The initiative, led by US President Donald Trump’s senior Africa advisor Massad Boulos, is designed to accompany the bilateral minerals pacts being ironed out with both nations, which would see billions of dollars of Western investments in the region.

“The (agreement) with the DRC is at a much bigger scale, because it’s a much bigger country and it has much more resources, but Rwanda also has a lot of resources and capacities and potential in the area of mining as well,” Boulos told Reuters.

DRC is currently the world’s largest cobalt producer and the leading copper producer in Africa. The country also produces nearly 70% of the world’s tantalum, extracted from coltan. Its eastern provinces hold significant reserves of tin, tungsten and additional coltan deposits.

For decades, Congo has been at odds with the neighbouring Rwanda due to ethnic tensions and control over the region’s natural resources. The conflict escalated earlier this year when the Rwandan-backed M23 rebels attacked and seized control over parts of eastern Congo, including the strategic mining hub of Walikale.

As part of the US peace mediation process, both African nations are expected to submit separate drafts of a peace agreement on Friday, with meeting scheduled in mid-May involving US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the foreign ministers of the DRC and Rwanda to finalize the accord, according to Reuters.

For the peace agreement to succeed, Boulos said several key security concerns must be addressed: Rwanda must withdraw its troops and cease support for the M23 rebels, while the DRC must address Rwandan concerns with militias like the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR).

A multinational oversight committee, including the US, Qatar, France and Togo, is monitoring the progress of the peace deal, Boulos added.

Launched in late 2023 by the US Department of Defense, the Open Price Exploration for National Security AI metals program is an attempt to counter China’s sweeping control of the critical minerals sector, as Reuters reported last year.

Now, more than 30 mining companies, manufacturers and investors – including auto giant Volkswagen – have joined the Critical Minerals Forum non-profit and will be its first users, according to Rob Strayer, a former US diplomat and the organization’s president.

“Everyone in the critical minerals sector is looking for more price transparency,” said Seth Goldstein, a lithium industry analyst with Morningstar. “Any tool like the CMF that could help would be welcome.”

Other members include copper miner South32, rare earths producer MP Materials and defense contractor RTX. The CMF held its first meeting with members in November. The privatization and CMF’s membership have not previously been reported.

Armed with the AI model, the CMF aims to help manufacturers curb their reliance on China by signing more metal supply deals with Western mines, according to more than two dozen industry consultants, purchasing agents, analysts, regulators and investors who told Reuters the program reflects one of the boldest efforts to date to transform the ways certain metals are bought and sold.

The goal is for the AI model to calculate what a metal should cost when labor, processing and other costs are factored in – and Chinese market manipulation is factored out – and thus give buyer and seller confidence in a deal’s economics.

Some deals with the CMF are beginning to take shape. Nevada officials this week said they would work with the CMF and its AI model to help attract copper smelting to the state. The US has only two copper smelters and as such imports nearly half of its demand for the red metal.

The program has already faced skepticism over whether it can achieve the goal of transforming the long-established ways metals are bought and sold.

Yet it is aimed less at heavily traded metals – such as aluminum – and toward lightly traded metals or metals that see heavy overproduction from some in an attempt to sway market pricing.

For example, the CMF model could help manufacturers forecast available nickel supplies in 2028 if the US were to impose a 100% tariff on that metal from Indonesia, the top global producer.

That data that could help a manufacturer determine whether to invest in a US nickel mine or agree to buy its future production, a step that would help obtain financing for a mine’s construction.

In such a scenario, the nickel buyer would use the AI model’s data to negotiate a long-term deal for guaranteed supply, regardless of whether Chinese miners boost production and drive down market prices, as they have done in recent years.

The CMF’s aim with the AI model does assume that a buyer would be comfortable paying more than the market price for a metal if supply were guaranteed.

China squeeze

The CMF’s entrance into the complex metals markets comes as Beijing restricts critical minerals exports, the very kind of market interference that the CMF officials said underscores the need to build more US mines and processing facilities to power the energy transition.

Prices on the London Metal Exchange and other futures exchanges for nickel, cobalt and some other battery metals have been dominated in recent years by overproduction from Chinese miners operating at a loss in Indonesia and Congo to boost market share.

Many niche-but-essential battery minerals on which Beijing has imposed export controls are not traded or lightly traded, including rare earths – a group of 17 metals used to make magnets that turn power into motion – as well as germanium and gallium.

In response to a request for comment about the CMF, the Chinese embassy in Washington, DC, said that China manages its exports of rare earths in accordance with rules from the World Trade Organization.

“China will continue to work with other countries to jointly undertake the responsibility of global rare earths supply,” said embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu.

Volkswagen and some other CMF members said they see the CMF as helping boost visibility into what can be an opaque critical minerals supply chain. MP Materials and RTX did not respond to requests for comment.

US President Donald Trump has already ordered his administration to work with private developers to boost US crucial minerals production, a step that could be aided by the data CMF aims to provide markets, program officials said. The president has also launched a study into potential tariffs on all US minerals imports.

Drawing on its government connections, the CMF aims to connect mining projects with potential investors and manufacturers needing more-secure metals supply, said Strayer.

Massachusetts-based rare earths processing startup Phoenix Tailings hopes the CMF can help create US-based prices for minerals tied to actual production costs, said CEO Nick Myers.

Phoenix aims to use data from the CMF as negotiating leverage with potential customers, including manufacturers that are themselves CMF members, Myers said. “In a sector that is opaque, it is one of the tools to get more information,” Myers said.

Not all market observers are convinced that the CMF’s AI model is revolutionary.

“I’ve tried to politely say I think this is worthless,” said Ian Lange, who teaches mining economics at the Colorado School of Mines. Lange contrasted the goals of the Pentagon’s AI model with the much-larger and more-complex global oil market.

“Can we predict the price of oil better now than five years ago? The answer is no. Machine learning doesn’t help,” Lange said.

‘Encourage more visibility’

The Pentagon’s AI model is being trained using more than 70 mining-related data sets and aims to guide investment decisions out for at least 15 years based on how unexpected market shocks – export restrictions, for example – could affect the production or price of a metal.

FactSet, Benchmark Mineral Intelligence and other pricing providers are supplying data, as is the US Commerce Department, officials said.

It is access to analysis of that data – some of which is not public – that the CMF says it believes sets the Pentagon’s AI program apart from ChatGPT or other AI programs.

And that data is the CMF’s biggest cost, part of the reason why the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) will fund it for the next few years while the CMF determines whether to charge all members or create a tiered structure with basic members getting free access and others paying for more granular data, officials said.

S&P Global, AI developer Charles River Analytics, and software firm Exiger with price reporting agency partner Metal Miner have developed the model, according to the Pentagon.

S&P Global declined to comment. Charles River Analytics did not respond to a request for comment. Exiger said it believes its data can help forecast a material’s cost and availability and boost supply chain visibility.

The CMF has been organized as a nonprofit trade association with a board of directors comprised of its members. Its staffing is small – fewer than 10 employees – and its annual budget is not disclosed.

DARPA does not have a representative on the CMF board, but is funding the program through at least 2029 and plans to transfer the AI model’s intellectual property to the CMF by the beginning of 2027, officials said.

There are no plans to make the CMF a for-profit entity, although there may be charges in the future for access to more detailed data sets, officials said.

The CMF is launching a campaign to attract more members – especially from the semiconductor, aviation and defense industries – and offering free membership for the next 14 months while the Pentagon funds data collection, Strayer said.

Foreign governments are also studying whether to join the CMF and use its data, including copper-rich Zambia and cobalt-rich Democratic Republic of Congo, CMF officials said, adding they aim to make the program international in scope to boost metals market transparency.

The Zambian and DRC embassies in Washington, DC, did not respond to requests for comment.

As Western miners begin to demand green premiums for their metals, those new agreements increasingly require the very market intelligence the CMF model aims to provide.

“Any mechanism that can give you better modeling of markets is obviously enormously valuable,” said Brian Menell, CEO of TechMet, a mining investor and CMF member.

The AI model introduces another variable for the LME to contend with, especially as the exchange is struggling as rivals in Chicago and Shanghai try to take market share for some niche battery metals.

The LME declined to comment.

(By Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Veronica Brown and Claudia Parsons)

Trump may be unlikely to gain dominion over Canada or Greenland, but he’s vying to supersede the UN treaty that governs nations’ use of the ocean, potentially with far-reaching consequences for untouched and biodiverse deep sea ecosystems targeted for exploitation.

“‘The next gold rush’: President Trump unlocks access to critical deep seabed minerals,” the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration proclaimed in a press release on Friday.

Just days after Trump issued an executive order expediting the processing of seabed mining applications, The Metals Company (TMC) on Tuesday applied for a US license to extract minerals from the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, an immense region of the Pacific that stretches from Hawaii to Mexico. 

There’s a hitch, though. The Clarion-Clipperton Zone and the rest of the ocean floor in international waters falls under jurisdiction of the International Seabed Authority, whose 169 member nations plus the European Union are loath to give up their mandate to regulate deep sea mining for the benefit of humanity while ensuring the effective protection of the marine environment. 

ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho on Wednesday warned that unilateral action by the US “sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilize the entire system of global ocean governance.”

At stake is not just who gets to exploit polymetallic nodules — potato-sized rocks rich in cobalt, nickel and other metals that carpet the Clarion-Clipperton seabed — or the fate of  the otherworldly deep sea life that lives on them, but the future of a treaty that has kept commercial peace on the world’s oceans for more than 30 years.

Here’s what else to know.

Who is in charge of deep-sea mining in international waters?

The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea established the ISA to regulate deep sea mining beyond national jurisdiction, with royalties on any mining to be distributed among member states. The organization, which is headquartered in Kingston, Jamaica, has spent more than a decade negotiating mining regulations with an end currently not in sight.

For more than 30 years, the ISA has forestalled a deep-sea gold rush as nations respected its mandate to first develop regulations to minimize harm from mining to unique marine life that evolved over eons in the frigid darkness of the abyss. Then TMC grew weary of waiting, saying it spent half a billion dollars on environmental assessments required to prepare an ISA mining license application.

What is The Metals Company?

TMC is a public company registered in Canada and run by Gerard Barron, an Australian former internet advertising entrepreneur. It holds two of 31 ISA exploration licenses. As ISA negotiations dragged on, company executives lobbied Trump White House officials to issue seabed mining licenses. A polymetallic nodule “was presented to the president last week and now sits on the Resolute Desk” in the Oval Office, Barron said at a congressional hearing on Tuesday. The company’s US subsidiary has applied for the US seabed mining licenses.

What is the US authority to issue mining licenses in international waters?

It’s complicated. While the Law of the Sea treaty was being negotiated, the US enacted the 1980 Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resources Act to allow it to grant mining licenses in international waters. The idea at the time was that the law would serve as a placeholder — “an interim legal regime,” in the words of the legislation, until the treaty came into force so that companies would be encouraged to develop deep sea mining technology.

But when the Law of the Sea treaty became what is called “the constitution of the ocean” 14 years later, the US Congress declined to ratify it. Though the US isn’t a member of the ISA, it participates in the organization’s proceedings as an observer and has generally abided by  the treaty’s provisions. (The ISA reserved a permanent seat on its policymaking body for the country in case it eventually ratifies the treaty.) With his executive order, Trump reversed the US government’s longstanding position, upending multilateral deliberations about deep-sea mining. TMC is the first company to apply for a mining license under the 45-year-old US seabed mining law.

Doesn’t TMC already hold ISA exploration licenses?

Yes, and what’s fueling outrage among the diplomatic corps is that TMC wants US permission to mine an area it licensed from the ISA under the sponsorship of Nauru, a tiny and impoverished Pacific island nation to whom the company has agreed to pay royalties under its ISA contract. TMC declined to comment on whether those obligations to Nauru remain if it is issued a US mining license. Even as it seeks a US license, the company still plans to apply for an ISA mining contract in June, despite the absence of mining regulations.

How has the ISA responded to Trump and TMC?

Member nations are divided over whether deep sea mining should proceed but agree that the ISA is the sole authority empowered to make such decisions. “Circumventing the regulatory authority of ISA not only breaches international law, but also erodes trust, exacerbates global inequality and silences the voices of least developed countries,” the ISA said in a statement released after Trump signed the executive order.

What happens next?

TMC said it expects the initial US review of its mining application to be completed within 60 days. Matt Giacona, the acting principal deputy director of the US Interior Department’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, said that other deep-sea mining application reviews, such as for exploration licenses, will move faster. “These new permitting procedures will reduce a multi-year process down to just 28 days upon request by project applicants,” he said at a press briefing last week.

That timeline worries deep-sea biologist Diva Amon. “It will likely prevent robust assessment of whether environmental obligations will be fulfilled,” said Amon, a science advisor to the Benioff Ocean Science Laboratory at the University of California at Santa Barbara. “Currently we know little about the animals inhabiting the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, including their ecology and how they will cope with the potential impacts of deep-sea mining.”

TMC has previously said it expected to begin commercial mining in 2026 if it obtained an ISA license. While the company tested a small-scale prototype of a nodule mining machine in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone in 2022, it will need to secure a full-size commercial version capable of operating continuously under crushing pressure and ice-cold conditions.

Where would nodules be processed?

The US has no current capacity to process and refine the minerals contained in nodules into metals suitable for making electric car batteries and other products. A Japanese company has conducted processing trials for TMC but building industrial-scale operations for nodules could require billions of dollars in investment. “Polymetallic nodules are a unique resource, and there is no proven processing technology that can recover all four saleable elements contained in them,” stated an April RAND report on seabed mining.

(By Todd Woody)

The company’s over the counter units trading on US markets (OTCPK:GLNCY) was down by 8.6% in mid-afternoon dealings, recovering from a double digit fall at the open.

Glencore stock is down more than 26% so far this year, affording the company a market capitalization of just under $40 billion. Its market value peaked at the end of Q1 2022 at more than $90 billion.

The Swiss-headquartered miner and commodities trader reported a 30% drop in first-quarter copper production to 167,900 tonnes, but maintained its full-year forecast for 2025 at 850,000-910,000 tonnes, expecting higher output in coming months.

The top of that range would still be down from the company’s 2024 annual production of 952,000 tonnes. The Q1 production miss was primarily due to lower ore mining rates, head grades and overall recoveries at Collahuasi (29,400 tonnes), Antapaccay (20,800 tonnes) and KCC (16,700 tonnes) Glencore said.

First-quarter production of cobalt rose 44% on higher grades and volumes at its Mutanda mine, while nickel production fell 21%, it said. The company kept 2025 production guidance unchanged for both.

Glencore forecasts full-year trading and marketing earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) in the middle of its long-term guidance of $2.2 billion to $3.2 billion this year, compared to $3.2 billion in 2024.

“Since quarter-end, financial markets, including commodities, have been highly volatile and unpredictable, responding rapidly to US tariff newsflow and uncertainty.

“In such an unpredictable environment, risk management has been a primary focus, noting the many complex supply chains we are exposed to, including the US, China, Europe and Canada. Despite the ‘noise’, primary commodity trade routes to date have not been meaningfully disrupted.

“However, owing to the various proposed and currently being implemented tariffs across commodity supply chains, it is likely that some physical trade flow re-orientation and dislocation will manifest over the coming months, which may present opportunities for our marketing business,” Glencore said in a statement.

The trading division, whose profit hit a record $6.4 billion in 2022, includes coal, oil, liquefied natural gas and related products, as well as metals.

“Disappointing that in these volatile times with significant regional arbitrage in copper that marketing guidance was not at the top end of the range,” RBC Capital Markets analysts told Reuters.

Glencore’s first-quarter thermal coal production fell 7% to 23.4 million tonnes from 25.2 million tonnes a year before on lower output from its Australian mines.

The company is one of the largest producers and exporters of thermal coal, mining 99.6 million tonnes in 2024.

Glencore said in March it would begin reducing production at its Colombia mine Cerrejon by between 5 million and 10 million tonnes annually.

(With files from Reuters)

PM and Liberal Party head Mark Carney, who’s leading in the polls, has pledged to approve resource projects within two years and broaden exploration tax credits as part of a plan to make Canada both an “energy superpower” and “the global supplier of choice for critical minerals.”

Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, meanwhile, has vowed to open a resource-focused project office with an even shorter time limit – one year – to get “shovels in the ground” as fast as possible.  He also says he’ll build long-discussed infrastructure for Ontario’s Ring of Fire region, a set of three new roads and power lines linking future mines with the southern road network. Even so, his platform is thin on details about mining.

“Both parties would unlock stronger growth via major infrastructure and resource development, but each differs in approach,” Scotiabank Economics Vice President Rebekah Young said in a report issued Friday. “A complicated jurisdictional landscape, compounded now by global uncertainties, means either party would have its work cut out to spur greater investment.”

Critical minerals and industrial metals have emerged as essential economic building blocks in recent years as the world gears up for the coming energy transition. In the United States, President Donald Trump recently signed an executive order to increase American critical mineral production to dent China’s dominance after launching a Section 232 probe on all critical mineral imports – a process that typically results in tariffs.

‘Energy superpower’ goal

“Making Canada an energy superpower starts with critical metals and minerals, vital components to build everything from solar panels to electric vehicles,” Carney said last week during a campaign stop in Vancouver. “The market for these minerals is currently dominated by China and Russia. That must change.”

In his first election campaign, Carney has pledged to “kick-start” the “clean energy supply chain” by investing in critical minerals, spurring private investment and supporting early-stage mining companies.

If elected, Carney is proposing to adopt “Buy Canada” standards for products such as steel and aluminum while putting an increased focus on feedstock for battery supply chain buildouts.

First and Last Mile

A key measure included in the 67-page Liberal platform is the creation of the First and Last Mile Fund, an investment vehicle that Carney says will connect critical mineral projects to supply chains by supporting on-site development, processing and refining capacity.

Carney also wants to broaden the Critical Mineral Exploration Tax Credit by including critical minerals necessary for defence, semiconductors, energy and clean technologies to the list of qualifying minerals.

A Liberal government would also expand eligible activities under Canadian exploration expenses to include the costs of engineering, economic and feasibility studies for critical minerals projects.

“All of these measures taken together will make Canada the global supplier of choice for critical metals and minerals,” Carney said.

Repealing obstructive laws

Poilievre, Carney’s main rival for the top job, has vowed to repeal various policies passed under former Liberal prime minister Justin Trudeau – including the Impact Assessment Act known as Bill C-69.

He calls Bill C-69 the “No More Development” law, saying it “makes it impossible to build the mines, pipelines and other major energy infrastructure Canada needs.” Removing it would trigger a boom in the country’s resource sector, he says.

“We will get big projects built again by repealing the Liberal anti-development laws and regulations that have cost us half a trillion dollars in lost investment over the last decade,” Poilievre said in a campaign document posted on his party’s website. “We’ll also work with Indigenous partners to process and sell our clean natural resources to get foreign countries off burning higher-emission fuels and fight climate change.”

Although the 30-page Conservative platform has a section on Canadian energy and resources, “mining” and “minerals” don’t appear at all in the document. The word “mines” is mentioned once.

If he becomes PM, Poilievre has vowed to accelerate priority resource projects and usher in “One and Done” approvals. He would create a single Rapid Resource Project Office to streamline all regulatory approvals into one application and environmental review, in cooperation with the provinces, with a target of six-month decisions and a one-year maximum timeline.

Fast-tracking projects

A key pledge for miners involves building the infrastructure project to Ontario’s Ring of Fire region, which is known for its vast potential but slow progress towards getting any mines built. A Conservative government would approve federal permits to harvest chromite, cobalt, nickel, copper and platinum in the area, Poilievre says.

In the Conservative leader’s view, these measures would give the Canadian economy a boost of several billion dollars, “allowing us to become less dependent on the Americans, while our allies overseas would no longer have to rely on hostile regimes for these metals, turning dollars for dictators into paycheques for our people.”

The vast Central African nation is home to large reserves of copper, cobalt, lithium and uranium among other minerals, but chronic instability has long been an obstacle to the foreign investment needed to fully develop them.

Kinshasa is currently on a push to attract new players to the sector and talks are already under way with Washington after a Congolese senator pitching a minerals-for-security deal contacted US officials.

Asked by Reuters on Monday about possible interest in Congolese minerals, Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Prevot said Belgium had firms with the know-how to ramp up its role in the sector.

“We have globally recognized expertise with players like Umicore and John Cockerill, who have the capacity to process all these rare critical materials,” he said.

“If one day the opportunity arises to also be an investment partner, we will not pull back,” he added.

Despite China’s dominance, Belgian firms have been involved in mining, processing and trading Congolese cobalt, copper and diamonds for decades.

Belgium-based global materials technology group Umicore signed a deal with state miner Gecamines last year to ship germanium concentrates to Europe.

Prevot said Belgium’s approach to working with Congo was good for both countries, contrasting it with how some other partners operated.

“We observe the motivations of other international actors that can sometimes have a more transactional approach,” he said.

Prevot was due to visit the city of Beni on Tuesday as part of a trip intended to draw attention to serious human rights issues, particularly in Congo’s eastern provinces where the army is facing an offensive by Rwandan-backed M23 rebels.

(By Ange Kasongo, Maxwell Akalaare Adombila and Sofia Christensen; Editing by Robbie Corey-Boulet and Joe Bavier)

The company’s US subsidiary, TMC USA, filed the applications under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA) and regulations set by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which collectively form the US seabed mining code. 

The move comes just days after President Donald Trump issued an executive order to fast-track offshore mining, aiming to boost access to critical minerals despite strong opposition from environmental groups.

TMC’s two exploration licence applications cover a combined 199,895 square kilometres, while the commercial recovery permit covers 25,160 square kilometres within the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, a resource-rich swath of the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Mexico. These areas include the company’s indicated and measured polymetallic nodule resources.

The zones hold 1.63 billion wet metric tonnes of SEC SK 1300-compliant nodules, with an estimated exploration upside of 500 million tonnes, according to the company.

The resource is projected to contain 15.5 million tonnes of nickel, 12.8 million tonnes of copper, 2 million tonnes of cobalt, and 345 million tonnes of manganese — metals critical for batteries, clean energy, infrastructure and defence applications.

“This marks a major step forward — not just for TMC USA, but for America’s mineral independence and industrial resurgence,” CEO Gerard Barron said in a statement. “We’re offering the US a shovel-ready path to new and abundant supplies of critical metals.”

The Trump administration views deep-sea mining as a strategic route to reduce dependence on foreign mineral supply chains. A White House official suggested the industry could generate up to 100,000 jobs and add hundreds of billions to the economy over the next decade.

Hurdles remain

The company’s ambitions are not without controversy. Environmentalists have long warned that the impacts of deep-sea mining are poorly understood. Critics argue more scientific research is needed before any commercial extraction begins, citing risks to fragile ecosystems and ocean biodiversity.

Supporters counter that deep-sea mining is essential to meet rising global demand for minerals. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts the need for copper and rare earth elements will grow by 40% in the coming years, driven by clean technology and electrification.

TMC has pledged to mitigate environmental damage by leaving at least 30% of its contract areas untouched. The company also claims its modern nodule collector disturbs only the top three centimetres of seabed sediment, far less than earlier technologies.

Still, TMC’s application could reignite tensions at the international level. The company has been operating in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone for years under exploration contracts backed by the UN-affiliated International Seabed Authority (ISA), which governs mining in international waters. But the US is not a signatory to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and TMC’s move to seek approval under US law may be seen as sidestepping international consensus.

Critics warn such actions could undermine more than a decade of negotiations aimed at finalizing global regulations for seabed mining, potentially setting a precedent for other countries or companies to bypass multilateral frameworks.

The copper-and-cobalt giant’s chairman Yuan Honglin and vice chair Li Chaochun both resigned for personal reasons and had no disagreement with the board, CMOC said in an exchange filing on Sunday. Two new executive directors were nominated to the board, and a new vice president appointed, while Ives, already head of CMOC’s trading unit IXM, will become chief commercial officer.

The changes mark a significant shift at the top of CMOC, which has emerged from relative obscurity to become the world’s biggest cobalt miner and a major copper producer, largely thanks to acquisitions in Africa. The new structure will help CMOC meet its ambitions for more growth, the company said.

“CMOC will focus on mining industry M&A, including copper, gold, and other minor metals mines,” CMOC said in comments via WeChat to Bloomberg News. The new management has “rich experience in mine operation” and is able to acquire, develop and operate large greenfield projects, it said.

The company’s Hong Kong shares rose as much as 4.6% after the announcement, and following a near-doubling of first-quarter net income.

New team

The two board nominees are Que Chaoyang, who was appointed as chief operating officer, and Liu Jianfeng, appointed as chief investment officer. Que is a former executive at Zijin Mining Group Co., while Liu has held multiple roles in the energy sector.

Tan Xiao, a former senior manager at Huawei Technologies Co., will be a vice president.

But it’s the promotion of Ives, who spent 23 years at Glencore and wanted to be its boss, will attract attention globally. He’s been chief executive officer of CMOC’s trading arm since 2022, overhauling the unit as CMOC aims to challenge the dominance of firms like Glencore and Trafigura Group in global metals trading.

CMOC is already a major player in commodities linked to the energy transition after its expansion in the Democratic Republic of Congo. It passed Glencore as top cobalt supplier in 2023, but also has significant clout in copper and ambitions in lithium and nickel. Chinese battery giant Contemporary Amperex Technology Co. Ltd. has a 25% stake.

The exit of Yuan Honglin, chairman and non-executive director, will become effective once CMOC gets approval to appoint additional directors at an upcoming shareholder meeting. The resignation of vice chairman and chief investment officer Li Chaochun has already taken effect, it said.

CMOC reported 3.95 billion yuan ($542 million) of first-quarter net income on Friday, building on a record year of earnings in 2024. The company recently agreed to buy Canada’s Lumina Gold Corp., allowing it to tap the largest primary gold deposit in Ecuador.

Read More: CMOC to double copper output at Congo mines to 1 million tonnes by 2028

Benjamin Katabuka, the country’s newly appointed director general, told the British newspaper that KoBold is looking to “go big” in the DRC, currently the world’s biggest producer of cobalt and the leading copper producer on the continent.

He added the company plans to apply for licences to explore for these two critical minerals as well as lithium, of which the DRC holds significant deposits but has yet to fully unlock.

These investments could potentially be “in the billions”, Katabuka said, as cited by the Financial Times on Saturday.

The report comes amid heightened trade tensions between the US and China, which saw the latter flex its dominant position in the critical minerals supply chain by placing export restrictions on rare earths.

In the Congo, many of its biggest mines are run by Chinese groups, while American companies have had little presence since Freeport-McMoRan sold its stake in the Tenke Fungurume copper mine to China’s CMOC in 2016.

Katabuka said the Congolese government is “interested in having some Western investors coming into the country” to balance China’s presence in the nation.

Congo minerals

KoBold’s push into Congo comes at a time when the African nation is negotiating with the US on a potential minerals pact. Earlier this year, DRC President Felix Tshisekedi offered a minerals-for-security deal to Washington in an effort to end the ongoing armed conflict with Rwanda-backed M23 rebels.

On the jurisdictional risk, DRC’s Katabuka acknowledged that it has been “difficult” to do business in the country, but added that KoBold has assured that the company will demand “high standards” for its operations.

KoBold — which specializes in using artificial intelligence to identify untapped critical minerals deposits — has around 60 active projects across four continents. In Africa, its focal point has been Zambia, where last year it made what was the country’s largest copper discovery in a century.

A move into Congo means the company would have a presence in Africa’s two largest copper producers. Earlier this year, it also expanded into Namibia, focusing on its deposits of lithium and nickel.

To support its critical minerals exploration, KoBold raised $537 million during its latest round from investors including Gates’ Breakthrough Energy Ventures, Earthshot Ventures, Equinor, July Fund, Mitsubishi Corporation and Standard Investments.

To date, the California-based company has raised $1 billion.

Signed in private, the order aims to accelerate the mining of critical minerals in both US and international waters, part of a broader strategy to counter China’s dominance in the global supply of these resources.

“The US authorization… violates international law and harms the overall interests of the international community,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun said, the BBC reported.

The move has stirred international criticism, especially over its provision to allow seabed exploration beyond US jurisdiction. Deep-sea mining has increasingly come into focus as countries seek access to valuable metals like nickel, manganese, and cobalt — key components in batteries for electric vehicles and smartphones.

Estimates suggest the ocean floor holds between $8 trillion and $16 trillion worth of these metals. In US waters alone, more than a billion metric tons of mineral-rich nodules could be extracted, potentially adding $300 billion to its GDP over a decade and creating 100,000 jobs, according to administration officials.

“The United States has a core national security and economic interest in maintaining leadership in deep-sea science and technology and seabed mineral resources,” Trump stated in the order.

The directive calls for fast-tracking permits under the 1980 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act and sets up a permitting process along the US Outer Continental Shelf. It also pushes for quicker review of applications to mine in international waters — a move expected to trigger push back from the global community.

“We want the US to get ahead of China in this resource space under the ocean, on the ocean bottom,” a US official told the BBC.

Environmental groups remain critical of seabed mining, warning it could irreparably damage fragile marine ecosystems that are still poorly understood and already stressed by pollution, industrial trawling and climate change.

In a recent interview, Gerard Barron, CEO of The Metals Company (TMC), told MINING.COM that the US government’s renewed emphasis on domestic mineral production is well-timed.

“Mineral security is really important for critical minerals, and many in the new administration have been tremendous supporters,” Barron said. “So we’re going into 2025 thinking this will be a breakout year.”

TMC, which is partnered with the Republic of Nauru, plans to submit its first application to begin mining operations on June 27, just ahead of the International Seabed Authority’s next meeting in July.

Speaking at the Future of Energy Security summit held in London this week, IEA executive director Fatih Birol highlighted the strong expansion of clean energy technologies in recent years — while remarkable — also creates a new problem: the urgent need for raw materials.

“To manufacture this new clean energy technologies, you need critical minerals,” Birol said during the two-day event co-hosted by the British government. “We look at where the critical minerals are produced, where they are refined and where they are manufactured, that is a huge concentration, and this is something that we think is risky.”

According to the IEA, the world’s supply of critical minerals — such as copper, cobalt, lithium and rare earth elements — are currently dominated by China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Australia, Chile, Indonesia and, to a lesser extent, the US.

This concentration of raw materials, said Birol, represents a “new emerging energy security challenge”, and the reason why the Agency launched its critical minerals program.

“Currently, we are A) not able to keep up with the demand, and B) the ability of manufacturing these critical minerals is concentrated in one single country or two,” Birol said in a speech last year when announcing the program.

In response to this challenge, the IEA urged nations to focus on policies that promote the diversification of mineral sources and move away from “critical mineral monopolies.”

“Most of these critical minerals are currently controlled by just one or two countries and it is important to ensure diversity in clean energy,” Birol told reporters from Turkish state-owned news agency Anadolu on Friday.

“This is not about whether a country is good or bad. If there is a technical problem or a geopolitical development in that country, entire energy supply chains could be jeopardized,” he said.

On the sidelines of the summit, Birol noted China’s dominance in the critical minerals sector and its contribution to low-cost clean energy technologies. The Asian nation is the main producer for 30 out of 50 minerals deemed critical by the US, and is the world’s top miner and processor of rare earths.

The order, which Trump signed in private, seeks to jumpstart the mining of both US and international waters as part of a push to offset China’s sweeping control of the critical minerals industry.

Reuters first reported last month that the order was under deliberation.

Parts of the Pacific Ocean and elsewhere are estimated to contain large amounts of potato-shaped rocks known as polymetallic nodules filled with the building blocks for electric vehicles and electronics.

More than 1 billion metric tons of those nodules are estimated to be in US waters and filled with manganese, nickel, copper and other critical minerals, according to an administration official.

Extracting them could boost US GDP by $300 billion over 10 years and create 100,000 jobs, the official added.

“The United States has a core national security and economic interest in maintaining leadership in deep-sea science and technology and seabed mineral resources,” Trump said in the order.

The order directs the administration to expedite mining permits under the Deep Seabed Hard Minerals Resource Act of 1980 and to establish a process for issuing permits along the US Outer Continental Shelf.

It also orders the expedited review of seabed mining permits “in areas beyond the national jurisdiction,” a move likely to spark friction with the international community.

The International Seabed Authority – created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the US has not ratified – has for years been considering standards for deep-sea mining in international waters, although it has yet to formalize them due to unresolved differences over acceptable levels of dust, noise and other factors from the practice.

Supporters of deep-sea mining say it would lessen the need for large mining operations on land, which are often unpopular with host communities. Environmental groups are calling for all activities to be banned, warning that industrial operations on the ocean floor could cause irreversible biodiversity loss.

“The deep ocean belongs to everyone and protecting it is humanity’s global duty. The sea floor environment is not a platform for ‘America First’ extraction,” said Emily Jeffers of the Center for Biological Diversity, a conservation group that opposes the practice.

Any country can allow deep-sea mining in its own territorial waters, roughly up to 200 nautical miles from shore, and companies are already lining up to mine US waters.

Impossible Metals earlier this month asked the administration to launch a commercial auction for access to deposits of nickel, cobalt and other critical minerals off the coast of American Samoa.

Shares of The Metals Company – among the most prominent of deep-sea mining companies – rose on Thursday by roughly 40% to hit a 52-week high of $3.39 per share after the Reuters report earlier in the day on the executive order.

“With a stable, transparent, and enforceable regulatory pathway available under existing US law, we look forward to delivering the world’s first commercial nodule project, responsibly and economically,” said Gerard Barron, CEO of the company, which aims to extract nodules from a vast plain of the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Mexico known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone.

Beyond The Metals Company, others eyeing deep-sea mining include California-based Impossible Metals, Russia’s JSC Yuzhmorgeologiya, Blue Minerals Jamaica, China Minmetals, and Kiribati’s Marawa Research and Exploration.

Other mining steps

US access to critical minerals – especially those produced by Chinese companies – has dwindled in recent months as Beijing has limited exports of several types. That, in turn, has ratcheted up pressure on Washington to support efforts to boost domestic mining.

Last week, Trump officials fast-tracked permitting on 10 mining projects across the United States and implemented an abbreviated approval process for mining projects on federal lands.

The administration also said it would approve one of the country’s largest copper mines.

Trump’s Thursday order uses the term “rare earths” to broadly refer to all critical minerals and is not meant to imply the administration believes the nodules contain neodymium and the 16 other rare earths, the administration official said.

(By Jarrett Renshaw and Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Aidan Lewis and Daniel Wallis)

A surge in supply from the Congo, responsible for 80% of the world’s cobalt output, coupled with tepid demand from the electric vehicle market, saw cobalt sulphate entering the EV battery supply chain in China fall to an average of just $3,556 per tonne in January.  That compares to a peak of nearly $19,000 a tonne in 2022.

Copper production in the DRC, with a big chunk owned by Chinese companies, was rising fast – leading to a near 40% jump in the country’s co-product cobalt output in 2024, but in February the country announced a four month ban on exports to ease the glut. 

Cobalt sulphate prices duly responded, jumping more than 60% in March to average $5,767 a tonne, and holding onto most of those gains in April.   

Cobalt byproduct output is also increasing in Indonesia as its nickel shipments ballooned and the DRC is now in talks with the Asian nation to collaborate on managing supply of cobalt including the use of quotas. 

Cobalt consumption in EV batteries overtook other sources of demand like aerospace several years ago and the impact of the DRC strategy has been swift.  

The latest data from Adamas Intelligence tracking EV battery metal deployment in over 120 countries paired with monthly prices shows the cobalt market springing back into life. 

The estimated size of the battery cobalt market shot up in March to an overall $152.4 million, up 120% over February and the highest since December 2022, lifting the value of sales weighted average cobalt contained in tandem. 

While March was a good month across the board for the EV industry and by extension battery metal deployment, and January and February are generally quiet months for passenger vehicle sales, cobalt vastly outperformed other battery metals. 

Nickel rose by a more subdued 41%, also amid rising prices, while the value of battery lithium deployment increased by 28% month over month, relying on rising EV sales in Asia more than prices, which are still bobbing along near the bottom of the cycle.  

And while price can make all the difference for suppliers to the EV battery market, longer term trends for cobalt (and its ternary cathode cousins) in the EV market are less encouraging. 

Lithium iron phosphate or LFP batteries continue to rapidly take market share from NCM (nickel-cobalt-manganese) and NCA (nickel-cobalt-aluminum) cathode chemistries. 

The China-fueled rise of LFP has fostered a large divergence in global consumption growth rates of key battery metals, according to Adamas Intelligence data.

For example, in calendar 2024 iron and phosphorous deployment were up by 54% and 49%, respectively, for a combined 399.1 kilotonnes contained in the batteries of sold EVs over the course of the year.

In contrast, global nickel deployment into EV batteries increased 11% to 322.7 kt while that of manganese rose 10% to 73.6 kt and cobalt 7% to 59.6 kt as the industry continues to thrift the metal.  Keeping in mind that the installed tonnage does not take into account any losses during processing, chemical conversion or battery production scrap (often well into double digit percentages) so required tonnes are meaningfully higher at the mine mouth. 

In total, installed tonnage of nickel, cobalt and manganese last year represented 21% of the battery metal basket.  

That’s down from a 24% share in 2023 and 36% in 2020 when top EV maker BYD shifted to an all-LFP line-up, and LFP-powered Tesla Model 3s re-ignited uptake of the Ni-Co-Mn-free battery chemistry. 

The world’s largest EV battery maker CATL, responsible for 30% of total battery capacity deployed globally in GWh terms, in April announced that commercial production of sodium-ion packs will begin before the end of 2025. Due to its inherent limitations, sodium-ion is more likely to eat into LFP’s market than NCM’s.

At least there’s that.    

For a fuller analysis of the EV battery metals market check out the May issue of The Northern Miner print and digital editions.

* Frik Els is Editor at Large for MINING.COM and Head of Adamas Inside, providing news and analysis based on Adamas Intelligence data.

For BMI, a price reporting agency (PRA), this is an important step in having its prices used to settle derivative contracts traded on exchanges, an area dominated by information firms Fastmarkets and S&P Global Commodity Insights.

An agreement between BMI and ICE signed earlier this year covers prices of lithium carbonate, lithium hydroxide, spodumene concentrate and cobalt hydroxide, BMI said. Spodumene concentrate contains lithium.

They are all crucial materials for lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles, a key plank of the global energy transition.

BMI said the contracts will be cash-settled and listed in London on ICE Futures Europe. New contracts typically need regulatory approval.

ICE declined to comment.

“BMI is the benchmark for lithium and critical mineral prices that settle billions of dollars of contracts,” said BMI executive chairman Simon Moores.

Industry sources say BMI has pioneered price assessments for lithium, cobalt and critical minerals price reporting.

Approval by the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) indicates that BMI’s assessment methodology has been reviewed and conforms with international best practices and standards.

In March, ICE Futures Europe president Chris Rhodes told the FT Global Commodities Summit in Switzerland that the exchange was planning to launch lithium, cobalt and spodumene derivatives in London this year.

At that time Rhodes said the advantage of these contracts on ICE is that many of the participants active in these markets are already managing their wider energy portfolio at ICE.

Last year, UK-based Global Commodities Holdings Ltd said it was working with ICE to create cash-settled derivatives contracts for nickel, also used in electric vehicle batteries.

Commodity exchanges across the globe are seeking to capture strong expected growth in demand for minerals needed for electric vehicles and renewable energy.

CME Group and the London Metal Exchange (LME), owned by Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing, offer futures in lithium and cobalt, while China’s Guangzhou Futures Exchange has listed lithium carbonate futures.

Singapore-based Abaxx Commodities Exchange launched lithium carbonate and nickel sulphate contracts this year.

(By Pratima Desai; Editing by Eric Onstad and Alexandra Hudson)

While prices of aluminum, zinc, and copper have given up the heady gains of 2024, the 71-year-old tycoon is betting that a simpler structure for the sprawling group and growing demand for critical minerals will add to the allure of his companies even as the specter of a global recession looms.

The overhaul will allow the group to list each of its key businesses: aluminum, oil & gas, power, iron & steel, along with the publicly traded core company Vedanta. The demerger could provide new funding sources and increase financial transparency across the group, according to Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Mary Ellen Olson.

“The time for growth is now as demand is strong, supply is tight, and we’re positioned in the right markets,” Agarwal said in a recent video interview from his London home, adding that most of the materials mined by his company are locally consumed. The billionaire said that this makes Vedanta less vulnerable to potential disruptions in global supply chains arising from US President Donald Trump’s tariff measures.

Vedanta is also expanding the gamut of its operations by winning rights to mine critical minerals like nickel, chromium, platinum, and cobalt in India through November auctions. The global demand for these and other metals that are key to energy transition remains high and will give the group the next fillip of growth, Agarwal said.

Middle East and Africa

Agarwal has long dreamed of building an empire that spans continents and competing with the ranks of the world’s largest diversified miners, including Rio Tinto Group and BHP Group Ltd.

The group plans to spend more on overseas projects and is doubling on investments in the Middle East and Africa. Vedanta is set to invest $2 billion in copper-processing facilities in Saudi Arabia — one of the largest by a foreign firm — as the oil kingdom aspires to build its metals and mining industries significantly.

“Saudi not only has good geology but strong local consumption too,” Agarwal said, adding that “funding is never a problem for a project like that.”

According to local government estimates, Saudi Arabia has untapped resources, including phosphate, copper, gold, and bauxite, worth as much as $2.5 trillion. About a third of its investments in the country will be funded through internal accruals, and for the rest, the group will seek project financing, Agarwal said.

The company is currently seeking funds to develop mines in Africa, too. The Konkola Copper Mines in Zambia, which it controls, has a major copper deposit and cobalt reserves, according to Vedanta.

The financing options being weighed range from a billion-dollar bond offering, “off-take financing, or sale of a minority stake to global investors, for which there is significant demand,” Agarwal said.

Cutting debt

Vedanta shares dropped about 7% this year in Mumbai trading amid a slump in commodities prices. Other than economic growth woes, weighing on investor sentiment is the company’s $6.2 billion debt, the upshot of an acquisition spree since the turn of the century that includes stakes in Bharat Aluminium Co. and Hindustan Zinc Ltd.

Over the last two years, Agarwal has been on a drive to cut leverage and push back repayment deadlines on the group’s borrowings. The plan is to halve it over the next three years.

The group will be cautious about loading up on debt as it chases growth for each demerged unit, he said. All existing shareholders of Vedanta will receive one new share in each of the newly listed entities against each share they own in the parent company.

“There is no need for a stake sale to reduce our debt at the parent company level, and neither are there any plans to sell our stakes in any of the demerged entities,” Agarwal, who started as a scrap metal dealer and has weathered cash crunches and government friction, said. Each listed company can look at issuing fresh shares to raise funds for expansion, he said.

The so-called debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization ratio — a financial metric that measures a company’s ability to pay off its debt obligations — for Vedanta has to be brought down to 1 from the current 1.4 and maintained, according to him.

Over the years, Agarwal has been grooming his daughter Priya Agarwal Hebbar to take over from him as the head of the conglomerate. A psychology and film studies graduate from the University of Warwick, the 35-year-old is the chairwoman of Hindustan Zinc and is on the board of Vedanta.

“The group’s future is very focused on transition and critical minerals, and that is where the company will go,” Hebbar said.

(By Anto Antony)

Two weeks into the second quarter, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.36 trillion, up $79.7 billion so far in 2025.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies remains almost $400 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.

This snapshot was taken at the close of trading on 17 April and not at the start of Q2 as usual to avoid some of the market distortions brought on by the chaotic weeks following Trump’s on-again off-again tariffs.

This flatters the index to some extent as gold stocks rode the coattails of the record setting bullion price and almost all big names regained some ground after the severe sell-off during the first week of April.

Newcomers

The volatile trading saw the greatest number of new entries – six in all – in a quarter since MINING.COM started tracking the Top 50 six years ago. From $6.7 billion at the end of 2024, the lowest ranked entry must now be worth $8 billion.

Mining and metals arguably suffered some of the biggest swings and roundabouts as the economic effects of a trade war and the focus on critical minerals played havoc – exemplified by the volatility on copper markets.

The bellwether metal hit a record high in the US at the end of March, only to plunge more than 20% over the next week and a half and then make up a big chunk of those losses going into the long weekend.

Amid the hectic trading, copper producers and diversified companies with large base metal portfolios lost a combined $53 billion to April 17 and are now trading $205 billion below their collective peak end-Sep 2024 as the sector’s ranks thin.

Lundin Mining dropped out of the Top 50 during Q1 following another copper counter, Poland’s KGHM, which did not make the cut off in Q4 last year. Q1 was a mixed blessing for the Canadian mining empire with the copper producer making way for Lundin Gold, entering the Top 50 for the first time after doubling in value in USD terms to $10.1 billion in Toronto.

Huayou Cobalt’s inclusion proved to be short-lived while South32 failed to make the cut for the first time since being spun out of BHP a decade ago. The base metals sans copper producer sits at position 51 after being narrowly edged out by Shanjin International Gold, so the stock may well return if (and not necessarily when) profit-taking in gold and gold stocks starts to make sense.

Another notable mover of 2025 is Amman Mineral, the worst performer in the index which lost over $10 billion in value as reality about its piercing run since its debut in Jakarta early 2023 continues to set in. The Indonesian copper-gold company is now worth an eye-catching $20 billion less than its high point at the end of Q2 last year, even after investors ran up the stock more than 20% just in the last week.

Nothing counters gold

While the direction of the copper price over the last few months was almost impossible to judge, gold’s record breaking run looked inevitable. At $3,420 per ounce gold at the time of writing, the yellow metal has now finally also surpassed its 1980 peak in inflation-adjusted terms.

Unsurprisingly, precious metals counters dominate the best performer list and make up the majority of new entrants. Gold, silver and PGM miners and royalty companies now represent a third of the value of the Top 50. The strength in precious metals has also seen Canada overtake Australia for the first time in terms of the value of miners headquartered there.

At 22% of the index, the 13 Canadian companies collectively are worth a smidgen under $300 billion compared to $275 billion for the now eight Australian firms with the inclusion for the first time of Sydney-based gold stock Evolution Mining. In their current form Melbourne-based BHP and Rio Tinto have been the top two global mining stocks since the turn of the century, together worth $220 billion today.

The MINING.COM Top 50 tracks stock value in USD terms not share price gains on local exchange and many stocks in the ranking benefitted from strengthening currencies against the USD.

South Africa’s Harmony Gold tops the gainers after jumping 24 spots to enter the ranking at no 37 following a 117% advance since end-2024. Like Harmony, Goldfields also benefited from the strong rand against the greenback, lifting the Johannesburg-based company’s shares by 83% year to date.

Russia’s Polyus, which added $14.4 billion in Q1, was only beaten by the top two gold stocks Newmont and Agnico Eagle which added $18.6 billion and $19.9 billion year to date in market cap gains. The ruble has strengthened by 20% against the US dollar in 2025 and Norilsk Nickel, thanks to captive investors on the MCX, has maintained its good standing in the Top 50 despite sanctions and trading restrictions. Norilsk is still worth north of $20 billion but still a far cry from its peak position as the world’s number 5 most valuable mining company reached mid-2021.

London-listed Fresnillo returns to the index after years in the wilderness thanks to a 74% surge in value for the Mexican silver and gold miner, majority owned by Mexican industrial group Peñoles. Together with Southern Copper, owned by Grupo Mexico, the country now represents nearly 6% of the value of the Top 50.

Gold counters are likely to only increase in number and size over the rest of 2025. Kazatomprom dual-listed in London and Astana in 2018, and Uzbekistan is now readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer later this year.

Rare earth representation

China Northern Rare Earth is the only producer of the 17 elements in the ranking and despite the frenzy surrounding the sector as China tightens control. There are no obvious REE candidates that could join the Top 50 in short order.

MP Materials, which operates the Mountain Pass mine in California, has surged by 69% in value year to date but the Las Vegas-based company is still worth only $4.3 billion.

The company’s valuation peaked above $8 billion in March 2022, but the whole mining industry was riding high at the time and the high price ticket for entry at the time meant it fell just outside the ranking. Australia’s Lynas Rare Earths have also come close in the past and is up 26% this year for a valuation of $5.3 billion.

Lithium down to a single stock

Lithium’s representation in the ranking is down from six companies to a single stock – Chile’s SQM languishing in position 42 and worth less than $10 billion – following the exit of China’s Tianqi and US-based Albemarle during the quarter, with the latter dropping by 38% in 2025.

The value destruction caused by the slump in lithium prices has been nothing short of astonishing. Lithium stocks in the index peaked in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion.

While Albemarle now worth $6.2 billion may well make a comeback (the longer term prospects for lithium demand remains bright), the absorption of Arcadium by Rio Tinto makes it unlikely that the Top 50 will see a rush of lithium stocks any time soon, a rebound of the commodity notwithstanding.

Zangge Mining, which does derive a good proportion of income from lithium, but is mostly a fertilizer producer, is bubbling under at number 53. The Chinese company may not stick around either – it’s the subject of takeover overtures by Zijing Mining, which also helps explain the 25% rise in the stock on the Shenzen exchange in USD terms.

Notes:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close April 17/18, 2025 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry, and how far upstream is the bulk of its revenue, before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or even warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec.

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialized financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

With other groups like Mexico’s Penoles where refining and chemicals make up a substantial part of the business where possible the Top 50 would include separately listed operating subsidiaries that are dedicated to mining. This is also why Southern Copper represents Grupo Mexico in the ranking.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology: email Frik Els at fels@mining.com with Top 50 in the subject line.

The licences, sponsored by the UK and located in the Pacific Ocean, are held by UKSR, which was acquired in 2023 by Norway’s Loke Marine Minerals from US defense contractor Lockheed Martin. Loke filed for bankruptcy earlier this month, prompting an auction for its assets.

The Department for Business and Trade said the transfer of these licences could be assessed under the National Security Investment Act, according to an email sent to Loke’s CEO Walter Sognnes and reviewed by the Financial Times. The government official also reportedly suggested restructuring UKSR under a UK holding company to avoid scrutiny, stating that having a Norwegian parent company would be “problematic”, according to the the FT.

The Act grants the British government authority to examine and intervene in transactions deemed a threat to national security. The department declined to comment when contacted by FT.

The potential sale comes amid heightened global interest in critical minerals used in batteries, such as nickel, cobalt and copper, which are found on the ocean floor.

US President Donald Trump recently voiced support for accelerating deep-sea mining, adding pressure on allies to secure mineral supply chains.

Loke, which had been developing seabed mapping technology, said any ownership structure would be discussed by the future owner and UK authorities.

Seabed mining permits in international waters require state sponsorship under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. China currently leads in the number of such licences. Norway plans to begin commercial deep-sea mining in its national waters, while the UK, France and Germany remain cautious over environmental concerns.

The Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority (ISA) previously warned Loke that UKSR risked non-compliance with exploration terms. The company has also reportedly fallen behind on licence payments.

Sources close to Loke said the company struggled to raise capital, blaming regulatory uncertainty and delays by ISA member states.

“No international regulation has taken longer to get into place than this one,” one source told FT.

Among the bidders for UKSR’s licences was environmental group Greenpeace, which entered the auction as a stunt to protest the commercialization of deep-sea mining. Other bidders include Loke’s founders and UK-based TechnipFMC, one of its investors.

Duncan Currie, legal adviser to the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, criticized foreign control of licence-holding firms, stating that it undermines the legal framework that governs seabed access.

Two weeks into the second quarter, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s most valuable miners had a combined market capitalization of $1.36 trillion, up $79.7 billion so far in 2025.

The total stock market valuation of the world’s biggest mining companies remains almost $400 billion below the peak hit in the second quarter of 2022.

This snapshot was taken at the close of trading on April 17 and not at the start of Q2 as usual to avoid some of the market distortions brought on by the chaotic weeks following Trump’s on-again off-again tariffs.

This flatters the index to some extent as gold stocks rode the coattails of the record setting bullion price and almost all big names regained some ground after the severe sell-off during the first week of April.

Newcomers

The volatile trading saw the greatest number of new entries – six in all – in a quarter since MINING.COM started tracking the Top 50 six years ago. From $6.7 billion at the end of 2024, the lowest ranked entry must now be worth $8 billion.

Mining and metals arguably suffered some of the biggest swings and roundabouts as the economic effects of a trade war and the focus on critical minerals played havoc – exemplified by the volatility on copper markets.

The bellwether metal hit a record high in the US at the end of March, only to plunge more than 20% over the next week and a half and then make up a big chunk of those losses going into the long weekend.

Amid the hectic trading, copper producers and diversified companies with large base metal portfolios lost a combined $53 billion to April 17 and are now trading $205 billion below their collective peak end-Sep 2024 as the sector’s ranks thin.

Lundin Mining dropped out of the Top 50 during Q1 following another copper counter, Poland’s KGHM, which did not make the cut off in Q4 last year. Q1 was a mixed blessing for the Canadian mining empire with the copper producer making way for Lundin Gold, entering the Top 50 for the first time after doubling in value in USD terms to $10.1 billion in Toronto.

Huayou Cobalt’s inclusion proved to be short-lived while South32 failed to make the cut for the first time since being spun out of BHP a decade ago. The base metals sans copper producer sits at position 51 after being narrowly edged out by Shanjin International Gold, so the stock may well return if (and not necessarily when) profit-taking in gold and gold stocks starts to make sense.

Another notable mover of 2025 is Amman Mineral, the worst performer in the index which lost over $10 billion in value as reality about its piercing run since its debut in Jakarta early 2023 continues to set in. The Indonesian copper-gold company is now worth an eye-catching $20 billion less than its high point at the end of Q2 last year, even after investors ran up the stock more than 20% just in the last week.

Nothing counters gold

While the direction of the copper price over the last few months was almost impossible to judge, gold’s record breaking run looked inevitable. At $3,420 per ounce gold at the time of writing, the yellow metal has now finally also surpassed its 1980 peak in inflation-adjusted terms.

Unsurprisingly, precious metals counters dominate the best performer list and make up the majority of new entrants. Gold, silver and PGM miners and royalty companies now represent a third of the value of the Top 50. The strength in precious metals has also seen Canada overtake Australia for the first time in terms of the value of miners headquartered there.

At 22% of the index, the 13 Canadian companies collectively are worth a smidgen under $300 billion compared to $275 billion for the now eight Australian firms with the inclusion for the first time of Sydney-based gold stock Evolution Mining. In their current form Melbourne-based BHP and Rio Tinto have been the top two global mining stocks since the turn of the century, together worth $220 billion today.

The MINING.COM Top 50 tracks stock value in USD terms not share price gains on local exchange and many stocks in the ranking benefitted from strengthening currencies against the USD.

South Africa’s Harmony Gold tops the gainers after jumping 24 spots to enter the ranking at no 37 following a 117% advance since end-2024. Like Harmony, Goldfields also benefited from the strong rand against the greenback, lifting the Johannesburg-based company’s shares by 83% year to date.

Russia’s Polyus, which added $14.4 billion in Q1, was only beaten by the top two gold stocks Newmont and Agnico Eagle which added $18.6 billion and $19.9 billion year to date in market cap gains. The ruble has strengthened by 20% against the US dollar in 2025 and Norilsk Nickel, thanks to captive investors on the MCX, has maintained its good standing in the Top 50 despite sanctions and trading restrictions. Norilsk is still worth north of $20 billion but still a far cry from its peak position as the world’s number 5 most valuable mining company reached mid-2021.

London-listed Fresnillo returns to the index after years in the wilderness thanks to a 74% surge in value for the Mexican silver and gold miner, majority owned by Mexican industrial group Peñoles. Together with Southern Copper, owned by Grupo Mexico, the country now represents nearly 6% of the value of the Top 50.

Gold counters are likely to only increase in number and size over the rest of 2025. Kazatomprom dual-listed in London and Astana in 2018, and Uzbekistan is now readying an IPO for Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Combinat – the world’s fourth largest gold mining company and significant uranium producer later this year.

Rare earth representation

China Northern Rare Earth is the only producer of the 17 elements in the ranking and despite the frenzy surrounding the sector as China tightens control. There are no obvious REE candidates that could join the Top 50 in short order.

MP Materials, which operates the Mountain Pass mine in California, has surged by 69% in value year to date but the Las Vegas-based company is still worth only $4.3 billion.

The company’s valuation peaked above $8 billion in March 2022, but the whole mining industry was riding high at the time and the high price ticket for entry at the time meant it fell just outside the ranking. Australia’s Lynas Rare Earths have also come close in the past and is up 26% this year for a valuation of $5.3 billion.

Lithium down to a single stock

Lithium’s representation in the ranking is down from six companies to a single stock – Chile’s SQM languishing in position 42 and worth less than $10 billion – following the exit of China’s Tianqi and US-based Albemarle during the quarter, with the latter dropping by 38% in 2025.

The value destruction caused by the slump in lithium prices has been nothing short of astonishing. Lithium stocks in the index peaked in the second quarter of 2022 with a combined value of nearly $120 billion.

While Albemarle now worth $6.2 billion may well make a comeback (the longer term prospects for lithium demand remains bright), the absorption of Arcadium by Rio Tinto makes it unlikely that the Top 50 will see a rush of lithium stocks any time soon, a rebound of the commodity notwithstanding.

Zangge Mining, which does derive a good proportion of income from lithium, but is mostly a fertilizer producer, is bubbling under at number 53. The Chinese company may not stick around either – it’s the subject of takeover overtures by Zijing Mining, which also helps explain the 25% rise in the stock on the Shenzen exchange in USD terms.

Notes:

Source: MINING.COM, stock exchange data, company reports. Share data from primary-listed exchange at close April 17/18, 2025 close of trading converted to US$ where applicable. Percentage change based on US$ market cap difference, not share price change in local currency.

As with any ranking, criteria for inclusion are contentious. We decided to exclude unlisted and state-owned enterprises at the outset due to a lack of information. That, of course, excludes giants like Chile’s Codelco, Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining (the gold and uranium giant may list later this year), Eurochem, a major potash firm, and a number of entities in China and developing countries around the world.

Another central criterion was the depth of involvement in the industry, and how far upstream is the bulk of its revenue, before an enterprise can rightfully be called a mining company.

For instance, should smelter companies or commodity traders that own minority stakes in mining assets be included, especially if these investments have no operational component or even warrant a seat on the board?

This is a common structure in Asia and excluding these types of companies removed well-known names like Japan’s Marubeni and Mitsui, Korea Zinc and Chile’s Copec.

Levels of operational or strategic involvement and size of shareholding were other central considerations. Do streaming and royalty companies that receive metals from mining operations without shareholding qualify or are they just specialized financing vehicles? We included Franco Nevada, Royal Gold and Wheaton Precious Metals on the basis of their deep involvement in the industry.

Vertically integrated concerns like Alcoa and energy companies such as Shenhua Energy or Bayan Resources where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem. The revenue mix also tends to change alongside volatile coal prices. Same goes for battery makers like China’s CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining will continue to represent a small portion of its valuation.

Another consideration is diversified companies such as Anglo American with separately listed majority-owned subsidiaries. We’ve included Angloplat in the ranking but excluded Kumba Iron Ore in which Anglo has a 70% stake to avoid double counting. Similarly we excluded Hindustan Zinc which is listed separately but majority owned by Vedanta.

With other groups like Mexico’s Penoles where refining and chemicals make up a substantial part of the business where possible the Top 50 would include separately listed operating subsidiaries that are dedicated to mining. This is also why Southern Copper represents Grupo Mexico in the ranking.

Many steelmakers own and often operate iron ore and other metal mines, but in the interest of balance and diversity we excluded the steel industry, and with that many companies that have substantial mining assets including giants like ArcelorMittal, Magnitogorsk, Ternium, Baosteel and many others.

Head office refers to operational headquarters wherever applicable, for example BHP and Rio Tinto are shown as Melbourne, Australia, but Antofagasta is the exception that proves the rule. We consider the company’s HQ to be in London, where it has been listed since the late 1800s.

Please let us know of any errors, omissions, deletions or additions to the ranking or suggest a different methodology: email Frik Els at fels@mining.com with Top 50 in the subject line.

ERG, a Luxembourg-based producer of copper, cobalt, aluminum and iron ore that is 40%-owned by the Kazakh government, said last year it had formed a task force to explore deposits of rare earth and rare metals in Kazakhstan.

Those minerals have gained particular attention in recent months as US President Donald Trump’s administration seeks alternatives to China to supply its domestic industry as a trade war between the countries escalates.

According to a source close to the company, talks between ERG and Cameron have been going on since the end of last year. Cameron shares a name with the Academy Award-winning film director, but the two are not related.

ERG, the Kazakh government, and Cameron, once a board chairman of former FTSE 250 mining firm Petropavlovsk, did not comment.

According to Cameron’s letter to the ERG board, a copy of which was obtained by Reuters, Goldman Sachs is in preliminary talks to advise on the deal.

“The financing will come from a combination of my own funds, as well as equity contributions from other investors in the United States, and possibly Australia and the Middle East,” the letter said.

Another source close to the transaction told Reuters the investor’s interest in ERG is partly linked to Kazakhstan’s potential in critical minerals exploration and mining. Kazakhstan aims to lift rare and rare earth metals output by 40% by 2028, with ERG seen taking a major role in the initiative.

This month, Kazakhstan’s government announced that its geologists had discovered a large rare earth deposit with estimated resources exceeding 20 million metric tons.

Kazakhstan’s Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov said last year that data concerning the country’s deposits of rare and rare earth metals, a state secret since Soviet times, is being gradually declassified.

If confirmed, this discovery could position Kazakhstan among the top three holders of rare earth reserves globally, following China and Brazil.

ERG once produced one-fifth of the world’s gallium, a rare metal used in microchips and included on the US list of critical materials. However, it ceased production after China increased its output of the metal in 2012.

Beijing in December banned gallium exports to the US after a crackdown by Washington on China’s chip sector.

In 2013, ERG was taken private in a $4.5 billion buyout by its three founders, who each owned approximately 20% of the company, along with the government.

Last month, one of ERG’s founders and its board chairman, Kazakh-Israeli businessman Alexander Mashkevich, passed away, leaving only one of the original founders, Patokh Chodiev, among the current shareholders.

(By Gleb Bryanski and Mariya Gordeyeva; Editing by Guy Faulconbridge and Jan Harvey)

In new legislation branded as ‘One Project, One Process’ the new bill would speed up approvals in strategically important mining projects starting with the Ring of Fire and critical minerals, Ford said.

“Right now it takes 15 years to open a new mine in Ontario,” Ford said. “That’s 15 years of missed opportunity, 15 years of jumping through hoops… these delays were never acceptable, but today, more than ever, we need to act with President Trump taking direct aim at our economy, it cannot be business as usual.”

The measure if passed by the Provincial Legislative Assembly, will aim to have a 50% reduction in the time taken for government review for mining projects, including a coordinated consultation with indigenous groups on whose lands these mines will be built.

Ontario is also tightening its norms over the involvement of foreign entities such as China in critical mining projects, Ford said.

(By Divya Rajagopal; Editing by Kirsten Donovan)

Read More: Prime Minister Mark Carney vows to speed permits, make Canada energy superpower

The deal, reached before Rwanda-backed M23 rebels launched a major offensive in January, was confirmed to the news agency by a Congolese official, two diplomats, and sources close to Prince. M23 has since seized control of eastern Congo’s two largest cities.

The Prince-led initiative runs parallel to a broader minerals-for-security deal being negotiated between the DRC and the Trump administration, aimed at securing critical mineral supplies. Current discussions between Prince and Congolese authorities are focused on implementing the agreement, Reuters said.

Washington has yet to clarify what role it would play in providing security under the potential agreement. 

Prince, who founded the private military firm Blackwater — later renamed Constellis — sold the company in 2010 after several employees were charged with unlawfully killing Iraqi civilians. They were convicted but later pardoned by Trump during his first term.

Trump’s global tariff regime target, China, holds a stronger position than the US in Congo’s mining sector. The European Union, originally included in a potential mineral deal pitched by DRC President Felix Tshisekedi, has moved to secure resources through Rwanda. Last year, the EU pledged about $935 million to Rwanda in exchange for access to minerals including tin, tungsten, and gold.

The DRC is the world’s largest cobalt producer, with 220,000 tonnes of the metal mined last year, according to the US Geological Survey. The country also produces nearly 70% of the world’s tantalum, extracted from coltan. Its eastern provinces hold significant reserves of tin, tungsten, and additional coltan deposits.

Coltan mining in the region has long been linked to environmental destruction, human rights abuses, and deadly violence. Reports continue to surface of child labour in dangerous conditions, raising serious concerns about the ethical sourcing of these essential minerals.

(With files from Reuters)

The order lays bare what manufacturers, industry consultants, academics and others have long warned Washington about: that the US is overly reliant on Beijing and others for processed versions of the minerals that power its entire economy.

China is a top global producer of 30 of the 50 minerals considered critical by the US Geological Survey, for example, and has been curtailing exports in recent months.

Trump signed an order directing Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to begin a national security review under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. That is the same law Trump used in his first term to impose 25% global tariffs on steel and aluminum and one he used in February to launch a probe into potential copper tariffs.

Asked for comment on the order, China’s foreign ministry said on Wednesday that “artificial interference in the supply chain violates the laws of the market economy and international trade rules.”

US dependency on minerals imports “raises the potential for risks to national security, defense readiness, price stability, and economic prosperity and resilience,” Trump said in the order.

Within 180 days, Lutnick is required to report his findings to the president, including whether to impose tariffs. Were Trump to then impose a tariff on a nation’s critical minerals, the rate would supersede the “reciprocal” tariffs Trump imposed earlier this month, according to the White House.

The review will assess US vulnerabilities for the processing of all critical minerals – including cobalt, nickel and the 17 rare earths, as well as uranium – how foreign actors could be distorting markets, and what steps could be taken to boost domestic supply and recycling, according to the order.

The US currently extracts and processes scant amounts of lithium, has only one nickel mine but no nickel smelter, and has no cobalt mine or refinery. While it has several copper mines, the US has only two copper smelters and is reliant on other nations to process that essential metal.

The probe may create an opportunity for some friendly supplier nations angling for exemptions, given Washington has previously flagged potential tariff carve outs for energy and other minerals that are not available domestically.

“Given Australia is a trusted supplier of critical minerals essential to US industries, this investigation presents an opportunity for the nation to strengthen its position as a reliable supplier of these essential resources,” said Tania Constable, CEO of the Minerals Council of Australia.

“But we cannot afford to be complacent. Australia must negotiate a framework that delivers mutual benefit to both Australian producers and US industries, while also continuing to forge and deepen strategic partnerships with other like-minded nations.”

Rare earths producer Australian Strategic Materials, which has been supported by US government funding, welcomed any efforts to build an alternative supply chain for critical minerals, “particularly in the current environment where supply of critical minerals is dominated by one state player,” its CEO Rowena Smith told Reuters.

The company can support Washington in building domestic capability by replicating its Korean processing plant in the United States, she said.

The order is the latest in Trump’s effort to jumpstart US minerals production and processing. The president last month signed an order directing federal agencies to create a list of US mines that could be quickly approved and federal lands that could be used for minerals processing.

Still, it takes years to build a new mine and processing facility, which has sparked concern about where the US could procure minerals were tariffs broadly imposed.

“Ultimately the US gets certain minerals from China because there are not alternative supplies elsewhere,” said Gracelin Baskaran, director of the critical minerals security program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

‘Full scope’

Beijing earlier this month placed export restrictions on rare earths in response to Trump’s tariffs, a move that further exacerbated supply concerns amongst Trump officials.

Rare earths are a group of 17 elements used across the defense, electric vehicle, energy and electronics industries. The United States has only one rare earths mine and most of its processed supply comes from China.

The restrictions from China were seen as the latest demonstration of the country’s ability to weaponize its dominance over the mining and processing of critical minerals after it put outright bans on the export of three other metals last year to the US and imposed export controls on others.

Chinese mining companies across the globe have been flooding markets with cheap supplies of critical minerals like rare earths in recent years, fueling calls from industry and investors for Washington to support US projects.

The White House also said Trump was focused on closing tariff loopholes. As with other products, the supply chain for critical minerals processing involves multiple countries.

“An effective policy should take into account the full scope of the supply chain to level the global playing field,” said Abigail Hunter, executive director of SAFE’s Center for Critical Minerals Strategy.

(By Ernest Scheyder, Costas Pitas, Fransiska Nangoy, Melanie Burton and Amy Lv; Editing by Sonali Paul, Saad Sayeed and Tomasz janowski)

The waters around the Pacific Ocean territory are estimated to contain large amounts of potato-shaped rocks known as polymetallic nodules filled with the building blocks for electric vehicles and electronics.

The request from privately held Impossible Metals asks the US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management – which oversees mineral deposits in federal waters – to launch a competitive lease process for the American Samoa nodules.

A BOEM spokesperson confirmed the request and said the agency will decide by May 23 “whether to initiate steps that could lead to a lease sale.” The agency has not held a competitive lease sale since 1991.

If the BOEM decides to move forward, the request would be put out for public comment before any auction.

Supporters of deep-sea mining say it would lessen the need for large mining operations on land, which are often unpopular with host communities. Detractors say more research is needed to determine how the practice could affect ecosystems.

California-based Impossible Metals said it has developed a robotic device with a large claw that uses artificial intelligence to distinguish between nodules and aquatic life.

Any country can allow deep-sea mining in its own territorial waters, roughly up to 200 nautical miles from shore.

That means that California-based Impossible Metals does not need permission from the International Seabed Authority (ISA) – created by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which the US has not ratified.

Reuters reported last month that the White House is weighing an executive order to let mining companies that want to mine international waters bypass the ISA.

(By Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Sandra Maler)

Two sources familiar with the matter said the transaction completed in March, but they did not know how much commodity broker Marex paid for Darton or exactly when the deal was agreed.

However in its preliminary first quarter results published on April 2, Marex said a “bargain purchase gain is expected to be recognized as a result of the group’s acquisition” of Darton.

In the profit before tax section, the bargain purchase line estimate showed an estimated negative entry of between $3.4 million and $6.1 million, leaving adjusted profit before tax estimates at between $92.3 million and $97.3 million.

According to Companies House, a UK government agency responsible for registering companies, Darton’s address was changed on April 8 to 155 Bishopsgate in the City of London, where commodities broker Marex is headquartered.

Marex’s website shows it offers derivative trading of industrial metals including aluminum, copper, molybdenum, nickel, zinc and tin.

On the physical side, Marex owns recycling firm Tangent Trading, which trades metals such as copper used in the power and construction industries.

Marex recently bought warehousing and logistics company Edgemere Terminals, according to sources.

Prices of cobalt metal used to make missiles, aerospace parts, magnets for communication, and radar and guidance systems have risen since Democratic Republic of Congo suspended cobalt exports in February.

At around $16 a lb or $35,270 a metric ton, they are up nearly 60% since hitting a nine-year low in February.

(By Pratima Desai; Editing by Susan Fenton)

The Trump administration is drafting an executive order to enable stockpiling of deep-sea metals found on the Pacific Ocean seabed to counter China’s dominance of battery minerals and rare earth supply chains, the Financial Times reported on Saturday, citing people familiar with the matter.

The stockpile would “create large quantities ready and available on US territory to be used in the future,” in case of a conflict with China that might constrain imports of metals and rare earths, the report said.

China has placed some rare earth elements under export restrictions in retaliation to US President Donald Trump’s steep tariffs on Chinese goods, potentially cutting the US off from critical minerals vital to everything from smartphones to electric car batteries.

Following the report, the Chinese foreign ministry said that under international law, the seabed and its resources “are the common heritage of mankind.”

“Exploration and exploitation of mineral resources in the international seabed area must be conducted in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and within the framework of the International Seabed Authority,” the ministry said in a statement.

China produces around 90% of the world’s refined rare earths, a group of 17 elements used across the defense, electric vehicle, clean energy and electronics industries. The US imports much of its rare earths, which come largely from China.

(By Ethan Wang and Ryan Woo; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

The move is aimed at countering Chinese global dominance in the critical minerals sector by tapping into a largely unexploited part of the Earth. The polymetallic nodules formed on the sea floor are said to contain rich amounts of nickel, cobalt, copper and manganese used in batteries, as well as traces of rare earth minerals, a group of 17 elements required to build high-tech applications.

China is currently by far the world’s biggest supplier of rare earth minerals, accounting for nearly 70% of the global production, the US Geological Survey estimates. The Asian nation also controls about 90% of the world’s processing of rare earths, and is a world leader in the processing of battery metals.

The executive order, according to FT, would allow the US government to build a “strategic reserve” of these critical minerals, like it had done with gold and oil. The plan is to “create large quantities ready and available on US territory to be used in the future” in case of a conflict with China that might constrain imports of metals and rare earths, the FT sources said.

Amid escalating trade tensions between the two countries in recent months, China has already leveraged its supply dominance by placing export restrictions on some rare earth minerals.

The critical minerals stockpile is part of a broader push to fast-track deep-sea mining applications under US law, and to create onshore processing capacity, the FT report added. It coincides with a Reuters report earlier this month that the Trump administration is considering an executive order to accelerate seabed mining by allowing companies to bypass authorities backed by the United Nations and seek permits directly from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Like the US, China also has ambitions to mine the ocean floor, and according to reports, is poised to lead the “race to the bottom”.

As for the minerals found onshore, Trump signed an executive order last month to activate the Defense Production Act with the aim of boosting domestic mining and processing of critical minerals and making the US less reliant on China.

CMOC’s cobalt production rose almost 20.7% to 30,414 metric tons in the three months to March, it said in a statement. Copper output rose 15.7% to about 171,000 tons.

Congo, the world’s biggest cobalt supplier, in February banned exports of the metal for four months to curb market oversupply that it said was depressing prices.

The price of cobalt on China’s Zhonglianjin trading platform has risen by more than 25% since the DRC government banned exports, closing at 219,000 yuan a ton on Tuesday.

CMOC forecast production of cobalt, a by-product of copper, between 100,000 and 120,000 tons this year.

The company is the world’s biggest cobalt miner and last year more than doubled output of the metal to about 114,000 tons from about 56,000 tons as it ramped up copper production at its Tenke Fungurume and Kisanfu mines in Congo.

The Congo government has said it could either extend the ban or adopt new measures to curb the flow of cobalt on the market to boost prices.

(By Felix Njini and Violet Li; Editing by Louise Heavens and David Goodman)

Massad Boulos was in Congo’s capital, Kinshasa, to discuss an offer by Tshisekedi to invest in the country’s rich mining industry in exchange for security assistance in the nation’s fight against a rebel group in its east backed by neighboring Rwanda. Congo is the world’s second-largest source of copper and biggest producer of electric vehicle battery mineral cobalt.

“We have reviewed the DRC’s proposal, and I am pleased to announce that the president and I have agreed on a path forward for its development,” Boulos said after the meeting, according to audio shared by Tshisekedi’s office. The Trump administration looks forward “to fostering US private sector investment in the DRC, particularly in the mining sector.”

Tshisekedi is hoping US interest in Congo’s minerals will encourage the country to back his government, which is teetering amid the continued rebel advance in the east. Congo also holds vast reserves of critical minerals including lithium, tantalum and manganese.

Boulos gave no details of the proposed partnership, but said the US was working to end the fighting.

“We seek a lasting peace that affirms the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the DRC, and lays the foundations for a thriving regional economy,” he said.

Boulos will head to Rwanda, Kenya, and Uganda to discuss the conflict in eastern Congo and US private sector investment in the region, according to the State Department. Boulos is also Trump’s Arab and Middle Eastern Affairs and father-in-law of his daughter, Tiffany.

(By Michael J. Kavanagh)

Read More: US-Congo minerals deal won’t bring peace, says rebel leader

According to the IEA, global battery demand reached a historic milestone of 1 terawatt-hour (TWh) last year, with annual electric car sales rising by 25% to 17 million.

At the same time, the average price of a battery pack in electric vehicles dropped below $100 per kilowatt-hour, commonly thought of as a key threshold for competing on cost with conventional models, the IEA said.

Driving the decline in battery prices are cheaper battery materials resulting from oversupply as well as advancements in the battery industry itself. Lithium prices, in particular, have dropped by more than 85% from their peak in 2022.

After years of investments, global battery manufacturing capacity reached 3 TWh in 2024, and the next five years could see another tripling of production capacity if all announced projects are built, the IEA predicts.

These trends point to the battery industry entering a new phase of development, the Agency says, noting that markets used to be regionalized and small, but are now global and very large, and a range of technological approaches is giving way to standardization.

China’s dominance

The IEA report also highlighted the continued dominance of China. As the world’s top EV market, it produces over three-quarters of batteries sold globally, and in 2024, average prices in China dropped faster there than anywhere else in the world, falling by nearly 30%.

Chinese batteries are now cheaper than Europe and North America by over 30% and 20%, respectively, the IEA said, citing estimates by BloombergNEF.

IEA ascribes the price advantage of Chinese producers to four main factors: 1) manufacturing know-how, which has supported the rise of giant manufacturers such as CATL and BYD; 2) supply chain integration resulting from acquisitions and co-operations; 3) cheaper battery chemistry, as evidenced by the rise of lithium-iron phosphate (LFP) batteries; and 4) fierce domestic competition between almost 100 producers that are driving down prices.

Declining battery prices in recent years are a major reason why many EVs in China are now cheaper than their conventional counterparts, the Agency points out.

Other major players

In Europe, many battery producers are postponing or cancelling expansion plans because of uncertainty about future profitability. IEA estimates that production costs in the region are about 50% higher than in China; meanwhile, the battery supply chain ecosystem is still relatively weak and a lack of specialized workers persists.

The bankruptcy of Northvolt – Europe’s largest investment in a homegrown battery maker – underscores the difficulties of competing with Asian producers, with smaller manufacturers struggling to scale up production, IEA stated.

However, the Agency said that there are still pathways for Europe to build a competitive battery industry, pointing to efforts to produce cheaper LFP batteries in the region, aided by investments from Korea. Chinese battery makers are also likely to keep expanding their European footprint, it added.

Korea and Japan, despite having limited domestic battery production, have strong innovation track records and are already major players in the industry with their overseas investments. Korea, in particular, leads in overseas manufacturing capacity, with nearly 400 gigawatt-hours (GWh), far ahead of Japan and China.

The United States is also on the rise. Its battery manufacturing capacity has doubled since 2022 following the implementation of tax credits for producers, reaching over 200 GWh in 2024, the IEA estimates.

The report also highlights Southeast Asia and Morocco as potential production hubs for batteries and their components, with the former attracting significant Chinese investment and the latter honing the largest reserves of phosphate, a mineral essential for LFP batteries.

The order, according to sources cited by Reuters, would affirm the United States’ right to extract critical minerals from the ocean floor, enabling companies to seek permits directly from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

The move would mark President Donald Trump’s latest push to secure international sources of nickel, copper and other essential minerals. It follows his recent invocation of emergency powers to boost domestic mineral production.

The International Seabed Authority (ISA), established in 1982 under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) — which the US has not ratified — has spent years developing regulations for deep-sea mining.

In 2021, the island nation of Nauru sponsored Canada’s The Metals Company (NASDAQ: TMC) to begin deep-sea mining, forcing the ISA to draft rules before any company could start extracting minerals in international waters.

The 36-member ISA council has since met repeatedly to finalize regulations. In March, officials gathered in Jamaica to review hundreds of proposed amendments to a 256-page draft mining code, but the session ended without a resolution.

Frustrated by the ISA’s slow progress, TMC last week formally urged the Trump administration to issue deep-sea mining permits, arguing that “commercial industry is not welcome at the ISA.”

“The Authority is being influenced by a faction of States allied with environmental NGOs who see the deep-sea mining industry as their ‘last green trophy,’” TMC chairman and chief executive, Gerard Barron, said on Monday.

“They have worked tirelessly to continuously delay the adoption of the Exploitation Regulations with the explicit intent of killing commercial industry.”

Growing interest

Governments interested in developing deep-sea mining within their territorial waters — typically 200 nautical miles from shore — include the Cook Islands, Norway and Japan.

Proponents of seabed mining contend that its environmental impact is lower than land-based extraction. Critics warn that the long-term consequences remain uncertain and advocate for further research before large-scale operations begin.

Supporters argue that deep-sea mining is crucial to meeting rising mineral demand. The International Energy Agency projects that demand for copper and rare earth metals will grow by 40%, while the need for nickel, cobalt, and lithium—driven by clean energy technologies—could rise by 60%, 70%, and 90%, respectively.

Beyond TMC, other companies exploring deep-sea mining include California-based Impossible Metals, Russia’s JSC Yuzhmorgeologiya, Blue Minerals Jamaica, China Minmetals, and Kiribati’s Marawa Research and Exploration.

Launched in 2013, the BRI represents a massive global infrastructure development strategy adopted by the Chinese government to boost its trade, economic growth and regional influence. To date, China’s BRI spending has crossed $1.1 trillion, with the funds going towards key sectors such as mining, energy and transportation in partnership with 149 countries.

In 2024, mining maintained its status as a major area of focus under the initiative, accounting for 17.6% of last year’s total BRI-related investments, behind only energy’s 32.5%, GAI’s report shows. However, compared to the year before, when mining investment more than doubled to a then record of $19.4 billion, the sector’s share in 2024 is slightly down (from 21% in 2023).

Regionally, China’s engagement has been strong in various African countries, Bolivia and Chile in Latin America, and Indonesia, the report shows.

According to GAI, China already holds significant shares of global mining sources (over 80% of global graphite resources), and even more control in material processing (where across lithium, nickel, cobalt and graphite, China owns more than 50% of global capacity).

GAI’s report also notes that that Chinese firms are increasingly prioritizing equity investments in mining despite the high risks, while those in the energy sector mostly prefer to do construction deals, which are safer as they’re backed by financial institutions. Hence, construction deals have represented a larger share of BRI-related engagements, and in 2024, became much more abundant across every region except South Asia.

Like mining, China’s clean energy (solar, wind, hydropower) investments under the BRI also reached a record high of $11.8 billion. According to GAI’s estimates, this represents about 30% of last year’s total energy spend, which was the highest since 2017. The country also remained a large investor in fossil fuels (coal, oil and gas) abroad, led by a resurgence of coal mining, processing facilities and pipeline projects.

Looking ahead, GAI expects a further expansion of BRI investments and construction contracts in 2025, given the “clear need” to support the green energy transition in both China and in BRI countries. This, as it points out, provides continued opportunities for mining and minerals processing deals, technology deals and green energy — which China now refers to as the “New Three”.

The Metals Company (TMC) on Thursday said it had initiated a process to obtain a US government license to mine metals used in green technologies from a region of the Pacific Ocean controlled by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), the United Nations-affiliated organization that regulates the exploitation of the deep sea. The announcement came as ISA delegates were meeting in Kingston, Jamaica, to draft rules for how companies should go about mining a vast swath of the ocean outside the jurisdiction of any one nation.

ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho and members of the organization’s 36-nation Council policymaking body denounced TMC’s action, saying it defied the organization’s authority over 54% of the global seabed and its mandate to manage it for the benefit of humanity.

“Any unilateral action would constitute a violation of international law and directly undermine the fundamental principles of multilateralism,” Carvalho, a Brazilian oceanographer who took office in January, told the delegates.

A decision by the Trump administration to issue a seabed mining license for an ISA-controlled area could upend an international treaty that governs deep-sea mining and other commercial uses of the world’s oceans.

TMC holds an ISA license sponsored by member state Nauru to explore for minerals but has grown frustrated by decade-long negotiations to draft regulations governing mining biodiverse deep-sea ecosystems. TMC and other ISA-licensed companies can’t begin mining until regulations are enacted. The two-week Council meeting ended on Friday with contentious issues unresolved, including how to protect marine life in areas targeted for mining.

The company is now seeking permission from the Trump administration to mine its ISA license area under US law, which would go against the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The US never ratified the treaty and is not an ISA member. But that treaty reserved some mining areas for the US in case it eventually acceded to the convention. The US in turn passed a 1980 law that laid out procedures for American companies to gain access to deep-sea minerals there.

TMC chief executive officer Gerard Barron said in a statement to Bloomberg Green that the company had complied with the terms of its ISA contract but the organization has failed to fulfill its duty under UNCLOS to enact regulations.

“I’m not sure why ISA member states act surprised that TMC is now looking at an alternative, long-standing regulatory regime,” he said. “Member states cannot have it both ways—expressing shock while repeatedly breaching UNCLOS and failing to deliver the regulatory clarity they committed to years ago.”

International legal experts said it’s unclear what action the 169-member nation ISA could undertake if TMC obtains a US mining license. “If the US takes steps in this unilateral direction,” it’s possible the ISA could pursue some form of international legal action, said Pradeep Singh, an expert on the Law of the Sea at the Oceano Azul Foundation.

Representatives of China, Russia, France, Germany, South Africa and Chile were among the delegates who asserted that only the ISA has the authority to issue mining licenses under UNCLOS. Uganda delegate Duncan Muhumuza Laki, who serves as president of the ISA Council, characterized TMC’s actions as “a breach of their good faith obligation.”

Despite its move to obtain a US mining license, TMC has said it will still file an application for an ISA mining contract in June even if regulations, including environmental protections, are not in place. But many ISA delegates on Friday reiterated that they would not approve any contracts until strong environmental rules are in place.

Thirty-two ISA member nations, including Costa Rica, Germany and France, have called for a moratorium on mining until its environmental impacts are better understood.

“No country, no person and no company may claim property rights nor exercise sovereignty over the common resources of this heritage,” Gina Guillén Grillo, Costa Rica’s representative to the ISA, said Friday.

The ISA Council will likely have to decide how to handle TMC’s application for a mining contract at its next meeting in July.

“We call on ISA members to not be bullied,” Louisa Casson, a Greenpeace deep sea mining campaigner, told delegates.

(By Todd Woody)

But even as European policymakers work to build a future industrial base, they are facing a crisis in the region’s existing metals sector.

Chinese over-capacity and high energy prices have accelerated the long-term decline of European steel and aluminum production.

The latest threat, however, is coming from the United States. President Donald Trump’s tariffs, particularly the increased tariff on aluminum imports, risk displacing a flood of metal into Europe.

Europe’s response is shaping up to be equally protectionist, heralding more fracturing of global trade patterns.

Building for the future

Europe’s strategic projects qualify for fast-track progression through the permitting stage – a maximum 27 months for mine projects and 15 months for processing projects – and access to funding both at European and national level.

The list is heavily weighted towards battery inputs such as lithium, cobalt, nickel and graphite but also includes more esoteric elements such as gallium, germanium and tungsten. Fourteen out of 17 metals on the EU’s strategic metals list are represented.

The projects across 13 member states extend along the whole length of the supply chain from mining to processing to recycling and even materials substitution.

They should allow the EU to fully meet its 2030 domestic production benchmarks for lithium and cobalt and make “substantial progress” for other battery materials such as nickel, manganese and graphite.

In the case of gallium, used in semi-conductors and currently subject to Chinese export restrictions, METLEN’s project in Greece will cover the region’s needs by 2028.

There is more to come.

The European Commission received 46 applications for projects outside of the EU. A decision on the potential selection of such projects “will be decided at a later stage,” it said.

Current crisis

Europe’s bold ambitions for new energy metals stand in stark contrast to the dire problems facing its traditional metals production sectors.

EU steel output has declined from 160 million metric tons in 2017 to 126 million in 2023. Current steel capacity utilization of around 65% is unsustainable, the Commission said.

The region has lost a significant part of its primary aluminum production capacity for good and around half of what remains has been idled since 2021.

The Commission’s “Action Plan” identifies high power costs as a core problem for its industrial metals base. Power prices surged in 2022 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and although they have since fallen, they remain higher than historical levels and well above those in the United States.

A range of solutions is proposed from facilitating more long-term power supply contracts to improving network efficiency and accelerating permitting for building more renewable grid capacity.

In the short term member states are called “to rapidly implement and make use of all the flexibilities (of state aid rules) to lower costs for energy-intensive industries.”

Tariff turbulence

The threat of metal diverted from the United States washing up in Europe has focused minds on how to prevent further contraction in Europe’s steel and nonferrous metals sectors.

Tighter steel import quotas could come as soon as next month, according to European Commission Executive Vice-President Stephane Sejourne.

A “melted and poured” rule, allowing the Commission to take action against the original producer of the metal rather than a third-party transformer, is under consideration.

Plans for import restrictions on aluminum are being fast-tracked with the Commission gathering “relevant evidence” in preparation for some sort of safeguard measures.

This is a race against time for many struggling operators.

Paul Voss, Director General of European Aluminium, has called for “immediate, targeted interventions to stabilize the sector now.”

One of those interventions would be to stem the flow of recyclable materials out of Europe.

Scrap wars

Although the US tariffs of 25% on aluminum imports have been presented as “without exceptions of exemptions”, they do not apply to the movement of scrap.

Aluminum scrap exports from the EU were already on track to hit a record of 1.3 million tons last year. That figure is likely to rise this year as more material goes to the United States, where processors can remelt it into aluminum products and pocket the tariff premium.

European copper recyclers are similarly worried that the threat of US copper tariffs is already pulling more units to the United States along with refined metal.

The Commission is promising to propose by the third quarter of the year appropriate trade measures to ensure more scrap stays in the EU.

That will include reciprocal measures on both those countries applying metals tariffs and on those that currently block exports of scrap.

Global scrap trading has so far been largely unaffected by geopolitics but that looks about to change.

Sense of urgency

The European Union is playing catch-up with the United States, when it comes to investing in critical metals capacity.

But the 27-member bloc has no equivalent of the presidential powers used by both the Joe Biden and Trump administrations.

The combination of strategic projects and metals action plan shows that the European Commission has woken up to the urgency of both building for the future and protecting what it already has.

But as both corporates and lobby groups have been quick to point out, words need to be followed by action.

Or to quote Voss from European Aluminium, “strategy alone won’t keep our operations running.”

(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, Andy Home, a columnist for Reuters.)

(Editing by Jane Merriman)

The company plans to apply under the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act of 1980 (DSHMRA) instead of the International Seabed Authority (ISA), stating the latter had not yet adopted regulations around deep seabed exploitation.

It also added that it has requested a pre-application consultation with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

TMC’s bid to become the first company to gain approval to develop deep sea minerals has been controversial. Environmental groups are calling for all activities to be banned, warning that industrial operations on the ocean floor could cause irreversible biodiversity loss.

This move comes at a time when delegations from 36 countries are attending a council meeting of the UN’s ISA in Kingston, Jamaica this week to decide if mining companies should be allowed to extract metals such as copper or cobalt from the ocean floor.

Few expect a final text for the mining code to be completed by the end of the latest round of talks on March 28, with delegates also planning to discuss potential actions if a mining application is submitted before the regulations are completed.

“We believe we have sufficient knowledge to get started and prove we can manage environmental risks. What we need is a regulator with a robust regulatory regime, and who is willing to give our application a fair hearing,” said Gerard Barron, CEO of The Metals Company.

Advocacy group Greenpeace said the move was “desperate”, accusing the company of “encouraging a breach of customary international law”, by attempting to mine the international seabed under US legislation.

(By Seher Dareen and Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Vijay Kishore)

See Also: Trump is the best news for deep sea mining – The Metals Company CEO

In a press release late Wednesday, the company said it has been infilling the Tamarack resource area as it looks to complete a feasibility study in support project’s environmental permitting process. During this work, the exploration team re-examined and extended a historic drill hole which encountered significant mineralization at a depth of 707.75 metres, drilling 8.25 metres that was logged as 95% sulphide content.

This represents the second significant discovery by Talon’s team in the space of five months. In October, the battery metals explorer announced the Boulderdash copper and nickel discovery in the nearby state of Michigan.

Shares of Talon Metals closed Thursday’s trading session 23.5% higher at C$0.10 apiece, for a market capitalization of C$92.6 million ($64.7m).

The new discovery at Tamarack is situated approximately 150 metres below and 50 metres south of the known nickel-copper mineralization within the current resource area, where a drill hole previously intercepted 7.74 metres of massive sulphide assaying 8.01% nickel and 2.87% copper.

The location, as the Talon team points out, is significant, as it could be a laterally extensive area with a lack of drilling, and may even host some of the highest-grade nickel and copper mineralization discovered to date at Tamarack.

Timely discovery

The Canadian miner also cheered the timing of its new discovery, as it comes days after US President Donald Trump signed an executive order to boost domestic production of critical minerals.

“Talon is uniquely positioned to respond – we operate the only integrated geophysics and drilling team in the United States dedicated to finding new sources of domestic nickel, copper and cobalt,”Talon CEO Henri van Rooyen said in a press release.

According to Talon’s chief exploration officer Brian Goldner, the mineralization model for Tamarack is that “the nickel mineralization was draining down through the intrusive system and pooled up at the bottom of the massive sulphide” near the previous intercept.

“This type of pooling is also seen at the world’s most prolific high-grade nickel producer, in Norilsk, Russia, once again showing similarities that Tamarack shares with the global giants,” Goldner added.

Following the discovery, Talon has advanced towards follow-up drilling after an EM survey conducted on the extension of the discovery hole identified a strong off-hole conductor.

The Tamarack project currently hosts a mineral resource of 8.6 million tonnes grading 1.73% nickel and 0.92% copper in the indicated category and 8.5 million tonnes grading 0.83% nickel and 0.55% copper in the inferred category.

A 2023 expedition to the mineral-rich Clarion Clipperton Zone (CCZ) by a team of scientists led by Britain’s National Oceanography Centre found that the seafloor, a complex ecosystem hosting hundreds of species, still bears scars of a 1979 test mining operation.

The collection of small polymetallic nodules, potato-shaped rocks rich in minerals and metals, from an eight-metre strip of the seabed caused long-term sediment changes and reduced the populations of many of the larger organisms living there, the study, published in Nature, shows.

The team of researchers also found encouraging signs of recovery, with smaller and more mobile creatures returning to the area.

Lead author and expedition leader, Professor Daniel Jones of the National Oceanography Centre said that to tackle the question of recovery from deep-sea mining, it is necessary to first look at available evidence and use old mining tests to help understand long-term impacts. 

“Forty-four years later, the mining tracks themselves look very similar to when they were first made, with a strip of seabed cleared of nodules and two large furrows in the seafloor where the machine passed,” Jones said.

Among the first creatures to recolonize the disturbed areas were large, amoeba-like xenophyophores, commonly found throughout the CCZ — a vast area between Hawaii and Mexico. “However, large-sized animals that are fixed to the seafloor are still very rare in the tracks, showing little signs of recovery,” he said.

The study’s release coincides with a key meeting of the UN’s International Seabed Authority (ISA) in Kingston, Jamaica, where delegates from 36 countries are reviewing over hundreds of proposed amendments to a 256-page draft mining code that will rule commercial deep-sea mining. 

Environmental groups have called for a halt to such activities, a position supported by 32 governments and 63 major companies and financial institutions.

While few expect a final text to be completed by the time the latest round of talks ends on March 28, Canada’s The Metals Company (NASDAQ: TMC) plans to submit the first formal mining application in June.

TMC, which will hold fourth quarter and full year 2024 financial results calls after market close on Thursday, has long said that deep-sea mining has a smaller environmental footprint than terrestrial mining. 

Recovery not only possible, but likely

Chief executive officer Gerard Barron told MINING.COM that the new study supports this view. “For years, activists have pushed baseless claims that nodule-collecting robots will dig up the seafloor and devastate ecosystems. This new study proves otherwise — showing that even with outdated, far more disruptive technology, recovery is not only possible but likely within decades,” Barron said.

“Sessile megafauna such as sponges were scarce in track areas where nodules were removed, as expected, but were observed attached to nodules left behind by the 1979 collector. This suggests a potential mitigation strategy — leaving some nodules intact to support recolonization by reliant organisms,” he said.

TMC has pledged to leave at least 30% of its contract areas untouched to facilitate recovery. “Our own nodule collector will disturb just the top 3 cm of sediment, not the 80 cm as seen in the 1970s trials,” Barron noted.

Opponents warn that the long-term consequences of deep-sea mining remain uncertain, advocating for further research before large-scale extraction begins. Supporters argue that the industry is vital for meeting growing mineral demand.

According to the International Energy Agency, demand for copper and rare earth metals is expected to rise by 40%, while the need for nickel, cobalt, and lithium from clean energy technologies alone could increase by 60%, 70%, and 90%, respectively.