and decarbonization. As the race approaches its conclusion, with battleground states like North Carolina, Georgia, and Arizona playing pivotal roles, the election outcome remains uncertain, potentially leading to legal disputes and even demonstrations. Despite the election’s tight margins, little has been said about climate change, a critical issue given recent destructive weather events. The Republican platform suggests a rollback on clean energy incentives, while the Democratic vision includes expanding decarbonization efforts. The election results could redefine US energy policy and critical mineral development, affecting both domestic initiatives and geopolitical dynamics.

UK Critical Mineral Importers to Get Financial Support in Budget (October 25, 2024, Source) — The UK is set to increase financial support for companies importing critical minerals such as lithium, graphite, and cobalt, as announced by Chancellor Rachel Reeves in the upcoming budget. This initiative aims to strengthen British industries and lessen dependence on China by granting importers access to UK Export Finance if they have long-term contracts with UK exporters. This move is expected to advantage sectors like defense, aerospace, and renewable energy. Additionally, the budget will introduce tax hikes and increased borrowing to raise £40 billion, primarily to fund the National Health Service and cover a fiscal deficit attributed to previous Conservative governance. Amidst these changes, the government has successfully attracted £63 billion in international investments and plans further private investments to stimulate economic growth.

US approves lithium project in push to break China’s grip on EV minerals (October 24, 2024, Source) — The US has greenlighted a major lithium mining project in Nevada as part of efforts to reduce dependence on Chinese-dominated critical mineral supply chains. Australian firm Ioneer Ltd. (ASX: INR | NASDAQ: IONR) announced the federal permit for its Rhyolite Ridge lithium-boron mine, aimed at supporting the production of around 370,000 electric vehicles annually. This initiative marks the first lithium mine approval under President Biden’s administration, which also includes a $700 million loan to enhance domestic lithium output. The mine could significantly increase U.S. lithium production by 2028. Despite environmental concerns and opposition from conservation groups, modifications and a protection plan for the endangered Tiehm’s buckwheat flower have allowed the project to proceed.

Eramet takes full control of lithium project from China’s Tsingshan (October 24, 2024, Source) — Eramet has acquired Tsingshan’s 49.9% stake in the Centenario lithium project in Argentina for $699 million, assuming full ownership as the project nears production commencement. This move allows Eramet to independently manage future expansions, including a potential second production facility. Despite recent declines in lithium prices, Eramet’s stock rose by 6% following the announcement, which partially offset the steep losses experienced after recent production target reductions. Additionally, Eramet announced the suspension of an electric vehicle battery recycling project in France and other cost-cutting measures, including a reduction in this year’s capital investment target. The company also delayed construction of the second plant in Argentina until potentially 2026, citing market volatility but maintained expectations of improved EBITDA in the latter half of the year.

US copper imports accelerate in wake of CME squeeze (October 24, 2024, Source) — Following the May squeeze on the CME copper contract, U.S. copper imports have significantly increased, influenced by a favorable arbitrage opportunity between the CME and LME. This has led to a redistribution of copper stocks, boosting CME inventories while depleting those of the LME and ShFE. Notably, imports from Chile, the primary supplier, have risen sharply, making the U.S. the largest recipient of Chilean copper during this period. This influx of copper to the U.S. has helped cover short positions on the CME, alleviating the pressure from earlier squeezes and balancing the exchange’s inventory levels. Despite a global consistency in elevated exchange inventory, domestic challenges such as production cuts at major mines like Bingham Canyon due to geotechnical issues suggest that the U.S. might rely even more on imports to meet its copper demand.

Armed group says it takes control of Myanmar rare earth mining hub (October 23, 2024, Source) — The Kachin Independence Army (KIA), an armed group in Myanmar, has seized control of Panwa, a key rare earth mining hub, disrupting shipments of rare earth oxides crucial for clean energy and other technologies. This hub, alongside Chipwe, both in Kachin state near China’s Yunnan province, significantly supplies China. These towns were formerly controlled by the NDA-K militia, allies of Myanmar’s junta, which collaborated with Chinese companies. With Myanmar as a leading exporter, providing significant quantities of rare earth oxides to China, this takeover could impact the global supply. Rebel control has led to a halt in rare earth imports by China from Myanmar and adjustments in the trade of critical materials. Analysts suggest disruptions might continue until early-2025, potentially causing a rise in prices for rare earth elements used in various high-tech industries.

US grants $428 million to clean energy projects in communities that relied on coal (October 22, 2024, Source) — The U.S. government has allocated $428 million to enhance clean energy projects in regions historically dependent on coal, by supporting the development and expansion of battery manufacturing and recycling plants. This initiative, part of the Biden-Harris administration’s commitment to aid communities impacted by the decline of coal industries, aims to transition these areas towards sustainable energy production. Announced on a press call by Deputy U.S. Energy Secretary David Turk, the funding—stemming from the bipartisan 2021 infrastructure law—will facilitate the creation of over 1,900 high-paying jobs. It will also attract approximately $500 million in private investment. The 14 projects, distributed across 12 states including Kentucky and Texas, include significant investments like $87 million for Mainspring energy in Pennsylvania to produce linear generators capable of utilizing multiple fuel sources.

US-led Minerals Security Partnership backs new rare earths project in Brazil (October 22, 2024, Source) — The Minerals Security Partnership (MSP), an initiative led by the US and comprising 14 countries and the EU, endorsed a new rare earths project in Brazil to counteract China’s dominance in critical minerals. The Pela Ema deposit, run by Serra Verde Group and supported by significant investments from notable mining firms, illustrates the MSP’s efforts to diversify the global supply chains away from Chinese influence. However, challenges remain, as Serra Verde’s produced rare earths still require processing in China, highlighting the West’s infrastructural gaps. The MSP lacks direct funding, relying on private and state-backed investments to support such projects. Serra Verde’s recent success in fundraising is seen as a step towards establishing a competitive stance in the global market for the strategically important minerals used in advanced technologies like electric vehicles and wind turbines.

Shift to electric vehicles will have far-reaching impact, IMF says (October 22, 2024, Source) — The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has highlighted the significant implications of the global shift towards electric vehicles (EVs) in its latest World Economic Outlook. As discussed during the IMF and World Bank annual meetings, this transition is pivotal for investment, production, international trade, and employment. This shift is integral to meeting climate goals, given the substantial emissions from transportation—36% in the U.S., 21% in the EU, and 8% in China. The automotive industry, known for its high wages and strong profits, faces transformative changes, particularly with China’s current dominance in EV production and exports. This could potentially lower Europe’s GDP by about 0.3% in the medium term, with employment shifting from the automotive sector to less capital-intensive industries.

EU set to choose firm for critical minerals joint buying platform (October 21, 2024, Source) — The European Union is advancing a 9 million euro initiative to create a joint purchasing platform for critical minerals, essential for the green transition. With the aim of consolidating demand to secure more favorable terms in opaque markets often dominated by China, the EU has narrowed the competition to eight bidders, including prominent firms like Deloitte and PwC. This platform is part of the EU’s broader strategy under the Critical Raw Materials Act to reduce reliance on external suppliers and bolster domestic production. While larger companies with established supply chains may find limited use for this platform, it could benefit those seeking sustainable or niche materials. Despite industry support, concerns remain about the practicality of combining diverse materials like minerals and gases in one platform and safeguarding sensitive procurement data. The EU plans to finalize the contract by year-end, with platform development starting early next year.

Taiwan Signals Openness to Nuclear Power Amid Surging AI Demand (October 21, 2024, Source) — Taiwan, under Premier Cho Jung-tai, is considering embracing new nuclear technologies to satisfy rising electricity demands from the AI-driven semiconductor industry. Cho suggests that with consensus on nuclear safety and waste management, Taiwan could publicly discuss nuclear energy usage. The reconsideration follows heightened energy demands, evidenced by two electricity price hikes this year, and TSMC assurances of adequate resources for expansion. Globally, companies like Microsoft, Google, and Amazon are exploring next-generation nuclear solutions. Taiwan’s strategic shift also addresses potential risks from China’s military maneuvers, hinting at a blockade scenario. Meanwhile, Taiwan aims to maintain its critical role in the global semiconductor and democratic supply chains, with plans to bolster defense spending and international ties to ensure security and support in crises.

India seeks critical mineral agreement with US, hopes for a trade pact, minister says (October 19, 2024, Source) — India is actively seeking a critical mineral partnership agreement with the United States, aiming to elevate a memorandum of understanding into a broader trade pact. India’s Trade Minister Piyush Goyal expressed this ambition during a press briefing in New Delhi, proposing that this partnership could lay the groundwork for a future Free Trade Agreement (FTA). The push for this partnership follows a recent preliminary agreement between India and the U.S. to enhance cooperation on supply chains for essential minerals like lithium and cobalt, crucial for electric vehicles and clean energy. However, the existing MoU does not qualify India for the U.S.’s $7,500 electric vehicle tax credit under the Inflation Reduction Act, which is limited to trade deals and is part of broader efforts to integrate trusted allies into U.S. economic strategies.

New IAEA Report on Climate Change and Nuclear Power Focuses on Financing (October 18, 2024, Source) — The 2024 IAEA report on Climate Change and Nuclear Power, released at the Clean Energy Ministerial in Brazil, underscores the need for substantially increased investment in nuclear power to meet global climate goals. It calls for annual global investment to rise from the current $50 billion to $125 billion to meet a high projection for nuclear capacity by 2050. This could further increase to $150 billion to potentially triple capacity, as discussed at COP28. The report highlights the economic viability of nuclear plants over their nearly century-long lifespans, though it acknowledges challenges in financing initial costs, particularly in market-driven and developing economies. It also explores mechanisms to engage private and institutional investors more effectively, including multilateral development banks, to provide better financing options, particularly for developing countries.

Investor.News Media Highlights:

• October 25, 2024 – The US Presidential Election: A Tight Race with Big Stakes for Clean Energy and Critical Minerals https://bit.ly/3Ynx1JT
• October 21, 2024 – ArcStone Financial Pulse: Opportunities Surge in AI, Tech, and Clean Energy Amid Economic Shifts and Geopolitical Risks https://bit.ly/4fw1Oev

Investor.News Member News:

• October 24, 2024 – Ucore Continues to Advance its US DoD Demonstration Project towards Louisiana REE Commercialization https://bit.ly/3UkvSkZ
• October 24, 2024 – Meteoric included in Brazil’s ambitious development and climate platform https://bit.ly/3BY3E9r
• October 23, 2024 – Appia Begins Diamond Drilling to Delineate Potential Highgrade Mineralization at PCH Target IV in Goias, Brazil https://bit.ly/3A9ga5j
• October 22, 2024 – Appia Announces Non-Brokered Private Placement https://bit.ly/4dUJgTW
• October 22, 2024 – American Rare Earths Receives First Reimbursement from Wyoming Grant https://bit.ly/4feQGSQ
• October 22, 2024 – High-grade Figueira resource improves financial metrics of the Caldeira Scoping Study https://bit.ly/3BV9J6m
• October 21, 2024 – NEO Battery Materials Signs Letter of Intent for Joint Venture with Lotus Energy Recycling https://bit.ly/3A8218n
• October 21, 2024 – Panther Metals PLC – Dotted Lake: Soil Survey Extension Commenced https://bit.ly/3Yi1B7s
• October 21, 2024 – Scandium Canada Ltd. provides an update on its activities https://bit.ly/48dzXNq

“The upcoming US election is not only a tight race but could have profound implications for the clean energy and critical minerals sectors, with vastly different paths depending on the party that wins. The outcome will shape policies on energy independence, decarbonization, and regulatory environments for years to come.” — Melissa ‘Mel’ Sanderson, Co-Chair, Critical Minerals Institute (CMI).

Well, I did it. I mailed my ballot last week and so for me personally, this election is over. But the closest – and arguably most consequential – US election in recent memory is far from over. The candidates are going to go to the wire in a virtual tie, with so-called battleground States like North Carolina, Georgia and Arizona likely to determine the outcome. Viewers around the world will be glued to televisions Nov 5^th and 6^th.

With a race this tight in an environment this polarized, the results are sure to be close. There won’t be any huge margin of victory here, at least not if the polls are anything like accurate. A close election most certainly will be contested legally and, for the first time in US history, many are worried that there could be demonstrations in at least some cities. With a clear-cut victory unlikely, questions are being raised about procedure if there isn’t a candidate to be sworn-in in January, with attendant delays in filling key Cabinet positions, diplomatic postings, etc. A certain degree of disarray is possible, albeit not inevitable. But the mere fact that these things are being discussed is certainly a first in my experience.

This article isn’t about Constitutional conundrums however, but rather something much more practical: the possible effects of the election on the clean energy agenda and the critical minerals sector which depends upon it.

Amid the key issues raised by the candidates, there has been little to nothing said about climate change, which is rather striking in itself, given the magnitude of the widely recognized problem and the (debatable) consequences already being observed in the form of massively damaging and costly storms, fires and heat waves in the US, especially in 2024. The silence, however, is actually not surprising.

A recent series of Pew Research Center surveys shows that only 12% of Republicans and Republican leaners say dealing with climate change should be a top priority for the President and Congress. In fact, climate change ranked at the bottom of the 20 issues on the Pew survey index. Fifty-nine percent of Democrats and Democrat leaners, on the other hand, rank it as a top priority, with 78% viewing climate change as a major threat to US security. Perhaps not surprisingly, therefore, Republican candidate/former President Trump has frequently referred to climate change as a “hoax” and “fake science.” Democratic candidate/current VP Harris’ relative silence seems surprising at first glance, given the support among party faithful – but her advisers probably have urged her that the best strategy is to keep focused on pocketbook issues like inflation and taxes.

Despite the polling numbers and popular perception, it is important to remember that significant numbers of Republican Representatives have supported, and even introduced, climate change legislation. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) could not have been passed without support from Republicans (albeit that the majority still did oppose that Bill). Energy independence, and independence from China’s hegemonistic position in the critical minerals space, has spurred Republican actions until now, but it is far from clear that this support would continue if Trump wins the election.

The Republican Party platform is quite clear, for instance, in calling for the IRA to be rescinded and unspent monies to be reallocated. The priority, per the vision document, should be on greatly increasing oil and gas production, withdrawing incentives for electric or hybrid vehicles and slowing deployment of wind turbines and hydropower in favor of increased nuclear and gas powered energy generation. (Ironically, oil production rose during the Biden Administration as well.) While these policies would benefit one element of the critical minerals space (the nuclear energy industry), other critical minerals would-be producers more closely tied to alternative energy and electric vehicles could face additional headwinds to project development.

The Democratic Party platform, in contrast, envisions IRA 2, expanding the scope and rate of decarbonization measures across the economy while ‘tapering off’ new oil projects in favor of ‘green hydrogen’ and other alternative fuels.

It’s worth mentioning that in the realm of unintended consequences, critical minerals mining projects could indirectly benefit if a Republic Administration proceeded with its vision of abolishing or sharply diminishing certain government functions such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Bureau of Land Management (BLM) etc., effectively sharply reducing the regulatory time and burden needed to bring new projects on-line. Likewise, should a Harris Administration heed the advice of many advisors and implement more fully the authorities embedded in the Defense Production Act, new mines could find themselves in a less burdensome environment with the added advantage of possible new and expanded government funding available.

As always, election campaigns produce many visions, promises and pledges, most of which seem never to be realized, so it is impossible to say with any certainty what really could happen over the next couple of years. That said, based only on the policies outlined in the two party platforms, and taking into account China’s market dominance, a Democratic Administration might (ironically) prove the better choice for the fledgling critical minerals segment of the mining industry.

It’s certainly a neck-and-neck horse race down the stretch, so let’s see what happens in two weeks.

A Brief History of the Origins of the Demands for today’s Critical Minerals and the Consequences of their Geographic Locations

In 1934, the American economist Harry Dexter White, who later was to mold the Bretton Woods Agreement, negotiated in 1944, into the American dollar’s global dominance that, although beginning now, after 80 years, to fade, still exists, wrote:

“The stabilizing influence exerted by the interdependence of nations is not likely in the future, however, to be so great as it has been in the past. Other countries are awake to the disturbing forces coming from abroad. They also are concerned over their domestic stability and are less hesitant about adopting restrictive measures to ward off disturbances. Bumper export crops in the United States are more likely in the future to be met by specially imposed import restrictions designed to check ‘dumping,’ rising discount rates will be met with more effective measures for protecting gold, and so on. Increased government control by numerous important countries over their international trade and finance will be used more and more to wrest competitive advantage away from competing countries, and the struggle for competitive advantage in trading relations will, as a result, become keener and more prolific of sudden important shifts in the movements of international goods and capital. These developments in the direction of more intense economic nationalism obstruct the path of such stabilizing influences as the free exchange of goods, services, and capital might be expected to have.”

Ninety years later, world leaders, markedly unburdened with any knowledge of fact-based science or of common sense economics and too often completely inexperienced in the real world of commerce, are driving nations to economic ruin to “save” them from the most recent fantasy crisis of climate change. They use fact pickers, not fact-checkers, to carefully craft and support policies that churn capital needlessly to allocate it to favored industries that benefit only a few but benefit the “policymakers” themselves. Naturally, these leaders seek advice only from a carefully culled set of reliable “experts” who will be sure to agree with only the “correct” self-enriching policies.

The critical minerals of today are defined by consumer choices, not military ones, in the two nations that make up one-half of the world economy. The leaders and policies of both nations say that economic self-sufficiency is their goal, but the geology of geography has made natural resource self-sufficiency too expensive a goal to achieve (or maintain) in any one nation. This has impeded and probably eliminated economic self-sufficiency as a realistic goal if any modern nation wants to achieve and maintain a good standard of living for all of its citizens.

China and the United States have three things in common: They are both economic superpowers, deeply in debt, and economically interdependent. So that you’ll continue to read, let me first define the terms in my title for you:

1. Chimerica is my shorthand for China + America; it does not mean that China has a secret project intended to control America from within and
2. A chimera is defined as something hoped or wished for that is impossible to achieve.

How do we choose which is a critical mineral for either China or America? First, we need to determine where and when we are speaking. For the respective governments, it depends on which historical time period and which part of the population we are trying to satisfy in that period. The common cohort in both countries is the average citizen. He/She today wants air conditioning in the summer and heat in the winter, as well as personal transportation for local needs and mass transportation for long-distance travel, low-cost and abundant food, adequate and reasonably priced medical care, housing, and safety from normal climate variation, industrial pollution, crime, and war. The wealthy elites of both countries at all times want safety to do whatever they wish, most of all, and the politicians in both countries want to balance their dependence upon and subservience to wealth creation by tilting the playing field in favor of money creators (but destroying any sincerity or possible effectiveness of good intentions by cutting themselves in on the wealth, of course, always).

Both governments state that wealth creation for the benefit of all is their goal. The Chinese name this as a socialist concept, actually going back to Mao, which they call “shared prosperity,” Both governments then ignore this lofty goal in favor of wealth accumulation by their reliable “donors” for their benefit, with, of course, some reserved for the governing officials. I note that Imperial Japan’s former aristocracy used this theme to justify their recent failed attempt at conquest. The Japanese purpose was the creation of “The Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.” Apparently, in political control themes, what goes around comes around.

Privately owned manufacturers’ universal goal is much more straightforward: They want to create wealth by supplying the widest market with products that the market demands at the highest price they can sell them for (this is why capitalists hate competition; it keeps prices down). Any interest in and designation of critical minerals derives from the motives of money and power acquisition and maintenance in both nations.

However, at least in the United States, when the government tries to dictate consumer market demand (aka, “induced demand”), all common sense supply chains are interrupted.

In the most basic case, for the regular and reliable energy supply, that’s where we are now in both countries. Based on actual demand and economically determined supply, there would be no demand for any but the lowest-cost energy. In place of that actual demand for lowest cost energy by the majority of the people, we have in both countries the rule of “progressives” who say that they know better than the majority what is good for the majority, and so they just ignore, as much as possible, the actual wishes of the majority. Thus, for their holds on power and their own economic benefits, they promote higher-cost “alternate” or( as the Chinese call it) “new”energy sources, the construction and operations of which require larger quantities than ever before of scarce technology metals critical for such construction and operation. Thus, a demand for alternate energy-enabling metals such as lithium and rare earths is induced, but this is not in response to any real (free) market demand.

The current twenty-first-century selection of critical minerals has arisen to provide alternate (non-fossil-fueled) energy and to mass-produce consumer devices that are said to improve the standard of living of the average person by giving them low-cost access to communications and entertainment.

Electrical energy is the lifeblood of the Global North. History, science, and technology have only recently given us the lowest-cost energy source ever: fossil fuels. And that factor, low-cost energy, gave impetus to the greatest flowering of scientific and technological progress in humanity’s history.

The first mass production of relatively cheap (for the times) electrical energy was in the late nineteenth century when water flow turbine generators were invented. The invention of the steam-powered turbine (its own heat energy derived from burning coal) followed, and then the mass application of the electric motor and the invention of Alternating Current production, distribution, and end-use devices gave us the twentieth century’s (second) industrial revolution, the affordable fruits of which we, in the West, have enjoyed up until now.

From the end of World War II until the first manned landing on the moon (in 1969 for you youngsters), military requirements and U.S. Defense Department money fueled, unintentionally, a third “consumer products” based industrial revolution. The military requirements were for miniaturized electronic communications and mechanical components, radar, and computers. This led to the invention of the integrated circuit “chip,” but that was preceded (necessarily) by the discovery of methods to find, extract, separate, and ultra purify metals and non-metals, which until that time had been laboratory curiosities. These are the “technology metals” the electronic properties of which now make them critical minerals and metals to be utilized in mass-produced miniature devices for communication, data storage, micromechanical movement and entertainment.

Of course, silicon has been known for a long time, but its ultrapurification, first for use in semiconductors and then in solar cells, was a post-World War II achievement that triggered a new discipline among metallurgists, the commercial production of quantities of ultrapure technology metals necessary and sufficient for the mass production of consumer devices.

None of these critical metals and minerals today deemed necessary for this micro miniaturization of electronics revolution were available in commercial quantities or even sufficient quantities for experimentation until or after World War II. All of them were brought into production during that period for the purposes and use by the U.S. Military for manufacturing and controlling weapons and communication. All of that initial production was done without regard to cost; it was for the “defense” of the United States. Even the best educated among my contemporaries overlook the fantastic advances in the chemical engineering of extractive and purification required and achieved to bring the technology metals of our age into “mass production” economically,

Ultrapurification, necessary to establish the baseline electronic properties of materials, would never have been accomplished commercially due to its research and development costs if it had not been for the military’s need for miniaturized electronic devices.

At the beginning of World War II the allied nations sought to secure sufficient supplies of metals to make armor and ammunition. These were the alloying elements for steel, nickel, chrome, and tungsten and the copper and zinc necessary to make cartridge brass.

During the war, uranium, zirconium, silicon, and gallium became necessary for weapons and communications equipment, and the ultrapurification of all of those above and of germanium became a necessity. Interestingly, the separation of the rare earths and their purification was intensely studied during the war because the lanthanides (the rare earths) had chemical properties analogous to those of the actinides (the radioactive elements ) and so they could be used to infer the chemical properties of the actinides without the need for massive and restrictive shielding that is necessary when working directly with the radioactive actinides.

By the end of the war the chemical engineering had been done to assure greater supplies than ever before in history of many previously obscure metals and materials, because their extraction, separation, refining, and fabricating had been developed without regard to cost, and stockpiles had been built of them.

An intense period of invention based on the electronic and magnetic properties of the newly available technology metals occurred between 1945 and the end of the 1970s during which period America’s Federal Government lavishly supported research and development.

For example, separated rare earths became important for enabling true-color electronic displays, but their use in making very small but powerful permanent magnets was a scientific discovery made during the 1970s transition of R&D support, when private industry took over and made its own (market driven) choices for research and development. The engineering of the mass production of these magnets was entirely done by private enterprise and was driven by the needs of consumer products.

By the end of the 1970s, two cultures had emerged to support research and development: the military-industrial complex and the civilian consumer market.

Technology may be defined as the engineering of science.

The United States does not officially have an industrial policy, but its Department of Defense does have one: The application of engineering to the mass production of weapons shall be directed (and defined) by the Department of Defense.

The American consumer products industry follows the rules first defined by Adam Smith: Scientific discoveries to be engineered for mass production shall be chosen by either listening to the market or gambling that a “new” product will find acceptance. And such products must be affordable.

When the U.S. Department of Defense underwrote almost all basic research and development from 1942 until 1973, it was focused on military uses but open to civilian applications of technologies so long as, in its opinion, such uses did not compromise national security. Thus, the consumer market got transistors, integrated circuits (chips), solid-state electronics, and then electronic color television, and, most importantly, the widely available electronic components that allowed “inventors” epitomized by Steve Wozniak to assemble useful consumer devices such as the personal computer.

The invention (another term for the engineering of science) of the seminal miniature electric motor based on the use of rare earth permanent magnets was pioneered by scientists and engineers working for a large Japanese trading house, Sumitomo, and the then-largest OEM automotive company in the world, America’s General Motors.

The final triad of critical metals, platinum, palladium, and rhodium became such during the 1970s, when the engineering of catalyst materials for automotive exhaust emission catalytic converters occurred, and these three metals were chosen as the most effective for the purpose.

The honeymoon period for the dominance of development of new military market uses of devices based on the electronic properties of the technology metals was brief in historical terms.

Today, the markets have flipped. Consumer demand for products dependent upon the electronic properties of technology metals is now the dominant driver for the exploration and development of sources of critical minerals. And the consumer market has now added the last critical mineral for our age. Lithium.

Even so, the U.S. military has distorted the sourcing of such minerals by making financial “grants” to potential mineral vendors and processors it believes can immediately benefit its (limited) needs. The American consumer-oriented manufacturing economy, if left alone without government-induced demand market distortions, does not favor reducing the scope of the fossil-fueled energy economy. The flood of wasted capital, all from “borrowing by the national government, that has gone into the climate change agenda has, in my opinion, wrecked the American manufacturing industry by distorting its focus away from the real market of actual consumer demand.

China’s rulers, in their quest for economic self-sufficiency, have also wasted enormous amounts of capital in constructing a massive overcapacity and overproducing almost all domestic natural resources. However, they have also achieved material self-sufficiency through the adoption of the capitalist system of resource acquisition solely by investment rather than the imperial one of conquest.

The American consumer manufacturing industry has not seen the need for technology raw materials’ self-sufficiency so long as it could piggyback on Chinese achievements.

The American military, though, is in panic mode. It has become obvious to the military-industrial complex that the civilian resource market is no longer interested in or capable of supplying operational or critical mineral needs for national security.

One statistic tells it all: Today, in August 2024, China’s domestic shipbuilding industry is 500 TIMES LARGER THAN AMERICAS!

What has America lost by shifting its consumer manufacturing to China? The answer is the development and maintenance of critical natural resources and, ominously, the continuity of engineering necessary to maintain modern, high-tech mass production.

China has now replaced the United States as the world’s most self-sufficient manufacturing nation and as the world’s leading educator of scientists and engineers.

The only important critical material is human capital. All the financial capital in the world cannot replace it. The United States is now China’s largest trading partner.

The world’s future financial health depends on the interdependence of the two economies.

That is the only thing that is critical.

June 5, 2024 — In a recent interview with InvestorNews host Pat Bolland, Tawana Bain, CEO, and Director of American Clean Resources Group, Inc. (OTC: ACRG), discussed the importance of ACRG’s newly established Environmental Sustainability Board, which consists of experts in mining, renewable energy, and finance. “I hope that the board’s collective expertise will play a crucial role in how we shape up the strategic direction for the organization,” Bain stated, indicating her reliance on their guidance to advance smart mining and waste-to-energy technologies.

Bain also elaborated on the company’s recent well water purchase agreement with Road and Highway Builders LLC in Nevada, which supports their highway project. This initiative not only demonstrates ACRG’s capability to mobilize resources but also underscores their commitment to sustainability. By using well water, the project can reduce reliance on municipal water supplies and maintain surrounding ecosystems. Bain remarked, “It aligns perfectly with the narrative around our mantra of cleaning up America while building America.” Additionally, Bain discussed the innovative approach of transferring federal tax credits to individual investors to enhance the financial viability of renewable energy projects, describing it as a strategy to accelerate project timelines and boost investor confidence.

Furthermore, Bain touched on ACRG’s acquisition of Swiss Community, an organization focused on water quality improvement technologies. This acquisition aligns with ACRG’s long-term vision for environmental sustainability and aims to deploy these technologies across their operations. Bain expressed her enthusiasm for the potential of these technologies to address water security issues and improve community engagement. Looking ahead, she mentioned the company’s focus on exploring new projects and partnerships in the renewable energy sector, particularly in solar energy expansion and green retrofitting of facilities, reflecting ACRG’s ongoing commitment to ecological and social responsibility.

To access the complete interview, click here

Don’t miss other InvestorNews interviews. Subscribe to the InvestorNews YouTube channel by clicking here

About American Clean Resources Group, Inc.

American Clean Resources Group (OTC: ACRG), an environmentally sustainable development platform, is at the forefront of renewable and environmental development in the United States, through comprehensive Resource Management and processing of precious minerals and metals in a carbon-neutral and environmentally safe manner. Dedicated to revolutionizing the new American Supply Chain by aiming to deliver goods with a net-zero environmental impact, ACRG is committed to advancing climate change reduction, strengthening the American Supply Chain, and aiming to lead one of the largest renewable energy projects in the U.S. ACRG leverages existing assets and pursues strategic acquisitions across air, water, and land domains to benefit both public and private properties within the United States.

To learn more about American Clean Resources Group, Inc., click here

Disclaimer: American Clean Resources Group, Inc. is an advertorial member of InvestorNews Inc.

This interview, which was produced by InvestorNews Inc. (“InvestorNews”), does not contain, nor does it purport to contain, a summary of all material information concerning the Company, including important disclosure and risk factors associated with the Company, its business and an investment in its securities. InvestorNews offers no representations or warranties that any of the information contained in this interview is accurate or complete.

This interview and any transcriptions or reproductions thereof (collectively, this “presentation”) does not constitute, or form part of, any offer or invitation to sell or issue, or any solicitation of any offer to subscribe for or purchase any securities in the Company. The information in this presentation is provided for informational purposes only and may be subject to updating, completion or revision, and except as may be required by applicable securities laws, the Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update any information herein. This presentation may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and assumptions of the management of the Company as of the date made. They are inherently susceptible to uncertainty and other factors that could cause actual events/results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Additional risks and uncertainties, including those that the Company does not know about now or that it currently deems immaterial, may also adversely affect the Company’s business or any investment therein.

Any projections given are principally intended for use as objectives and are not intended, and should not be taken, as assurances that the projected results will be obtained by the Company. The assumptions used may not prove to be accurate and a potential decline in the Company’s financial condition or results of operations may negatively impact the value of its securities. This presentation should not be considered as the giving of investment advice by the Company or any of its directors, officers, agents, employees or advisors. Each person to whom this presentation is made available must make its own independent assessment of the Company after making such investigations and taking such advice as may be deemed necessary. Prospective investors are urged to review the Company’s profile on SedarPlus.ca and to carry out independent investigations in order to determine their interest in investing in the Company.

In a compelling discussion with Critical Minerals Institute (CMI) Director Melissa (Mel) Sanderson at PDAC 2024, Chad Clovis, CEO of Karbon-X Corp. (OTC: KARX), shared insights into the company’s remarkable expansion in the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) sphere, as well as in carbon offsetting initiatives. Under Chad’s leadership, Karbon-X has established itself as a leader in combating climate change, offering a subscription service that enables both individuals and organizations to engage in projects that significantly reduce carbon footprints through its innovative app and website. The company’s notable partnerships with industry giants such as Shell Energy and Drax have been instrumental in broadening its carbon offsetting solutions.

Chad Clovis proudly pointed to the app’s widespread acceptance, with over 17,000 downloads worldwide in less than a year, highlighting Karbon-X’s dual approach to cater to both businesses (B2B) and individual consumers (B2C) in promoting sustainable environmental practices. The success of initiatives like DRILLGREEN, which has attracted over 40 clients, illustrates the company’s effective engagement in environmental stewardship.

Acknowledging the critical views on ESG commitments, Chad emphasized the necessity of making gradual progress through collaboration, advocating a practical stance with the message, “We can’t be all or nothing…It’s about let’s do what we can.” This philosophy is central to Karbon-X’s strategy, aiming to achieve real environmental benefits through its app and various initiatives.

Looking to the future, Karbon-X is excited about launching new ventures, including a biochar project in Liberia and a waste-to-electricity plant in the western Baltics, demonstrating its ongoing commitment to innovative environmental solutions. In a strategic enhancement of its leadership, Karbon-X is thrilled to announce the addition of Brett Hull, a celebrated NHL Hall of Famer, and Justin Bourque, a distinguished indigenous leader in Canada, to its Board of Directors as of February 26, 2024. These appointments signify a pivotal advancement in Karbon-X’s dedication to leading the charge against climate change with cutting-edge carbon offsetting solutions.

To access the complete interview, click here

Don’t miss other InvestorNews interviews. Subscribe to the InvestorNews YouTube channel by clicking here

About Karbon-X Corp.

Karbon-X is at the forefront of the fight against climate change, offering a subscription service that allows individuals and organizations to sponsor projects that offset carbon footprints through an innovative app and website. Additionally, Karbon-X provides custom carbon offsetting solutions for businesses and organizations, aiming to make sustainability achievable for all. With a commitment to environmental stewardship and innovation, Karbon-X is dedicated to creating a greener, more sustainable future.

To learn more about Karbon-X Corp., click here

Disclaimer: Karbon-X Corp. is an advertorial member of InvestorNews Inc.

This interview, which was produced by InvestorNews Inc. (“InvestorNews”), does not contain, nor does it purport to contain, a summary of all material information concerning the Company, including important disclosure and risk factors associated with the Company, its business and an investment in its securities. InvestorNews offers no representations or warranties that any of the information contained in this interview is accurate or complete.

This interview and any transcriptions or reproductions thereof (collectively, this “presentation”) does not constitute, or form part of, any offer or invitation to sell or issue, or any solicitation of any offer to subscribe for or purchase any securities in the Company. The information in this presentation is provided for informational purposes only and may be subject to updating, completion or revision, and except as may be required by applicable securities laws, the Company disclaims any intent or obligation to update any information herein. This presentation may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking statements are based on the opinions and assumptions of the management of the Company as of the date made. They are inherently susceptible to uncertainty and other factors that could cause actual events/results to differ materially from these forward-looking statements. Additional risks and uncertainties, including those that the Company does not know about now or that it currently deems immaterial, may also adversely affect the Company’s business or any investment therein.

Any projections given are principally intended for use as objectives and are not intended, and should not be taken, as assurances that the projected results will be obtained by the Company. The assumptions used may not prove to be accurate and a potential decline in the Company’s financial condition or results of operations may negatively impact the value of its securities. This presentation should not be considered as the giving of investment advice by the Company or any of its directors, officers, agents, employees or advisors. Each person to whom this presentation is made available must make its own independent assessment of the Company after making such investigations and taking such advice as may be deemed necessary. Prospective investors are urged to review the Company’s profile on SedarPlus.ca and to carry out independent investigations in order to determine their interest in investing in the Company.

Welcome to the latest issue of the Technology Metals Report (TMR), brought to you by the Critical Minerals Institute (CMI). In this edition, we compile the most impactful stories shared by our members over the past week, reflecting the dynamic and evolving nature of the critical minerals and technology metals industry. Among the key stories featured in this report are President Joe Biden’s initiatives to restrict Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) citing national security concerns, the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy’s report naming the Toyota Prius Prime SE as the greenest car in America, and insights into the lithium market with investors remaining keen despite a price plunge. We also delve into the broader context of these developments, including the potential solution to the rare earth crisis through tetrataenite, BYD’s exploration for a factory location in Mexico, and the ongoing challenges and opportunities facing the global electric vehicle and critical minerals markets.

This week’s report also highlights various strategic collaborations and developments, including the significant challenge posed by China’s EV industry to Detroit’s Big Three automakers and Australia’s navigation of a critical minerals market meltdown amidst declining prices for key exports such as iron ore, nickel, and lithium. Furthermore, we cover Lynas Rare Earths Ltd.’s (ASX: LYC) call for government vigilance in the volatile nickel market, China’s lithium-ion battery industry facing excess inventory and production capacity issues, Energy Fuels Inc.’s (NYSE American: UUUU | TSX: EFR) record net income and uranium production ramp-up, and Mercedes-Benz’s adjustment of its electrification goal. These stories underscore the rapidly changing landscape of the technology metals and critical minerals industry, spotlighting strategic collaborations, market dynamics, and the critical role of innovation and policy in shaping the future of sustainable technology and energy.

Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat (February 29, 2024, Source) — President Joe Biden has initiated measures to potentially restrict the entry of internet-connected Chinese electric vehicles (EVs) into the U.S. market, citing national security concerns over their ability to transmit sensitive data to Beijing. The Commerce Department has launched an investigation into these security threats, marking the beginning of a broader strategy to prevent low-cost Chinese EVs from undermining U.S. automakers. This move comes amid growing tensions between the U.S. and China over trade and technology, with Biden emphasizing the need to protect the domestic auto industry from unfair Chinese practices. The investigation, a result of discussions with major automakers and unions, could lead to new regulations on vehicles using Chinese software, which is feared to collect extensive data on American users. This action is part of Biden’s wider efforts to bolster U.S. technology restrictions against China and maintain competitiveness in the global auto market.

The ‘greenest’ car in America might surprise you (February 29, 2024, Source) — A new report from the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy challenges the common perception that electric vehicles (EVs) are the greenest cars in America by naming the Toyota Prius Prime SE, a plug-in hybrid, as the top environmentally friendly vehicle. The Prius Prime SE can travel 44 miles on electricity before switching to hybrid mode, combining electric and gasoline power. The report assesses over 1,200 vehicles on their road and manufacturing emissions, including pollutants beyond carbon dioxide. Despite the growing market for EVs, the report emphasizes that a car’s green credentials depend on factors like weight, battery size, and overall efficiency, not just its electric capabilities. Plug-in hybrids like the Prius Prime offer a balance for drivers by allowing short electric commutes and longer gas-powered trips, presenting a practical alternative amidst America’s evolving charging infrastructure. Critics argue that fully electric vehicles remain the best option for environmental benefits, especially as renewable energy sources increase. However, the report suggests the importance of offering consumers a range of environmentally friendly choices to suit different needs.

Lithium Investors Are Looking Beyond Price Plunge, Chile Minister Says (February 28, 2024, Source) — Despite a recent downturn in lithium prices, investors remain keen on new lithium projects in Chile, as confirmed by the country’s Mining Minister, Aurora Williams. This interest is fueled by the long-term prospects associated with the global shift towards renewable energy and electric vehicles, rather than short-term price fluctuations. Chile, home to the world’s largest lithium reserves, has seen prices drop significantly since the introduction of a new public-private partnership model aimed at attracting investment while ensuring major deposits remain under state control. Despite this, major international companies like Rio Tinto Group and Tsingshan Holding Group have continued discussions with Chilean authorities, demonstrating a sustained interest in the sector. Chile plans to offer exploration rights in certain salt flats, with the possibility of private investors gaining either minority or majority stakes depending on the strategic importance of the area. This initiative is part of a broader effort to maintain Chile’s status as a key player in the global lithium market, amidst growing competition and as the country also seeks to bolster its position in the copper industry.

Navigating the Climate Change Storm of ESG Withdrawal and Climate Change Commitment (February 28, 2024, Source) — Recent decisions by JPMorgan, State Street, and Pimco to exit Climate Action 100+ (CA+), amid political pressures, have sparked debate over the fate of global ESG initiatives. Nevertheless, CA+’s extensive network, including over 700 members and its collaborations with high-emission companies for a low-carbon transition, exemplifies the resilience of ESG efforts. Despite these withdrawals, the broader commitment to ESG principles, especially in the extractive industries with initiatives like Copper Mark and Responsible Steel, remains robust. This commitment is further reinforced by regulatory measures against greenwashing and heightened public activism for environmental protection and equitable benefits. These trends underscore that, far from diminishing, ESG remains a crucial driver of corporate strategy and societal expectations, suggesting a sustained impact on global business practices.

Tetrataenite as a solution to the rare earth crisis (February 28, 2024, Source) — The rare earth crisis, pivotal for modern technologies such as electric motors and wind turbines, stems from the scarcity and environmental impact of mining rare earth elements like yttrium and neodymium. As demand for these materials grows due to their importance in reducing fossil fuel reliance and combating climate change, shortages are anticipated. A potential breakthrough in 2023 by an international research team suggests tetrataenite, a meteorite mineral with similar magnetic properties to rare earths, as a solution. Unlike its natural slow formation in space, the team discovered a method to synthesize tetrataenite on Earth rapidly using common materials like iron, nickel, and phosphorous, potentially offering an alternative to address the rare earth crisis.

Chinese automaker BYD looking for Mexico plant location, executive says (February 28, 2024, Source) — Chinese electric vehicle manufacturer BYD is scouting locations in Mexico for a new factory, targeting the local market to enhance its share, as stated by BYD Americas CEO Stella Li. With an annual production capacity of 150,000 cars, the company plans to finalize the plant location by year-end. Recently surpassing Tesla in global EV sales, BYD’s expansion into Mexico signals a potential competitive challenge to U.S. auto companies, amidst concerns from the Alliance for American Manufacturing about low-cost Chinese cars impacting the U.S. auto sector’s viability. BYD’s strategy focuses on serving the Mexican market, particularly eyeing central and southern regions for factory sites. The company’s cost competitiveness is attributed to early investments in EV technology and extensive vertical integration. BYD also announced the launch of its Dolphin Mini EV in Mexico, priced significantly lower than the cheapest Tesla, aiming to make electric cars accessible to more Mexican consumers. However, challenges remain, such as the limited network of charging stations in Mexico.

China’s Electric Vehicles Are Going to Hit Detroit Like a Wrecking Ball (February 27, 2024, Source) — China’s electric vehicle (EV) industry, led by automakers like BYD, poses a significant challenge to Detroit’s Big Three (Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis). Despite recent profits and optimistic forecasts for 2024, these American giants are struggling with their EV sales goals amidst the rapid emergence of affordable and efficient Chinese EVs. BYD, in particular, has sold millions of electrified vehicles, expanding its global manufacturing footprint to meet increasing demand. The competitive pricing and technological efficiency of Chinese EVs underscore China’s evolving industrial capabilities, transitioning from basic manufacturing to complex, high-tech production including cars and batteries. This shift represents a broader challenge to American automakers, who must navigate a changing market landscape while addressing structural vulnerabilities in their business models, heavily reliant on sales of trucks and SUVs to a niche market. The U.S. government faces a delicate balance of supporting domestic industries through subsidies and trade restrictions while fostering a competitive environment that encourages innovation and adaptation to the global shift towards electrification.

Australia’s Precarious Position: Navigating a Critical Minerals Market Meltdown (February 26, 2024, Source) — Australia is at a critical juncture, facing a significant downturn in the prices of key exports such as iron ore, nickel, and lithium, which underscores the country’s vulnerability due to its heavy reliance on these commodities and its dependence on China, its main buyer. The global implications of this market meltdown are profound, with the economic viability of mining and refining operations being challenged, as demonstrated by Lynas Rare Earths Ltd.’s (ASX: LYC) struggles at its Kalgoorlie ore processing plant. The decline in the nickel industry has uncovered manipulations of market prices, reflecting China’s strategic dominance over the global supply chain for rare earth elements and other critical minerals. In response, Australia is attempting to reduce dependence on Chinese processing by offering subsidies to local mining and processing operations, while also dealing with the economic repercussions of collapsing metal prices. This situation necessitates a strategic reevaluation of Australia’s role in the global minerals market, exploring options like underwriting national processing facilities to enhance the value of its mineral exports and diversify its economic base amidst changing global trade dynamics.

Rare earths leader Lynas warns govt on nickel fallout (February 26, 2024, Source) — Lynas Rare Earths Ltd. (ASX: LYC), a leading rare earths producer, has highlighted the importance of government vigilance in response to the nickel market’s volatility and its broader impact on the mining sector. The company reported a 74% decrease in net profit to $39.5 million for the half-year ending December 31, attributing this decline to subdued prices for critical minerals, largely due to China’s dominance in supply. Despite the market challenges, Lynas, the largest producer of rare earths outside China, emphasizes its strategy of being a low-cost producer to sustain profitability even in a weak market. Lynas is expanding its operations, including projects in the United States, and making contingency plans for potential disruptions in supply chains, such as sourcing sulphuric acid due to the possible closure of BHP’s nickel refinery. The company’s experience underscores the interconnected nature of the minerals industry and the need for strategic planning and government engagement to ensure resilience and competitiveness, especially in securing sovereign supplies of critical minerals.

China’s lithium-ion battery industry faces excess inventory, production capacity as EV market downshifts: industry analysts (February 25, 2024, Source) — China’s lithium-ion battery industry, pivotal in the global EV market, is navigating through a phase of excess inventory and production capacity due to decreased demand for electric vehicles. Analysts predict a challenging year ahead, with companies facing losses amidst a price war triggered by overcapacity. The situation has led to significant price drops in lithium carbonate and battery cells, exacerbated by reduced subsidies for EVs. With production far exceeding installation into products, further price declines are expected. The market is undergoing a clearing phase, with expectations of breaking even next year. Investment in new capacity is likely to decelerate. Despite a forecasted slowdown in domestic EV sales growth, the global lithium market faces a ballooning excess supply, raising concerns over the long-term growth prospects for lithium. Top battery and lithium mining firms may only see profitability by 2025, as the industry grapples with these challenges.

Energy Fuels Announces 2023 Results: Record Net Income and Earnings per Share, Uranium Production Ramp-Up, and Near-Term Production of Separated Rare Earth Elements (February 23, 2024, Source) — In 2023, Energy Fuels Inc. (NYSE American: UUUU | TSX: EFR) announced significant achievements including a record annual net income of nearly $100 million and the commencement of uranium production across three mines, aiming for a production rate of 1.1 to 1.4 million pounds per year by mid-to-late 2024. The company highlighted a strong balance sheet with over $220 million in liquidity and no debt. Revenue was primarily driven by uranium sales, with significant contributions from rare earth elements (REE) and vanadium. The sale of the Alta Mesa project funded investments in uranium and REE production. Energy Fuels is preparing for the near-term production of separated REEs, anticipating to become a leading producer outside of China. With a focus on growth, the company is also exploring expansions into additional uranium and REE sources, aiming to significantly increase production capabilities while capitalizing on market opportunities in both sectors.

Mercedes-Benz delays electrification goal, beefs up combustion engine line-up (February 22, 2024, Source) — Mercedes-Benz announced a postponement of its electrification target by five years, aiming for electrified vehicles to comprise up to 50% of its sales by 2030, a shift from the initial 2025 goal focused mainly on all-electric cars. This adjustment reflects a broader trend among automakers recognizing the slower-than-anticipated adoption of electric vehicles (EVs), as investments in EV technology and capacity have surpassed current demand. CEO Ola Kaellenius highlighted that even in Europe, a complete switch to electric vehicles by 2030 is unlikely, noting that EVs currently represent a small fraction of total sales. Mercedes-Benz reassured investors and customers of its commitment to refining its combustion engine vehicles alongside its EV ambitions, with plans for a significant lineup refresh by 2027. The announcement, coupled with a €3 billion share buyback program, positively impacted the company’s stock, which saw a 5.9% increase. However, challenges such as economic slowdowns, supply chain issues, and geopolitical tensions have led the automaker to anticipate lower sales and reduced profitability for 2024.

Investor.News Critical Minerals Media Coverage:

• February 28, 2024 – Navigating the Climate Change Storm of ESG Withdrawal and Climate Change Commitment https://bit.ly/3SXymnP
• February 26, 2024 – Australia’s Precarious Position: Navigating a Critical Minerals Market Meltdown https://bit.ly/3uWQoOZ

Investor.News Critical Minerals Videos:

• February 29, 2024 – PDAC President Raymond Goldie Bolsters Toronto’s Status as Global Mining Investment Capital in Lead-Up to PDAC 2024 https://bit.ly/42VBDss

Critical Minerals IN8.Pro Member News Releases:

• March 1, 2024 – Voyageur Pharmaceuticals Ltd. Announces Closing of Private Placement https://bit.ly/432eRzi
• February 29, 2024 – Ucore Rare Metals to Present at the 2024 PDAC Conference https://bit.ly/3TglcUa
• February 28, 2024 – First Phosphate and Craler Sign MOU for the Development of Global Logistical Competencies to and from the Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean region of Quebec, Canada https://bit.ly/49xD5DI
• February 27, 2024 – American Rare Earths to present at two leading industry conferences in March PDAC and International Battery Seminar https://bit.ly/49uaFuu
• February 27, 2024 – Nano One Commences Feasibility Study for First Commercial LFP Plant and “Design-Once-Build-Many” Growth Strategy https://bit.ly/3TaFtum
• February 27, 2024 – Media Advisory – Neo Performance Materials Inc. Fourth Quarter 2023 Earnings Release & Conference Call https://bit.ly/3uSkeUQ
• February 26, 2024 – Appia Reports High-Grade Total Rare Earth Oxide Results up to 22,339 ppm or 2.23% on Diamond Drill Hole #1 Within Target IV at PCH IAC Project, Brazil https://bit.ly/48DKQHe
• February 26, 2024 – Kraken Energy Commences Drilling at Harts Point & Provides Corporate Update https://bit.ly/49r02bS

In the ever-evolving world of resource investment, keeping abreast of the latest trends and market shifts is crucial for investors, I spoke with Hallgarten + Company‘s Christopher Ecclestone in London this morning who is headed to the Future Minerals Forum (FMF), scheduled to take place 9-11 January in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia as one of the speakers.

He responded by sending me a newly released research report from Hallgarten + Company he had written titled: Model Resources Portfolio: Peak Climate Hysteria. In it, Christopher Ecclestone, provides an in-depth analysis of the current economic landscape, blending market data with insightful commentary on environmental and economic trends.

Navigating Through ‘Peak Climate Hysteria’

The report kicks off with a provocative discussion on what he classifies as “Peak Climate Hysteria.” This concept delves into the growing skepticism and political polarization surrounding climate change initiatives, especially when viewed through the lens of economic impact on lower-income demographics. The report suggests that while there’s a general acknowledgment of climate change, the public’s patience may be wearing thin with policies perceived as economically burdensome. This sentiment is especially palpable in regions like the UK and Australia, where extreme weather patterns have sparked debates on the authenticity and implications of the prevailing climate change narrative.

Market Dynamics and Commodity Insights

A significant portion of the report is dedicated to reviewing the performance of various commodities and sectors, providing valuable insights for investors. Gold’s robust position above US$2000 is highlighted as a particularly positive indicator, reflecting the metal’s enduring appeal in uncertain times. The report also sheds light on Teck Resources Limited’s (TSX: TECK.A | TSX: TECK.B | NYSE: TECK) recent strategic moves in Latin America, painting a promising picture for the company’s future. Another notable mention is the economic reforms in Argentina under President Javier Milei, hinting at a liberal shift that could reshape the country’s investment landscape.

The Lithium sector, pivotal in the green energy transition, is examined in the context of Chile’s state interventions and a global slowdown in EV sales. This analysis is critical for understanding the sector’s trajectory amidst fluctuating demand and pricing pressures.

Sector-Specific Analysis and Forecasts

Hallgarten + Company’s report doesn’t shy away from deep dives into specific sectors, offering granular insights that are both informative and strategic. The spotlight on Teck Resources extends into a detailed look at its joint ventures and new ventures, especially in the copper-gold space, underscoring the company’s proactive approach in a competitive market.

The Antimony market receives particular attention, with the report highlighting its growing demand, especially in the solar photovoltaic industry. This insight is crucial for investors looking to tap into emerging opportunities within the renewable energy sector. Similarly, the bullish stance on the Tin market, backed by data on declining stock levels and potential supply tightness in China, provides a valuable perspective for those weighing investment options in this niche but significant sector.

Strategic Portfolio Adjustments

Understanding the dynamics of portfolio management is crucial in resource investing, and the report addresses this by detailing recent changes in its model portfolio. The addition of EMX Royalties and AbraSilver, along with a short position in Aya Gold & Silver, is indicative of the company’s strategic shifts in response to market trends. This section not only reveals specific investment moves but also offers a broader view of the company’s investment philosophy and approach to risk management.

Broad Market Commentary and Future Outlook

The report concludes with a broader commentary on the state of the resource investment market, particularly focusing on the junior gold explorers. It addresses the challenges faced by these companies in a fluctuating market and the broader implications of market dynamics on their performance. His commentary is essential for understanding the complexities and nuances of investing in junior explorers and the factors that can significantly impact their success or failure.

In summary, Hallgarten + Company’s “Model Resources Portfolio: Peak Climate Hysteria” report stands out as a comprehensive and thought-provoking analysis of the current resource investment landscape in usual Ecclestone fashion. A blend of market data, sector-specific insights, and broader economic commentary provides a valuable resource for investors looking to navigate the complexities of this dynamic field. While this commentary offers a rapid-fire snapshot of the report’s rich content, those interested in a deeper dive into the world of resource investing will find reading the full report an exceptionally good use of their time. To access this report, click here

A common joke among the credentialed is that the golden rule can be stated as “They, who have the gold, make the rules.”

A newer, more contemporary, version of the rule might be “They, who have the lithium, make the rules.”

Is China weaponizing Critical Minerals?

We are told repeatedly by American bureaucrats, academics, and elected policymakers that China is weaponizing critical minerals, such as lithium, in order to exert control over the “rules-based order” dominated by the United States that has shaped the world since the end of World War II.

The use of military analogies by developed world policymakers and industrialists and their captive media does not disguise their abject failure to realize that victimhood is not its own reward. In fact, to emphasize victimhood is to admit failure.

Developing nations paying the bill for the West’s assault on cheap energy

The apparent plan has been that the developing world, aka “the third world” should suicidally pay the bill in low-cost critical minerals for the West’s current assault on cheap energy – the only hope that developing nations have for growth in their standards of living. This is necessary say the comfortable upper classes of the developed world to avoid a climate catastrophe that will victimize all.

Mining finance has been more and more directed towards tilting at the windmill of “climate change,” but is now facing the hard reality of the non-existent understanding of the consequences of their acts by the so-called Western elites.

Nationalizing the Critical Mineral industries

There is a growing national awareness, and resentment, in many developing countries of the importance of certain “critical” commodities and how developed nations (the West) are dependent on them.

However, the group-think, climate-change fighting, developed nations and the self-centered, not-so-bright, policymakers of the West have failed to understand this reality.

But it seems that the policymakers of the primary national owners of those commodities have noticed it. The national owners of the critical minerals are finally rejecting the resource imperialism of the now-closing Eurocentric era and asserting their rights to domestic self-sufficiency.

First Mexico and now Chile, just this year, are nationalizing their lithium industries. Both nations are requiring that lithium produced domestically be processed domestically to add value and create wealth for their people.

This is not the weaponization of a commodity but the realization of its value in the place where it is produced.

Indonesia has done the same with its nickel, Peru (and Chile) are looking at nationalizing copper, and African nations who have restricted the activities and even thrown out Europeans are now pressuring the Chinese who replaced them to either add value to their mineral production locally or be nationalized and ejected.

Critical Minerals prices should increase

The fact that the world is heading into a global recession will temporarily derail the critical commodity price increase that will normally be capitalized through resource nationalization, but those prices will come roaring back when the recession ends and the ease of access to “third-world” natural resources has vanished forever. 

Internal demand within critical minerals’ producing countries will also bolster prices.

China’s approach to Chile

While Americans concern themselves with the proper choice of pronouns, the Chinese have already approached Chile offering to add value within the Chilean domestic economy by setting up the processing of Chilean lithium into battery cathode material within Chile.

I have no doubt that the Chinese will ultimately offer to do the same for batteries and even vehicles within Chile and be paid by being allowed to export part of that finished production to other countries.

You need to understand the problem

You cannot solve a problem that you do not understand. The lack of technological and commercial issues awareness by the self-styled Western techno-journalists is appalling but understandable.

These writers clearly lack both a general scientific education, such as American high schools gave after World War II, and they do not have the necessary basic education, or, perhaps, intellectual ability, to choose who to ask for the relevant explanations. The American academic community is today so specialized, and ideologically damaged, that it is unable to separate the forest from the individual trees.

A perspective informed by knowledge of data, a general understanding of the laws of nature, and the ability to reason logically has vanished from the policy sphere in the West.