A vocal Trump supporter who attended the president’s inauguration party in Mar-a-Lago in January, Rinehart told Reuters that rather than “whine and whinge” about Trump and his policies, Australia could benefit from a similar approach.

“Australia must reduce its costs, cut government wastage and the expense of government tape, regulations, compliance, licences…,” Rinehart said in exclusive comments sent to Reuters.

Rinehart is Australia’s richest person with a net worth Forbes puts at $30 billion. Her flagship mining company, Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd, is among the biggest donors to opposition leader Peter Dutton’s Liberal Party, more than tripling donations in the 2024 financial year to A$500,000 ($320,000), according to Australian Electoral Commission data.

Voter concerns over the global fallout from Trump’s stop-start tariffs and volatile diplomacy appear to have hurt the prospects of Dutton’s conservative coalition ahead of the May 3 vote, with polls in the final stretch of the campaign showing the ruling centre-left Labor Party of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese easing ahead.

The trend is similar to that seen in Canada this week where Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberals staged a major political comeback, fuelled by a backlash against Trump.

Rinehart said the outcome of Trump’s tariffs policies may take a few months to play out, noting “more than 75 countries had asked to meet with US Administration officials to negotiate on tariffs.”

Dutton’s office and the Labor party did not respond to requests for comment.

Rinehart’s support of Dutton and the populist conservative movement in Australia has echoes of the support for Trump by billionaire Elon Musk, who is now a key adviser to the president.

Rinehart has not publicly sought any Australian government role, but has called for the establishment of a version of Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). She also wants Australia to withdraw from the Paris Agreement to combat climate change, as Trump did during his first term.

When Trump was inaugurated in January, Dutton was ahead in opinion polls, as Australians expressed anger over the cost of living and housing affordability.

In the week after Trump and Musk arrived in the White House, Dutton criticized public servants hired as “culture, diversity and inclusion advisers.” He later promised to set up a Ministry of Government Efficiency, but has since played down comparisons with Trump and his policies.

Rinehart suggested without providing detail, that in Australia “the Left” was resisting public sector cuts because they benefited from bureaucratic largesse.

“Perhaps not surprising the Left are also against Elon Musk and DOGE, you might think, wouldn’t they like to see this taxpayer drain minimalized, but no, certainly not those with snouts in the trough. And not those who may be concerned they will have to pay money back where wrongly taken, or even go to jail.”

Dutton has proposed cutting around 41,000 non-frontline government jobs in Canberra, a figure Labor said was impossible given the number of jobs in the capital fitting the criteria.

Fossil fuels, defence boost

Rinehart has been a vocal supporter of fossil fuels to boost energy security and lower prices. She was pictured during the Trump campaign smiling and wearing a sign that read “Drill Baby Drill.”

Dutton has been a major backer of natural gas, pledging to incentivize more production, and wants to introduce nuclear power, in contrast to Labor which is relying on renewables and batteries to lower power prices and meet carbon commitments.

“Probably the biggest single government tape that needs to be on pause, so our economy has the chance to recover, is the Paris Accord,” Rinehart said.

“Could it be that the American public are ahead of us, they understand that cutting the mining and export of fossil fuels brings less revenue, less jobs and opportunities,” she added.

Last month, in response to questions that Liberal Party policies had not gone far enough for Rinehart on gas, while at the same time had not ditched a commitment to net zero emissions, Dutton said: “We’ll have points of difference with many people, but that doesn’t mean that it impacts your friendship or your relationship with different business people.”

Rinehart last week called for Australia, a key US security ally, to spend 5% of its gross domestic product on national security, in line with the Trump administration’s policies.

Labor has pledged to boost defence spending by A$50 billion over the next decade, but would have to more than double its current spending to meet a 5% goal.

Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting in February disclosed for the first time a roughly $1.3 billion US investment portfolio, with many of the largest holdings in companies involved in energy, mining and rare earths – crucial for defence and aerospace technologies.

A Reuters analysis of the 10 top holdings show they are up 2.3% in the first four months of the year, in contrast to a 5.5% fall in the S&P 500, thanks largely to a 57% surge in shares of rare earths producer MP Materials.

“Americans may be ahead of us recognizing they want strong leadership providing defence of their country and people, which President Trump is also busy doing,” Rinehart said.

“Although, they may not want their taxpayers dollars and defence personnel’s lives risked to help allies who don’t understand them, whine and whinge and worse, are incredibly rude to them, and who do bugger all to provide their own defence.”

($1 = 1.5603 Australian dollars)

(By Melanie Burton; Editing by Praveen Menon and Lincoln Feast)

The miner confirmed Friday that it’s actively negotiating to buy 100% of Gold Road through an Australian scheme of arrangement — just hours after Gold Road’s shares were suspended from trading in Sydney.

Gold Road had dismissed the first approach as “highly opportunistic” and claimed it undervalued the company. Price and timing were the key sticking points, chief executive Duncan Gibbs said at the time.

Gold Fields had offered A$2.27 per share in cash, plus a variable component tied to Gold Road’s stake in De Grey Mining. In response, Gold Road proposed acquiring Gold Fields’ 50% stake in the Gruyere mine at a matching valuation. Gold Fields rejected that counter-offer and refused further talks on divesting its interest.

Now, Gold Fields is back at the table, driven by its determination to secure full control of Gruyere — one of Western Australia’s largest gold mines. Gold Road discovered the deposit in 2013 and sold a 50% interest to Gold Fields in 2016 to fund development and exploration.

Gruyere has produced over 1.5 million ounces since beginning operations in 2019. It delivered record output of nearly 92,000 ounces in the final quarter of 2024.

Gold Fields cautioned there’s no guarantee a deal will materialize. That uncertainty pushed its Johannesburg-listed shares down as much as 6.4% Friday, though the stock was up 1.6% in pre-market trading in New York to $21.66.

Gold Road’s shares, suspended early in the day due to “media speculation regarding a potential change of control transaction”, will remain trading when the market opens on May 6, unless the company issues an announcement before then.

The bid comes amid a surge in gold prices and deal-making. With gold briefly topping $3,500 an ounce last month, the sector has seen a new wave of mergers and acquisitions. Recent deals include Equinox Gold’s  (TSX: EQX) C$2.6 billion ($1.88 billion) acquisition of Calibre Mining in Canada, and China’s CMOC Group buying Lumina Gold for C$581 million ($421m).

Rio Tinto pledged to reform its business practices after it blew up the 46,000-year-old Juukan Gorge rock shelters in Western Australia in 2020 for an iron ore mine. The destruction sparked a huge public and investor outcry, a government inquiry and ultimately the exit of its CEO and chair.

Deanna McGowan of the Robe River Kuruma Aboriginal Corporation said at Rio Tinto’s annual general meeting in Perth that the Mesa J mine, the company’s largest on the group’s lands, had been operating for 30 years.

“You have paid us for three years,” she said. When Rio Tinto negotiated the agreement with the group’s elders twenty years ago, executives had said there was no need to include the mine because it would soon close, she added.

“And here we’re now … 17 years of payments that Rio has cheated us at Mesa J,” she said.

The lands belonging to the Robe River Kuruma group do not include Juukan Gorge but are in the same Pilbara region.

Rio Tinto chair Dominic Barton said the company was committed to reaching an agreement on the issues raised by McGowan.

“We want to be able to get to an agreement and a resolution working with you. We’ve had a number of conversations and we’ll be having after this meeting as well, but there is a very, very strong commitment to work through these issues with you,” Barton said.

Earlier in the AGM, Barton said the mining giant had relationships with more than 60 Indigenous and land-connected groups globally.

“Many of these are very positive relationships, while a small number remain challenged,” he said.

Inquiries in the aftermath of the Juukan Gorge destruction revealed that past agreements between miners and many Aboriginal groups had prevented the groups from speaking publicly about damage to their heritage and underpaid them royalties for mining on their lands.

As a result, Rio Tinto and other major miners such as BHP and Fortescue pledged to update their land-use agreements with traditional groups.

Failures by Rio Tinto to reach such agreements could disrupt its production schedule.

The miner warned in its quarterly production report that its guidance remains “subject to the timing of approvals for planned mining areas and heritage clearances.”

(By Melanie Burton and Renju Jose; Editing by Edwina Gibbs)

Following the company’s annual general meeting in Perth on Thursday, chief executive Jakob Stausholm said the board had discussed rare earths this week and would take a “serious look” at their potential role in Rio Tinto’s portfolio.

Stausholm said that as the company continues to optimize its iron ore operations in the Pilbara and advances developments like the Simandou iron ore project in Guinea, it’s also reshaping its aluminum, copper, and lithium businesses to support the energy transition.

“So you could say, the next thing is to look a little bit deeper on critical minerals, and you have to think about that, not necessarily as separate mines,” Stausholm told reporters. He noted critical minerals are often present in Rio’s existing operations as a by-product, so “it’s a question of whether we should process them more deliberately.”

Rio Tinto already produces scandium as a by-product of titanium dioxide in Quebec and is weighing the production of gallium from its aluminum operations. Stausholm noted that the absence of a robust spot market for many critical minerals means Rio must ensure demand before scaling up production.

Chairman Dominic Barton echoed the cautious approach, pointing to the limited scale of the sector. “That’s why you don’t typically see the top five [largest miners] in this space,” he said. But with global supply chain diversification becoming a priority, Barton said they are asking themselves whether they should revisit what they already have and assess the economics.

Barton also said critical minerals could help strengthen Rio’s social licence to operate. “It’s interesting how often those with fewer resources are the most vocal,” he added.

Tariffs, Canada and the aluminum market

On tariffs, Barton said Rio could compete under the current global framework, though the company isn’t enthusiastic about trade barriers. “We’re not excited about tariffs, but we’ve got to live with what governments are doing,” he said, adding that if they’re applied uniformly, the company “would manage” because of its position on the cost curve.

Barton welcomed the recent Canadian election results, suggesting they provided a mandate for continued negotiations. He praised the country’s recognition of aluminum’s economic importance, especially given Rio’s workforce in Canada.

As a former Canadian ambassador to China, Barton said China’s economy could absorb short-term tariff impacts.

“Urbanisation, GDP consumption rates, and green infrastructure investment all support long-term steel demand,” he said. “We expect a new equilibrium despite near-term discomfort.”

Working in the US

Stausholm highlighted Rio’s significant presence in the US, including the Kennecott copper mine and smelter in Utah, a boron mine in California, and the Resolution copper project in Arizona.

“The US government is very, very keen on seeing us getting the most out of those assets, so it provides opportunities to serve the US government,” Stausholm said.

He added that tariff policies wouldn’t necessarily affect Rio’s long-term investment decisions. Last month, the US government fast-tracked permitting for the Resolution project, and Stausholm said the joint venture with BHP (ASX: BHP) is moving forward.

“Unlike Australia, the US has seen limited mining development in recent decades—this represents a shift”, he said.

Activist campaign fails

A proposal from UK-based hedge fund Palliser Capital to force a review of Rio’s dual-listed company (DLC) structure failed to gain traction. The company rejected the motion, with Barton stating the board had already reviewed the structure in detail last year with advice from five external consultants.

“All of this work showed that a unification of the DLC would be value destructive for the group and its shareholders,” Barton said.

Only 19.35% of shareholders supported the motion. Under UK law, a 75% majority is required to mandate a review, while 20% support would have have required the company to engage further with shareholders.

Total gold demand reached 1,206 tonnes in the first three months of 2025, a 1% increase from the same period a year ago, the WGC said in a new report Wednesday. Soaring inflows into gold ETFs fuelled a 170% surge in investment demand to 552 tonnes, the highest since the first quarter of 2022, WGC said.

As gold prices set multiple record highs this year, including touching $3,500.05 per oz. last week, investors have piled into physical gold ETFs, which grew by $21 billion in the first quarter, their second highest quarterly level since the second quarter of 2020.

Gold’s average price reached $2,860 per oz. in the quarter, a 38% jump from a year ago, according to data compiled by the London Bullion Market Association.

Flows into gold

Investment flows into physical gold will probably continue to gather pace this year, the WGC said. Key factors supporting demand include continued geopolitical tensions, near-term stagflation risks, medium-term recession risks, elevated correlations between stocks and bonds and an expected increase in US deficits.

Central banks bought 244 tonnes of gold in the first quarter, 21% less than in the same period a year ago but within the quarterly range of the last three years. Persistent trade tensions will probably drive full-year central bank purchases close to the range of the past three years, according to the WGC.

First-quarter bar and coin demand rose 2.6% to 325 tonnes, which is 15% above the five-year quarterly average. China accounted for much of the increase, posting its second-highest quarter of retail investment.

Tech demand

Technology demand was little changed at 80.5 tonnes. Ongoing artificial intelligence adoption drove continued growth in the electronics sector, but uncertainty over tariffs should result in a challenging environment for the rest of the year, the WGC said.

Jewelry consumption shrank 21% from the year-ago quarter to 380 tonnes, weighed down by elevated prices. Consumption in the period hit its lowest level since the Covid-19 pandemic brought global economies to a standstill in 2020, and WGC economists predict full-year jewelry demand will be weaker than expected in 2025 on lower growth and higher prices.

Total gold supply grew 1% from a year earlier to 1,206 tonnes, with mine production hitting a first-quarter record of 856 tonnes. Recycling declined 1% as consumers kept their gold hoping for higher prices.

Mine supply this year will probably stay close to its 2024 record level, the WGC said. “Unprecedented” cash generation should allow announced development plans to advance and mine production to stay strong. While Ghana, Chile and Canada have healthy production pipelines, disruptions in Turkey and Russia and cutbacks in Australia are expected to weigh on total output.

Read More: Annual gold price forecast tops $3,000 for first time: Reuters poll

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)

The Group, which recently concluded its biannual meeting with key industry players in Lisbon, forecasts global copper surplus to reach 289,000 tonnes in 2025, more than double the 138,000 tonnes from last year. This forecast also represents a larger surplus than its earlier projection of 194,000 tonnes.

In 2026, the surplus is expected to remain high at 209,000 tonnes, extending the surplus for a third straight year after a largely balanced market in 2023.

The widening surplus over the 2025-26 period, according to ICSG, can be largely attributed to higher mine supply and rising smelting capacity.

Mine supply growth

For 2025, the Group expects global mine production to increase by 2.3% to 23.5 million tonnes, benefiting mainly from the ramp-up of the Kamoa-Kakula mine in the DRC and Oyu Tolgoi in Mongolia and the commissioning of the new Malmyz mine in Russia.

In 2026, a higher growth of 2.5% is anticipated, supported by the continued ramp-up of new/expanded capacity (including China), an expected improvement in Chilean and Zambian output, and a recovery in Indonesia from expected declines in 2025.

In both years, ICSG said a series of smaller expansions and the start-up of a number of small and medium-sized mines will also contribute to the increase in global production notably in the DRC, Brazil, Iran, Uzbekistan, Ecuador, Eritrea, Greece, Angola and Morocco.

Higher refining capacity

The ICSG also sees expanded Chinese smelting capacity, as well as the start-up of new refineries in India, Indonesia and DRC, to contribute to a 2.9% increase in refined copper output this year.

In 2026, however, total refined production is expected to decline by 1.5%, due to constrained availability of copper concentrates leading to a slowdown in primary refined production. This will be offset partially continued growth in the secondary processing sector, which generates refined copper from scrap.

Demand impact

According to the ICSG, uncertainty surrounding international trade policy is likely to weaken the global economic outlook and negatively impact copper demand, dragging this year’s refined copper usage down to 2.4% compared to its previous forecast of 2.7% and the 2.8% recorded in 2024.

Copper usage growth is expected to slow further to 1.8% in 2026, largely reflecting an anticipated loss of momentum in China, where copper usage is expected to shrink from 2% this year to just 0.8% next year.

Demand in other key copper regions such as Europe, Japan and the US is also expected to remain “subdued”, leaving the Asia region as the lone key driver of demand.

However, ICSG also acknowledged that demand drivers such as energy transition technology and data centers will continue to support copper usage, helping to offset some of the broader manufacturing hit from a prolonged trade war.

The full ICSG report is here.

In its latest report, Sprott notes that uranium prices have stabilized near $65/lb following a correction driven not by weakening fundamentals, but by a pause in utility contracting. Buyers have been waiting for clarity on US tariffs and potential trade restrictions on Russian enriched uranium.

Some of that uncertainty began to clear in early April, helping steady the spot market. Sprott maintains that uranium’s decline reflects macro sentiment and technical selling—not a reversal in the commodity’s structural outlook.

“Despite market pressures, uranium’s term price remains stable at $80/lb and global supply is constrained below demand levels,” the firm said.

Resilience amid volatility

While broader equity and commodity markets have seen volatility in recent months, uranium has shown relative stability.

In early April, it remained uncorrelated with other risk assets—holding firm even as equities sold off, bond markets wobbled, and volatility spiked.

Uranium and uranium equities have outperformed other commodities and global equities over the past five years, driven by a deepening supply deficit and growing global policy support. That trend, Sprott argues, is far from over.

Supply lags demand

Supply constraints remain a central part of the bullish case. Few new uranium projects are advancing, and some juniors—like NexGen, Deep Yellow, and Paladin—have delayed development. Kazatomprom has also guided production toward the lower end of its outlook amid cost and input challenges.

In Australia, heavily shorted producers such as Paladin and Boss Energy have come under pressure, but Sprott believes short positioning in uranium equities is out of sync with underlying market dynamics. “This wave of equity weakness is a sentiment story, not a structural one,” the report reads.

On the demand side, China continues to expand its nuclear fleet, and the US—backed by bipartisan support—has reaffirmed its commitment to nuclear power as a strategic asset. Tech giants like Amazon, Google, and Meta are also pushing for an ambitious tripling of global nuclear power capacity by 2050 to meet growing baseload energy needs.

Sprott expects the next leg of the uranium bull cycle to begin as utilities return to the market and long-term contracting resumes. With global uranium production still well below reactor requirements and long timelines for new supply to come online, the firm sees a structurally tight market for years to come.

On Monday, Melbourne-based boutique fund Datt Capital, which holds a major stake in Koonenberry, went public with its concerns over the composition of Koonenberry’s board and proposed incentives to be issued to directors.

Datt chief investment officer Emanuel Datt told MINING.com it had first engaged with Koonenberry about six weeks ago over the nomination of a Datt representative to the Koonenberry board.

“They were very much opposed to any sort of board change,” he said.

“It made us think, well, we own over 10% of the company, we’re in a fairly strong position. We’d like a nominee on the board, but if we need to go through a formal shareholder, process, we’ll be going for two seats rather than just one.”

Datt then formally moved resolutions under section 203D of the Australian Corporations Act, calling for the removal of non-executive directors Darren Glover and George Rogers.

Rogers was a co-founder of Koonenberry, while Glover joined the board last year after selling the company its Lachlan project.

Datt said neither had public company experience or a track record of value creation.

“Ultimately, the board in its present incarnation, it’s fine if it’s a micro-cap company, and when the operations are still fairly speculative,” he said. 

However, shares in Koonenberry are up by around 200% year-to-date, including almost 70% in April, following exploration success at its Enmore project in New South Wales.

It started the week with a market capitalization of around A$70 million ($45 million).

“This looks like it could be a very real major gold discovery, and effectively, that’s when you’ve got to start preparing for the company’s evolution,” Datt said. 

“We’re really of the belief that you’ve got to have the right sort of experience and expertise around the board table to guide the company towards that outcome of maximising shareholder value in the medium term.”

Datt is proposing the appointment of Datt partner Tony Gu as its board representative and geologist and former IGO (ASX: IGO) exploration manager Tim Kennedy as an independent non-executive director.

Remuneration objections

Koonenberry was criticized for not disclosing Datt’s proposed board changes to the ASX and instead, announcing a new incentive package for directors on April 10.

The incentives included the issue of performance rights to employees if the company reported single drill intercepts of at least 20 gram metres and 50 gram metres of gold and the company achieving a volume-weighted average share price (VWAP) of at least A3.75c for 10 consecutive days.

Managing director Dan Power is set to receive roughly 2 million performance rights for achieving at least one 20 gram metre gold hit and at least one 50 gram metre gold hit.

Datt estimates the package could result in a potential A$5.4 million dilution to shareholder value, assuming a A20c share price, and could dilute existing shareholders by almost 6%.

Datt would prefer to see vesting conditions based on tangible metrics, such as JORC gold resource quantities, combined with a 30-day VWAP metric.

“I don’t think what we’re proposing is controversial in any way, shape or form,” he said. 

“I really think it’s just a situation where the incumbent board are very tight and cosy and are obviously granting themselves pretty rich performance right schemes with very low vesting conditions.”

Datt said the company’s move had received support from other Koonenberry shareholders.

“That has been from smaller investors, or even medium-sized investors, that are just tired of companies taking too many liberties. It’s like correcting your own homework.”

Emerging discovery

Koonenberry listed on the ASX in late 2021 with a focus on its namesake project in New South Wales.

Shares drifted lower in the years after listing due to limited exploration success and in October 2024, Koonenberry acquired a package of new projects in NSW, which included two joint ventures with Newmont Corporation (NYSE: NEM).

Newmont has acquired 80% of the Junee project, with Koonenberry free carried to commercial production, while Newmont can earn up to 80% of the Fairholme project by spending A$5 million on exploration.

While Newmont has been drilling both projects this year, Koonenberry has had the most success at its 100%-owned Enmore project.

Enmore is just 20km south of the Hillgrove gold-antimony project, a historical mine which is currently being redeveloped by Larvotto Resources (ASX: LRV).

Earlier this month, shares in Koonenberry surged by as much as 40% after it reported a hit of 170m at 1.75 grams per tonne gold (g/t) from 77m, including 18m at 9.95g/t gold from the first hole at the Sunnyside prospect.

It followed that up with 172.9m at 2.07g/t gold in the second hole, and today, reported 102m at 1.10g/t gold in the third hole.

The company’s other major shareholders are fellow Melbourne-based funds Lion Selection Group (ASX: LSX) and Lowell Resources Fund (ASX: LRT).

Koonenberry did not respond to a request for comment, but in the statement released Monday, it said it was considering the validity of Datt’s notices.

Meanwhile, Datt spent A$831,609 purchasing Koonenberry shares on market yesterday to take its stake in the company from 11.3% to 12.8%.

The iron ore producer, chaired by its billionaire founder Andrew Forrest, posted quarterly iron ore shipments of 46.1 million metric tons (mt), compared with 43.3 million mt reported a year earlier. That was largely in line with a Visible Alpha consensus estimate of 46.8 million mt.

The uptick in iron ore shipments comes despite Fortescue facing significant weather disruptions, including a five-day closure of the port of Port Hedland and operational constraints from Tropical Cyclone Zelia that drove a 7% quarter-on-quarter decline.

Shares of the world’s fourth-largest iron ore miner rose as much as 2.1% to a four-week high of A$15.8, outperforming a 0.3% rise in the broader mining sector.

Fortescue said it continues to review the timeline for its Iron Bridge operations to reach full production capacity of 22 million mt annually, with an assessment of key processing equipment expected to be completed by June.

For its green energy division, Fortescue is reassessing development timeframes for its Arizona Project in the US and its Queensland-based Gladstone PEM50 Project, with “greater clarity” on external factors affecting these projects expected by June.

The company maintained its fiscal 2025 iron ore shipments guidance of 190 million-200 million mt, including 5 million-9 million mt for Iron Bridge on a 100% basis. Projected 2025 capital expenditure of $3.5-$3.8 billion also remains unchanged.

Fortescue delivered its first T 264 Power System to mining equipment manufacturer Liebherr during the quarter. The system is designed to convert diesel mining trucks to zero-emission vehicles as part of the company’s decarbonization efforts.

(By Roushni Nair, Adwitiya Srivastava and Melanie Burton; Editing by Shailesh Kuber and Rashmi Aich)

Under a court-approved plan of arrangement, Alkane will buy all issued and outstanding common shares of Mandalay. Mandalay shareholders will receive 7.875 Alkane shares for each Mandalay share held. After the transaction, former Mandalay shareholders will own 55% of the combined company, with existing Alkane shareholders holding 45%.

The merged entity will operate under the Alkane Resources name, maintain its Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) listing, and seek a listing on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX). It will have an implied market capitalization of A$1.01 billion ($640 million) and expects to produce 160,000 gold-equivalent ounces in 2025, rising to more than 180,000 ounces in 2026 from three operating mines: Alkane’s Tomingley project and Mandalay’s Costerfield mine in Australia, and Björkdal mine in Sweden.

The tie-up, unanimously approved by both companies’ boards, comes amid a wave of consolidation in the gold sector, driven by record bullion prices. Gold hit a record $3,500.05 per ounce last week, up more than 25% this year on the back of geopolitical tensions and strong central bank demand.

Recent deals include Equinox Gold’s C$2.6 billion acquisition of Calibre Mining in February. Spartan Delta (TSX: SDE) agreed to a A$2.4 billion takeover by Australia’s Ramelius Resources (ASX: RMS) less than a month later. South Africa’s Gold Fields (JSE, NYSE: GFI) made a A$3.3 billion bid for Gold Road Resources (ASX: GOR), though it was rejected.

Last week, Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST) completed an A$5 billion acquisition of De Grey Mining.

Nic Earner, Alkane’s current managing director, will lead the merged company. The transaction is expected to close in the third quarter of 2025.

While pre-construction activities are underway, additional expenses are needed to mitigate wastewater challenges, Lynas said in a statement Monday. The company — backed by Australia’s richest person Gina Rinehart — is in discussions with the US government about the issue, it added.

Perth-based Lynas is the largest supplier outside China of rare earths, used in everything from smartphones to defense applications. The Asian nation’s dominance of the industry has caused angst in the US, which is seeking to bolster alternative supply chains. In response to punitive tariffs imposed by Washington, Beijing has added seven rare earths to its export control list.

“We are also reviewing the potential cost implications for the US project as a consequence of recent announcements on global tariffs,” Lynas said.

Lynas produces so-called ‘light’ rare earths, which are used in magnets for electric vehicle motors, wind turbines and munitions. It’s set to enter the ‘heavy’ industry with new refining capacity both in the US and in Malaysia, where it has an existing site that from later this year will start processing many of the metals restricted by Chinese export controls.

Lynas currently sources ore for its refineries from its Mt Weld mine near Kalgoorlie in Western Australia, according to its website. It will send ore from there to the Texas facility once it is operational.

(By Paul-Alain Hunt)

From January 2009 through August 2011, the monthly average price of dysprosium (Dy) oxide (China FOB) increased 26-fold, from $91/kg to $2,377/kg.

This price spike is often attributed to China halting rare earth exports to Japan amidst a territorial dispute, but in reality the rally had started months prior and was accelerated by a multitude of different forces; namely, falling Chinese export quotas, rising Chinese export duties, China’s weaponization of rare earth exports, a clampdown on illegal production in the nation, and resultant speculation and panic buying by end users.

This year, with China imposing export restrictions on a suite of rare earth materials earlier this month, including Dy oxide and other Dy-containing products, such as NdFeB magnets, flows from China to global end users are currently being bogged down by bureaucracy as sellers in China apply for and await the receipt of export licenses for affected orders – a process expected to take upwards of 45 business days.

Over the long term, these restrictions will have lasting impacts on global rare earths trade through the galvanization of supply chain development efforts in the US, Europe and elsewhere. In the near term, however, global end users – mindful of the 2010/11 price spike – face major uncertainty with respect to supplies and prices.

For the most part, rare earth prices have responded negatively to the new export restrictions, despite a sustained reduction in supplies from Myanmar and the recent stoppage of concentrate exports to China by MP Materials. Interestingly, prices were also initially indifferent when China halted exports to Japan in September 2010, but three months later embarked on a historic upswing that remains unmatched to this day.

Below is a summary of key developments from January 2009 through August 2011 that led to Dy oxide’s meteoric price rise.

January 2009: $91/kg

As of January 2009, China’s rare earth export quotas (i.e., the amount it permitted for export) had fallen steadily since 2005, down 13% in four years, raising concerns among end users.

Over the same period, China re-introduced export duties on rare earths in 2006 and gradually ratcheted them up from 10% to as high as 25% for a strategic selection of products, including neodymium metal, as well as dysprosium and terbium carbonate and chloride.

August 2009: $114/kg

With export quotas down and duties up, China’s MIIT released a draft report in August 2009 that hinted Beijing would ban the export of five rare earth elements within the next five years.

The following month, the New York Times reported that China was planning to further reduce its export quotas in 2010.

The price of dysprosium jumped 26% versus January but went largely unchanged thereafter through the end of 2009.

January 2010: $129/kg

In January 2010, China raised export duties on Fe-Dy alloy, a key input for high performance NdFeB magnets, from 10% to 20%, lifting the price of Dy products, including Dy oxide, by a similar rate month over month.

At the same time, China slashed its first of two export quotas for the year, as foreshadowed by the New York Times, leading the price of Dy oxide to more than double by July as end users raced to secure material.

In July 2010, China announced a 72% reduction to its second export quota for the year, exacerbating concerns while propelling the price of Dy oxide 26% higher month-over-month.

Two months later, in September 2010, China temporarily banned rare earth exports to Japan amid a territorial dispute.

Nevertheless, the price of Dy oxide and many other rare earths increased just modestly between July and December 2010, but the fever was nearing a boil.

In December 2010, Reuters reported that China planned to reduce its export quota for the first half of 2011 by another 35%, fueling a January price jump and a historic upswing to follow.

January 2011: $343/kg

Following the Reuters report, the five-month-stagnant price jumped 18% in January, 19% in February, 28% in March, 31% in April and 17% in May to a record $799/kg – a historic rally that remains unmatched to this day.

August 2011: $2,377/kg

A month later, in June 2011, the price soared 80% to $1,440/kg as the Chinese government cracked down on illegal mining in the nation and by August 2011 prices topped $2,377/kg, a 26-fold increase in just 31 months.

For the next five months, the price began to deflate but held above $2,000/kg into January 2012.

In February 2012, the average price fell to $1,633/kg and by December 2012 was down to $748/kg.

The following three years (2013/14/15) saw the price drop by roughly 33% each year to a floor of around $180/kg in 2016.

Short lived spike, long lasting fallout

While the price spike was short lived, the fallout was profound and enduring. In the years that followed, a quiet revolution unfolded in the electric vehicle sector. Where REE-powered motors once reigned uncontested, their dominance eroded as some manufacturers adopted or pivoted to alternatives.

From a negligible share of less than 1% in 2010, EVs powered by REE-free motors surged to over 12% of global sales by late 2017.

Adamas Intelligence points to this as a textbook case of engineered demand destruction – a deliberate shift to alternatives born of caution, catalyzed by the trauma of the 2010/11 price surge.

Companies, burned by volatility and unwilling to remain at the mercy of China’s whims, sought refuge in innovation, re-engineering their futures to sidestep the rare earth chokehold.

By 2018, however, with prices low and volatility tempered, REE-powered motors quickly recaptured market share, with 97% of all EVs sold each year since 2017 using them.

In 2017, when REE-free motor adoption peaked, the EV industry was still a relatively small end-use category and thus the impact on overall demand was less substantial than it would be today.

Undoubtedly, China recognizes this and will play its hand carefully this time around.

April 2025: China announces new export controls

Fast forward to this month and China is at it again, unveiling export controls on select rare earth products. But this time, the playbook feels different – less blunt force, more scalpel.

Adamas sees a calculated precision in Beijing’s approach, an intent to wield its resource dominance with surgical intent.

The likely targets? Initially, industries like defense contractors and drone makers, sectors where REE scarcity could deliver maximum disruption to rivals, particularly in the West.

Meanwhile, China appears poised to spare others, like the EV industry, from the worst of the fallout – perhaps a nod to its own stake in the green revolution or a bid to keep global markets from spiraling into further chaos.

Unlike the reckless two-order-of-magnitude price surge of the early 2010s, this move suggests a China keen to inflict pain where it hurts most while dodging the collateral damage of a full-blown crisis.

The message is clear: China knows the power it holds and is learning to wield it with chilling finesse.

For the rest of the world, the echoes of 2010/11 still linger – a haunting reminder of vulnerability, a call to diversify, innovate, or risk being caught in the crosshairs of a prolonged resource war where the stakes only grow higher.

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.

India, the world’s second-largest producer of crude steel, meets 85% of its coking coal requirements through imports. Australia accounts for more than half of the country’s coking coal imports.

The company is looking at this as a business opportunity, Mukherjee said. “They (explorations) are in different stages of negotiations.” He did not disclose the details of these talks due to confidentiality.

State-owned NMDC is India’s largest iron ore miner with four operational mines across the country.

The country’s top steelmaker JSW Steel’s CEO Jayant Acharya had told Reuters earlier in the day that the company sources coking coal from Australia, the United States and Mozambique. State-owned SAIL also procures coking coal from countries such as Mongolia.

Coking coal has traditionally been a volatile commodity because of its dominance in exports and the variability of weather, according to commodity consultancy firm BigMint.

In 2023, erratic weather conditions hit coking coal supplies from Australia.

(By Neha Arora and Manvi Pant; Editing by Mrigank Dhaniwala and Shilpi Majumdar)

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, holding a slender lead in polls ahead of a national election nine days away, said the reserve would make use of the country’s mineral deposits and boost its economic resilience.

“We need to do more with the natural resources the world needs, and that Australia can provide,” Albanese said in a statement.

The push comes after China placed export restrictions on several minerals, vital to make everything from smartphones and EV batteries to infrared missiles, squeezing supply to the West, after President Donald Trump imposed tariffs on Chinese goods.

China is a top global producer of 30 of the 50 minerals considered critical by the US Geological Survey, while Australia has some of the largest critical minerals deposits.

Albanese said the government would buy critical minerals from commercial projects or set up an option to buy at a given price, holding security over the assets. The government will also establish stockpiles of some minerals produced under offtake agreements.

“It will mean we can deal with trade and market disruptions from a position of strength, because Australia will be able to call on an internationally significant quantity of resources in global demand,” Albanese said.

Minerals held by the strategic reserve would be made available to domestic industries and key international partners.

A task force will be created to consult and finalize the scope and design of the strategic reserve, which is expected to be operational in the second half of 2026, Albanese said.

($1 = 1.5721 Australian dollars)

(By Renju Jose; Editing by Sonali Paul)

The partnership is looking for breakthrough technologies, and plans to invest in 12 startups annually from around the world. The amount of the investments was not disclosed.

The six companies, which span from Silicon Valley to MIT to Western Australia, break new ground in the industry’s journey into a provider of materials for a net zero world, the companies said.

This year’s six investments are: Rock Zero—zero-waste, cost-efficient process to extract lithium from hard rock deposits in Cambridge, US; Terra AI—for mineral exploration to reduce drilling costs and improve accuracy in Palo Alto, US; Ekion—electrokinetic in-situ recovery (EK-ISR) technology to extract metals from stranded deposits with minimal waste and emissions in Perth, Australia; Rainstick—agriculture and nature restoration using electrical fields to mimic the natural effects of lightning, boosting seed yields faster and more sustainably from Cairns, Australia; Thunderstone—reduced-impact mining using underground electric stimulation to extract critical metals with minimal waste and cost based in the US, and Durin—automated drilling rigs to accelerate mineral discovery and reduce exploration costs in Los Angeles.

“Working with Rio Tinto has given us tremendous insight into key opportunities for innovation across the mining value chain, represented by these six promising investments,” Founders Factory president George Northcott said in a statement.

“Reduced-impact mining sits front and centre for the business, as they look for more efficient, less environmentally-impacting methods for the discovery and extraction of critical metals. It’s clear this represents a transformational change for the industry, paving the way for industrial transformation and decarbonization.”

As well as receiving seed capital, the startups will enter a four-month accelerator program, operated by Founders Factory, aiming to help founders identify clear use cases for their technology and pathways to commercialization with Rio Tinto.

This includes operational support, direct access to Rio Tinto’s executives, and opportunities to pitch pilots and POCs to their team, including a residential program in Perth.

“Collaborating with startups gives us access to innovative ideas, diverse skill sets, and rapid solutions. Through our Mining Tech Accelerator, Founders Factory and Rio Tinto are partnering with startups to develop breakthrough technologies that tackle key challenges in mining and sustainability,” Rio Tinto’s chief innovation officer Dan Walker said. 

“Meeting the growing global energy demand is deeply complex, and collaboration is essential to delivering the materials the world needs—faster, more sustainably, and more cost-effectively.”

The previous cohort, which kicked off in September 2024, included investments in US-based Endolith, developing next-gen copper extraction and Cambridge University spinout Prospectral, which makes ultra compact imaging sensors for material detection.

The company said it produced 745,484 pounds of uranium oxide from its Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia, the highest since the mine resumed operations in March 2024.

The company also reported uranium sales of 872,435 pounds, compared to 500,143 pounds in the previous quarter.

Its shares were last up 26.5% at A$5.035, set for their highest one-day gain since February 2021.

The stock was also the top percentage gainer on the S&P/ASX 200 index, which was up 1.5%.

The average realized price of which uranium sales was about $69.9/pound, beating Citi’s expectation of about $60/pound.

The surge in Paladin drove a wider boost in uranium miners in Australia.

Shares of Boss Energy and Deep Yellow rose 10% and 11.4%, respectively, rebounding from sharp declines on Tuesday.

(By Adwitiya Srivastava; Editing by Varun H K)

Read More: Paladin faces irate investors in class action

The proposed funding — structured as debt over a 15-year indicative term — comes through EXIM’s China and Transformational Exports Program (CTEP), a strategic initiative aimed at strengthening US supply chain security by supporting critical mineral projects that reduce dependency on China.

Though non-binding, the offer could pave the way for Victory Metals to access additional US government financing under CTEP.

“This is a major milestone for Victory and a clear signal of the strategic importance of our project not only to Australia but to our allies abroad,” Victory Metals chief executive Brendan Clark said. 

The US move follows Japan’s Sumitomo taking interest in the North Stanmore deposit, underscoring growing international attention on the project, which lies outside the gold mining hub of Cue in Western Australia.

Victory Metals expects the support will boost its leverage in talks with downstream partners, original equipment manufacturers, and defence-aligned industries pursuing alternative supply chains.

North Stanmore hosts valuable heavy rare earth elements, along with scandium and hafnium—materials increasingly essential to clean energy, aerospace and defence technologies.

The offer comes amid the ongoing trade war between Washington and Beijing. A recent executive order by US President Donald Trump called for an investigation into the country’s dependence on imported processed critical minerals — primarily from China. In parallel, Beijing has imposed export controls on several rare earth elements, including scandium, dysprosium and terbium, which are vital to defence, nuclear power, medicine, and electronics.

The understanding at BHP is that Henry is now heading toward the end of his tenure, according to company insiders. They emphasized that no decision has been made. But some people close to the company say a change could come as soon as early next year, and some top executives have begun increasing their interaction with investors and other stakeholders ahead of a likely succession process.

The internal frontrunners for the role are seen to be Geraldine Slattery, who heads the company’s Australian mines, chief financial officer Vandita Pant, and Ragnar Udd, who runs the commercial team. However, the CEO search is also likely to include external candidates, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified discussing private information.

A change of leadership would come at a pivotal time for both BHP and the wider mining sector. The company and its biggest rivals spent the past couple of years pursuing a series of failed mega deals, while President Donald Trump’s trade war has cast a new level of uncertainty over future demand for key commodities.

BHP itself is embarking on a slew of expensive growth projects and Henry’s successor is likely to face some tough questions about capital allocation, including whether the company can pursue its aggressive spending plans while sustaining its dividend and debt policies.

The miner is already tightening its belt and has significantly sharpened its focus on cost cutting across its business, some of the people said.

BHP declined to comment.

The process to find a replacement for Henry is likely to kick-start in earnest in the coming months, the people said, making it one of the first major tasks of new chairman Ross McEwan. Henry has led BHP since January 2020, which means that an early 2026 departure would mean he has completed a six-year tenure — roughly in line with his most recent predecessors.

During that time, the 59-year-old BHP veteran has reshaped the company. Within the first two years of his leadership, the miner announced plans to sell its oil and gas business and dismantle a dual listing structure, as well as approving a giant potash mine in Henry’s native Canada.

Henry also led BHP through a return to dealmaking after years on the sidelines, culminating in the company’s ambitious but ultimately unsuccessful bid for Anglo American Plc. The $49 billion takeover attempt sent shockwaves through the mining industry but was rebuffed by the smaller company as too complex and risky.

Slattery — previously operator of BHP’s offshore oil and gas assets, which it spun off to Woodside Energy Group Ltd. — was placed in the far more public role of president of the Australian unit in 2022.

Pant, a former banker, has been at BHP since 2016. She served as chief commercial officer before becoming CFO last year. Udd has a technical past but was put in more operational roles and has proven success across BHP’s important copper business in the Americas.

The appointment of either Pant or Slattery would mark the first time that the world’s biggest mining company is led by a woman, in an industry notorious for the lack of diversity in its top ranks. Of the three dozen miners in the ASX200 index, just one has female CEO.

And Henry’s successor will inherit some thorny challenges. Despite recent years of record profits, BHP is looking financially stretched — already trending toward the top of its self-imposed debt target before it starts to pay for the series of hugely expensive growth projects.

The company is planning to spend billions of dollars to halt a decline in copper production at its crucial Escondida copper mine, further expand the Canadian potash mine, as well as develop copper projects in Argentina and Australia.

BHP isn’t alone. Capital allocation is likely to be a focus across the largest miners this year, according to analysts from Citigroup Inc. and Jefferies Financial Group Inc.

In BHP’s case, the company has ramped up its focus on cost reduction. Wage inflation is just one contributing factor: In Australia’a iron-ore rich Pilbara region unions are organizing to navigate salaries, something not seen in over two decades, adding further pressure to other areas of the business.

The company has already lowered its dividend to the minimum payout under its current policy and insiders said they don’t expect the policy to change. Unless commodity prices rise significantly, the company may have to change its debt policy or move to stagger some of its growth plans as a result, they said.

(By Paul-Alain Hunt, Thomas Biesheuvel and Archie Hunter)

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.

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.

Australia has two major political parties, Labor and Liberal, though the Liberal Party and National Party have an alliance known as the Coalition.

Before the election was called in late March, the two main parties were neck and neck in the polls.

Peter Dutton, leader of the conservative Liberal Party, initially leaned into the early popularity of US President Donald Trump, a move that has led to him being nicknamed “Trump Lite” or “Temu Trump”.

That strategy seems to have backfired in recent weeks, with Dutton and the Liberals slipping in the polls.

While the Australian Labor Party, led by Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, is leading on a two-party preferred basis, if it can not win a majority, it will likely look to the Australian Greens for support to be able to form government.

Campaigns launched

Both Labor and the Coalition formally launched their campaigns on Sunday, April 13.

Albanese held his campaign launch in Perth in a nod to the importance of Western Australian resources sector.

He was introduced by popular WA Premier Roger Cook, who won re-election last month in a landslide.

Two days before the launch, Albanese and Resources Minister Madeleine King were hosted by Rio Tinto during a visit to the Pilbara town of Karratha.

Labor did not outline any new policies to support the resources sector but has pledged A$8 billion ($5.1 billion) of additional investment in renewable energy and low emissions technologies via an expansion of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. 

Dutton launched his campaign in Sydney and promised to be a “friend of the mining and resources sector”.

He has warned Labor would shut down mining, particularly if it needs the support of the Greens.

Dutton and Shadow Resources Minister Susan McDonald unveiled the Coalition’s “Plan for a Strong Resources Industry”, which promises to cut red and green tape, expand the critical minerals list to include uranium, zinc, bauxite, alumina, aluminium, potash, phosphate and tin, and refocus the critical minerals strategy to better align with the defence and strategic needs of Australia and its allies.  

The plan also included a A$3.4 billion investment in Geoscience Australia over 35 years to map all of Australia, an announcement slammed by Albanese.

“That was in last year’s budget, last year’s budget that the Coalition, now, more than a year later, they’ve decided to pretend that it’s a new policy announcement at this election,” he told reporters. 

Three years of Albanese

The current government has a mixed record when it comes to mining.

One of the initiatives popular with the mining sector was the establishment of the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive (CMPTI), a 10% tax credit for processing and refining costs of Australia’s 31 critical minerals from July 1, 2027.

The bill was passed by the Senate in February.

“This is the first time any Australian government has put their money where their mouth is for the critical minerals industry,” the Association of Mining and Exploration Companies (AMEC) CEO Warren Pearce said.

“This will stimulate billions in new investment in critical minerals processing, which will be far more valuable than the incentives on offer.”

One of the low points of the government’s relationship with miners was the rejection of Regis Resources’ (ASX: RRL) McPhillamys gold mine last year.

After a lengthy approvals process, the proposed mine was approved by New South Wales and federal regulators but was overturned by federal Environment Minister Tania Plibersek on Aboriginal heritage grounds.

“That is a really bad message for Australia and the rest of the world,” Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) chair Andrew Michelmore told the Melbourne Mining Club in March.

Last year, the government introduced the ‘Same Job, Same Pay’ industrial relations legislation, which was slammed by BHP (ASX: BHP) as requiring it to pay inexperienced labor hire workers the same as a worker with decades of experience, impacting costs and productivity.

Dutton said he would not repeal the law.

“I understand the difficulty for some of the companies who are facing already a fairly militant union sector and want reforms but that’s our position,” he said on April 3.

Coalition all-in on nuclear

One of the Coalition’s key election policies is a plan to introduce nuclear energy into Australia’s power mix, which has been estimated to cost A$331 billion.

The policy has won the support of the MCA, while BHP is open to nuclear being considered.

“For Australia to be able to compete globally – and let’s face it, there’s economic headwinds that we’re leaning into in the coming years and decades in Australia – we have to be able to keep existing businesses competitive and to be able to grow new industries to overcome some of those headwinds,” BHP CEO Mike Henry told reporters in February.

“That requires affordable, reliable supply of electricity, whilst meeting this long-term ambition of being net zero. In order to achieve that, we have been strong proponents of a technology neutral strategy, and so, are we supportive of nuclear being part of the mix for consideration? Yes.”

Fortescue (ASX: FMG) founder and executive chairman Andrew Forrest has a different view, telling a Perth event on April 10 that he was close to the nuclear industry and knew it well after weighing up its potential for the past two decades.

He questioned why the taxpayer should have to pay for technology he described as “high cost and high risk” when compared to renewables.

“I know young males think nuclear is pretty cool but all I can say is, that’s until they’re educated. That’s until they’re told it’s not cool, it’s highly expensive to build, it’s almost impossible to take down and its power costs are nothing fancy at all,” Forrest said.

Permitting in focus

Lengthy approvals processes are a sticking point for the mining sector, something the Coalition has promised to address.

In a speech to the WA Mining Club in March, MCA chief executive Tania Constable accused the Albanese government of taking “a particular bent against our industry”.

“There is no reason in 2025 that environmental assessments and approvals could not move from years to hours, with the use of AI and enhanced environmental data,” she said.

Miners have been particularly vocal in its opposition against the government’s now-defunct Nature Positive legislation, which proposed the establishment of a national environmental protection agency, in addition to existing state agencies.

The bill never passed the Senate after protests from the resources sector and WA Premier Roger Cook, with even the Greens opposing it.

Plibersek says Labor is still keen to establish a federal environmental protection agency, but rather than duplicating approvals processes, she maintains it would speed up permitting.

“Our laws are 25 years old. They’re not fit for purpose, they don’t protect the environment, they’re not good for business,” she told the ABC on April 12.

“We want better environmental protections and faster, clearer decision making. We can do both, but it’s going to take common sense and compromise.”

The same day, WA Liberal Senator Michaelia Cash told reporters the policy would have a “devastating” impact on mining projects.

Incentive schemes under threat

The Coalition has committed to repeal the CMPTI, with Dutton long maintaining that projects needed to be economically viable on their own.

Former WA Nationals leader turned federal Nationals candidate Mia Davies criticised the stance.

“Good policy deserves support,” she told the ABC on April 15. 

Her comments were welcomed by AMEC CEO Warren Pearce, which described the CMPTI as a policy that focused on realising more value from Australia’s minerals.

“Right now, it is the only policy that does so – that’s the truth of it,” he said.

In March’s federal budget, it was revealed that it would not extend the Junior Minerals Exploration Incentive (JMEI).

Earlier this year, modelling by BDO, commissioned by AMEC, found the JMEI had stimulated A$404 million in greenfield exploration activity since 2017, at a cost to taxpayers of A$182.2 million in credits.

The Coalition has vowed to reintroduce the JMEI, pledging A$100 million for the scheme.

“The reinstatement of the incentive is necessary to decrease the risk for junior explorers,” MCA’s Constable said.

“Australia’s vibrant junior exploration sector plays a crucial role in the mining ecosystem by driving innovation, discovering new mineral deposits, and providing the foundation for future large-scale mining operations.”

Strategic minerals reserve

In a statement responding to US tariffs on April 3, Albanese announced that if re-elected, his government would establish a Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve.

Albanese and King have each said more details of the policy would be provided before the election.

King’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

Cook confirmed he was working “closely” with Albanese on the details of the policy.

AMEC’s Pearce suggested a Critical Minerals Strategic Reserve could further incentivize critical minerals exploration and production and create a strategic stockpile that provided greater resilience against global trade measures, and greater influence over critical mineral supply chains.

“Make no mistake. Australia is a critical minerals powerhouse. We can be the reliable supplier of critical minerals to the world, including the United States,” he said.

“Given the ground is moving so quickly, the onus is now on our political parties, to figure out how best to take advantage of this opportunity.”

BHP, the world’s biggest mining company, projects copper demand to explode and rise by 70% in 2050, reaching 50 million tonnes per year.

To meet this staggering demand, the mining industry would need hundreds of billions in investment to keep pace and grow enough supply. BloombergNEF estimates that as much as $2.1 trillion could be required by 2050 to meet the raw materials demand of a net-zero world.

This places tremendous pressure on mining companies to not just discover new sources of supply, but also expand on their existing operations to achieve supply growth.

Over the next few years and decades, the biggest copper mines would play a pivotal role in the energy transition.

Below is a list of the world’s 10 biggest by 2024 production:

# 1: Escondida

The vast Escondida mine in Chile retains its top spot, churning out 1.28 million tonnes of metal for an increase of 16% from 2023. Escondida is majority owned and managed by BHP (57.5%), with Rio Tinto holding 30% and Japan’s Mitsubishi and JX Advanced Metals the remaining 12.5%.

In February, BHP said it would move forward with a $2 billion plan to optimize its concentrator at Escondida, the first initiative of its decade-long $10.8 billion investment plan announced last year.

BHP’s copper production in 2025’s first three months climbed 10%, boosted by the ramp-up of Escondida operations.

#2: Grasberg

Jointly owned by Freeport McMoRan and PT Mineral Industri Indonesia, the Grasberg mine produced 816,466 tonnes of copper in 2024, up 8.4% from 2023. Work at Grasberg was halted temporarily in 2023 after flooding and debris flow from heavy rains and landslides damaged its milling complex, but the skies were fairer in 2024.

#3: Collahuasi

The Collahuasi mine in Chile, jointly owned by Glencore, Anglo American and Mitsui, saw its production fall 2.5% to 558,636 tonnes in 2024, compared to 573,200 tonnes from the prior year. Watch a compilation of 21 years of mining at Collahuasi in 21 seconds here.

#4: Kamoa- Kakula

The Kamoa-Kakula mine complex, jointly owned by Ivanhoe Mines, Zining Mining, the DRC government and Crystal River Global, increased its production to 437,061 tonnes in 2024, up 11% from 2023. Kamoa-Kakula in 2023 was named the world’s lowest carbon-emitting major copper mine.

#5: Buenavista

The Buenavista mine in Mexico came in fifth place with 433,000 tonnes of metal produced in 2024, up nearly 4% from the 416,600 tonnes in 2023. Wholly owned by Grupo Mexico subsidiary Southern Copper, Buenavista has been producing since 1899, making it the oldest operating copper mine in North America.

#6: Cerro Verde

In sixth place is Cerro Verde in Peru, an open-pit copper and molybdenum mining complex that is a joint venture between Freeport McMoRan, Buenaventura and Sumitomo. In 2024, Cerro Verde produced 430,459 tonnes, down 3.71% from 447,034 tonnes in 2023.

#7: Antamina

Also in Peru, Antamina is jointly owned by Glencore, BHP, Teck Resources and Mitsubishi. The mine produced 413,000 tonnes in 2024, a 2.13% decline from 422,000 tonnes in 2023.

Production figures for the mines below are based on FY2024 estimates:

#8: Tenke Fungurume

The second Congolese mine on the list, Tenke Fungurume produced an estimated 400,000 tonnes in 2024, which would represent a 42.7% yearly jump. In 2021, China’s CMOC, which jointly owns the mine with Congo state-controlled Gécamines, invested $2.51 billion to double its production. The project was completed and came online in 2023.

#9: KGHM Polska Miedz

The only mine in Europe to make the list is KGHM Polska’s Miedz in Poland, churning out an estimated 395,160 tonnes in 2024, approximately in line with the 395,400 tonnes from 2023.

#10: Polar Division

The Polar Division copper mine in Russia, owned by Norilsk Nickel, rounds out the list with an estimated 345,000 tonnes in 2024, an approximate increase 6.3% from the 324,600 tonnes in 2023.

*Cobre Panama, Central America’s largest open-pit copper mine, produced 330,863 tonnes of copper in 2023 before the government ordered it to shut down. If it was still operating, it would have become a 100-million-tonne-a-year operation in 2024, placing it near the top of the world’s copper throughput ranking.

The IPO is fully underwritten by joint lead managers Euroz Hartleys and Canaccord Genuity, Quebec City-based Robex said Thursday in a statement. Robex is planning to issue about 38.6 million Clearing House Electronic Subregister System depositary interests, or CDIs, at A$3.11 each under the IPO. Each CDI will represent one underlying common share of the company.

“While we are already listed on the TSX-V, we hope our listing on the ASX will increase our trading activity and volume, thereby allowing all our shareholders to benefit,” Robex CEO Matthew Wilcox said. He called the listing “an important and long-awaited milestone” for the company.

Moves towards ASX

Robex, the operator of Mali’s Nampala mine since 2017, joins a group of Canadian-listed resource companies that have pursued a secondary Australian Stock Exchange listing in recent months amid weak domestic liquidity. Toronto Stock Exchange-listed miner Marimaca Copper (TSX: MARI) now trades on the ASX, while Orezone Gold (TSX: ORE) and Canadian Securities Exchange-listed Pampa Metals (CSE: PM) are in the process of following suit.

Robex rose 2.6% to C$3.18 Thursday in late morning trading in Toronto. That gave the company a market capitalization of C$536 million.

The IPO’s completion will allow Robex to develop and build the Kiniero gold project. Kiniero is now fully funded through to first production, which is expected in late 2025, Robex said.

Construction at Kiniero “continues to progress on schedule and budget, overseen by a team that has decades of experience of building and operating projects in West Africa,” Wilcox said. “We are confident of achieving first gold at Kiniero in December.”

The offer is expected to run from April 30 to May 2. It represents a 14.8% discount to the April 14 TSX-V closing price of C$3.20 and a 10.3% discount to the five-day volume weighted average price on the TSX-V of C$3.04, Robex said.

Robex’s CDIs are expected to start trading on the ASX on or about June 3.

“With the gold price currently at record highs, it is an exciting time to be taking Kiniero into production and delivering on its potential,” Wilcox said.

MINING.COM and The Northern Miner mapped global copper production through a geopolitical lens, dividing the world into five “spheres of control”: American, Chinese, Russian, Coalition of the Willing, and Undrafted.

These groupings reflect geographic, social, cultural, and economic ties—as well as potential alignments in an increasingly polarized world.

In this interview, Anthony Vaccaro, the author of the graphic and president of The Northern Miner Group, explains how the five blocs compare in terms of copper extraction.

Explore the full infographic:

This week, BHP Group Ltd., Rio Tinto Group, and Vale SA all reported drops in quarterly shipments from the year before, the result of disruptions from cyclones in Australia’s Pilbara and heavy rains in northern Brazil. Rio was worst affected, with exports slumping 9% to a six-year low.

That leaves the companies needing to play catch-up on their supply targets at a time when escalating tensions with the US could wreak havoc on the Chinese economy. The question now is whether Beijing will deliver enough stimulus to support demand for steel and its inputs, of which iron ore is key.

“We might see a recovery phase where these companies ramp up production to compensate for the lost output,” said David Cachot, an iron ore research director at Wood Mackenzie Ltd. “Market participants are waiting to see what Beijing will do to further stimulate its economy, an additional source of concern the country did not need.”

Market dives

Before the supply disruptions hit and trade tensions ratcheted higher, the iron ore market was contending with a surge in supply just as demand in China’s maturing economy was dwindling. Still, benchmark iron ore futures in Singapore were steady, averaging around $103 a ton over the first three months, about the same as the previous quarter.

But the market dived earlier this month, to below $95 a ton at one point, after the Trump administration announced punitive tariffs on China, and Beijing responded with its own eye-watering levies on the US.

Now, China’s economic targets are in doubt, and officials have set a clear goal of expanding domestic consumption to counter the hit to exports. That could lift demand for the steel used in vehicles, household durable goods and machinery. Iron ore traders are also probably hoping that Beijing doesn’t ignore the playbook it has used during previous downturns, which involves splurging on more steel-intensive infrastructure to generate growth.

BHP chief executive officer Mike Henry warned on Thursday that slower global growth and a fragmented trading environment could have a significant impact on the company.

“China’s ability to shift toward a consumption-led economy and for trade flows to adapt to the new environment will be key to sustaining the global outlook,” he said.

(By Katharine Gemmell)

“Despite the limited direct impact of tariffs on BHP, the implication of slower economic growth and a fragmented trading environment could be more significant,” chief executive officer Mike Henry said in a statement Thursday. “China’s ability to shift toward a consumption-led economy and for trade flows to adapt to the new environment will be key to sustaining the global outlook.”

The global commodities market has been one of the sectors most exposed to the fallout from Trump’s burgeoning trade war. That could complicate Henry’s agenda to grow BHP’s holdings of what he calls “future facing commodities” — copper and potash. The drive has been backed by revenue derived from the miner’s long-standing iron ore business, which still accounts for more than half of its earnings.

BHP’s production of copper in 2025’s first three months climbed 10%, boosted by a ramp up of its Escondida operations in Chile, it said. Meanwhile, output from its Australian iron ore projects was steady at 68.1 million tons, and it kept its full-year guidance for the steel-making material unchanged.

Prices of copper — seen as a global economic bellwether — tumbled from late March as Trump launched his tariff spree, before recovering some losses. Iron ore has been comparatively stable, despite dropping below $100 a ton during April on concerns of oversupply as Beijing battles with a property crisis and slowing economy.

Henry backed his company to benefit from the turmoil, saying investors will be attracted to its large-scale, low-cost projects. BHP is one of the lowest cost iron ore miners in the world at around $18 a ton, while selling at an average of about $83 to the market during the quarter, according to the filings.

“In the face of global volatility and policy uncertainty, BHP is poised to benefit from a flight to quality with Tier-one assets, industry-leading margins and high-return organic growth opportunities that will underpin value and returns through the cycle,” Henry said.

That doesn’t mean BHP is immune to the challenges facing the mining sector. In February, it slashed its dividend by 31%.

BHP was also impacted by seasonal weather interruptions across its iron ore and coal operations during the period, which is its third quarter. Like peer Rio Tinto Group, it posted lower production quarter-on-quarter in the iron-rich Pilbara region due to severe cyclone events.

Rio reported on Wednesday that iron ore shipments had fallen 9% due to cyclones. The impact on BHP’s iron ore operations was comparatively smaller, but it said its coal fields in Queensland were hit by heavy rainfall, with production of the steelmaking fuel down 12% on the previous three months.

Copper and potash

The company has sold off many of its coal assets and exited oil and gas under Henry’s management, turning to copper — used in electrification and key to the energy transition — for its next leg of growth. BHP made a $49 billion bid for Anglo American Plc last year, which ultimately failed.

BHP has a controlling 57.5% interest in the massive Escondida project, which was hit by power outages over the reporting period. Still, it delivered better yields over the three months, driven by higher-quality ore.

While its Nickel West business remains in care and maintenance, due to a crash in prices driven by oversupply from Indonesia, it is developing a major potash mine — Jansen —- in Canada, which is set to become a big supplier to the fertilizer market. The project’s first stage is 66% complete, with initial production is scheduled for next year, BHP said.

(By Paul-Alain Hunt)

The company’s South Africa manganese operations produced 476,000 wet metric tons of manganese ore, down from 530,000 wmt a year before.

Its Australia manganese division reported no production in the third quarter as the primary concentrator at the operation was paused having established stockpiles ahead of the wet season.

The world’s biggest producer of manganese ore produced 476,000 wet metric tons (wmt) of the steel-making ingredient for the three months ended March 31, down from 1.2 million wmt a year earlier.

That compared with a Visible Alpha consensus estimate of about 678,900 wmt.

(By Sherin Sunny and Aaditya Govind Rao; Editing by Devika Syamnath)

Epiroc AB has won its largest order in company history with a A$350 million ($222m) contract to deliver a major fleet of fully autonomous and electric surface mining equipment to Australia’s Fortescue over five years.

Included in the order is a fleet of Epiroc blasthole drill rigs: the cable-electric Pit Viper 271 E and the battery-electric SmartROC D65 BE.

The equipment will be used across Fortescue’s iron ore mines in the Pilbara region in Western Australia. The driver-less machines will eventually be operated fully autonomously, overseen from Fortescue’s Integrated Operations Centre in Perth more than 1,500 km away.

According to Fortescue, these machines are expected to eliminate around 35 million litres of diesel consumption annually. The group is focused on accelerating the commercial decarbonization of its commercial operations, with plans to achieve “real zero” emissions by 2030.

“Fortescue is on the forefront of the mining industry in reducing emissions from operations, and in using automation to strengthen safety and productivity, and we are proud to support them on this important effort,” Epiroc CEO Helena Hedblom said in a press release.

“Not only is this the largest contract we have ever received, but it is also a major step forward for our electric-powered surface equipment. We look forward to contributing to Fortescue’s continued success now and in the future.”

“We’re thrilled to be joining forces with Epiroc to bring cutting-edge electric mining equipment into our operations,” Fortescue Metals’ CEO Dino Otranto said. “The deployment of this new fleet of electric drills will immediately start reducing our carbon footprint, cutting over 90,000 tonnes of CO₂ emissions annually once the fleet is operational.”

“To decarbonize, we’re aiming to swap out around 800 pieces of heavy mining equipment with zero emissions alternatives by the end of the decade, as well as deploy 2-3GW of renewable energy and battery storage across the Pilbara,” Otranto added.

This production target, Greatland says, is based on inventory from the currently active West Dome open pit and Main Dome underground as well as run-of-mine and low-grade stockpiles.

The company says it bridges the previously perceived ‘gap’ before the Havieron mine, which it consolidated from Newmont in the same transaction, when it enters production in fiscal 2028.

According to Greatland, the two-year plan for Telfer is expected to be further refined as it continues to progress and evaluate Telfer opportunities, with drilling ongoing to upgrade resources into higher-confidence categories.

The company estimates that about 20% of the inventory are inferred resources and unclassified mineralization from exploration targets.

Greatland says it is confident of making the conversion to measured and indicated categories, highlighting Telfer mine’s long operating history (40+ years) and the amount of drilling completed, and anticipates further growth beyond FY2027 by extending the open pit and underground deposits.

“When we acquired Telfer, we set out an initial mine plan of 15 months together with a number of opportunities we had identified during acquisition due diligence to extend that plan,” Greatland’s managing director Shaun Day said in a press release.

“After only five months since the acquisition, this initial updated Telfer outlook already provides for a substantial 18-month extension of dual train processing at Telfer through FY27,” he added.

In the March 2025 quarter, the Telfer mine produced 90,000 oz. of gold.

Haverion integration

Beginning in FY28, the Havieron project is expected to begin production and be integrated with Telfer, which Greatland management believes will result in a step change cost reduction and sustained higher volume production.

The Havieron deposit currently has estimated reserves of 25 million at 3 grams per tonne gold to support 221,000 oz. of annual production over its first 15 years. This is based on a steady state mining throughput rate of 2.8 million tonnes per annum, which the company is looking to expand to 4-4.5 million tonnes.

A feasibility study is underway to assess the Havieron expansion, anticipated to be completed in the second half of 2025.

The case filed with the Supreme Court of Victoria in Melbourne contends that Paladin made misleading representations and contravened its ASX continuous disclosure obligations between June 27 and Nov. 11, according to Paladin and Melbourne-based law firm Slater and Gordon.

“Paladin intends to strongly defend this claim,” the miner said in a statement.

The Perth, Australia-based company restarted its main producer, the Langer Heinrich mine in Namibia, in late 2023 after being on care and maintenance since 2018. The first official production guidance was announced on June 27 for the fiscal year 2025 (July 1, 2024, to June 30, 2025), projecting an output of 4 million to 4.5 million lb. of uranium oxide (U₃O₈). This guidance was later revised on Nov. 12 to 3 million to 3.6 million lb. due to operational challenges including variability in stockpiled ore and water supply disruptions.

Then last month Paladin withdrew its 2025 guidance entirely following unseasonal heavy rainfall that disrupted mining operations.

Shares in Paladin fell 2% to C$3.95 apiece in Toronto on Wednesday morning, giving it a market capitalization of about C$1.54 billion. They’ve traded in a range of C$3.34 to C$8.55 since they listed in Canada in December.

Ian Weatherlake

Paladin’s ASX share price dropped by 22% across two trading day after the Nov. 12 output downgrade, says Slater and Gordon. The firm is leading the class action seeking undisclosed damages on behalf of Ian Weatherlake, the trustee for the Ian Weatherlake Staff Superannuation Fund and the Ian Weatherlake Family Trust. Their assets aren’t publicly disclosed.

“This claim alleges that Paladin knew or ought to have known that its June guidance was unreasonably optimistic and there was a material risk it would not be met,” the law firm says. “We allege that the plaintiff and group members paid more for shares in Paladin than would have been the case had the company revealed the true situation and alternatively, that some group members would not have purchased shares at all.”

A timeline for the class action isn’t yet clear, Ian Hamilton, a Paladin spokesperson based in Toronto, said by email Wednesday. There’s nothing more to add to the company’s statement at this point, he said.

Investors who purchased Paladin shares between April 2, 2024, and Nov. 12, 2024, may be eligible to participate in the class action. Slater and Gordon has provided a registration form on its website for interested shareholders.

Fission takeover

In December, the Canadian government approved Paladin’s $1.1-billion all-share takeover of Fission Uranium after a three-month national security review since Chinese state-owned companies held stakes in both firms. The approval bars Paladin from selling uranium, sourced from the Patterson Lake South (PLS) project that Fission was developing, to end-users in China.

PLS is an advanced-stage project in Saskatchewan hosting the high-grade Triple R deposit. It is expected to produce about 9.1 million lb. of U₃O₈ annually over a 10-year mine life starting in 2029, according to a 2023 feasibility study.

The company also holds the Michelin project in Newfoundland and Labrador, an advanced exploration project with a resource of 127.7 million lb. at 860 parts per million (ppm) U₃O₈. It has the potential for both open-pit and underground mining operations.

The Mount Isa project in Queensland, Australia, has a resource of 148.4 million lb. at 680 ppm U₃O₈, with potential for a 5 million to 7 million lb. a year open-pit mine. In Western Australia, the Manyingee and Carley Bore projects have a combined resource of 41.5 million lb. at 510 ppm U₃O₈, with potential for in-situ recovery mining methods.

The iron ore and lithium miner said that Susie Corlett and Jacqueline McGill, were leaving the board, without given further details. They were two of the three-member ethics and governance committee formed after an internal probe found that outgoing managing director Chris Ellison had withheld details about personal transactions, causing what the company described as a “significant reputational impact.”

Independent director Denise McComish remains the sole member of the three-person committee.

Chairman James McClements, who is also set to depart in the coming months, thanked Corlett and McGill for their efforts. “Susie and Jacqui have dedicated substantial time and effort over recent months in our efforts to improve governance and procedures across the business, whilst navigating their significant other professional commitments,” he said in the statement. 

It is unclear whether Corlett and McGill, who were privately the most critical of Ellison’s conduct, will be replaced.

Mineral Resources’ stock closed at A$16.61 in Sydney on Wednesday. The company has lost more than 52% of its value since the start of the year and now holds a market cap of A$3.3 billion ($2.1 billion), well below its gross debt of A$5.8 billion.

Ellison, a self-made billionaire from New Zealand who left school at 15, has vowed to quit the company by next year. He admitted to participating in an offshore tax scheme that benefited him and others at the company’s expense.

MinRes has been struggling financially, particularly in its lithium division, where low prices led to the shutdown Bald Hill, near Kalgoorlie. The company has also scaled back iron ore production, suspended dividends and is facing a class action in the Supreme Court of Victoria. Additional pressure has come from unexpected costs related to repairs on its Onslow iron ore haul road.

The decision gives BHP, the world’s largest mining company, more time to extract between 13 and 15 million tonnes of thermal coal from what is currently NSW’s largest coal mine. The miner had announced in 2022 that it would wind down operations at Mount Arthur by 2030 — 15 years earlier than initially planned — after failing to find a buyer and as the mine approaches the end of its economic viability.

As part of its exit strategy, BHP has partnered with renewable energy and infrastructure firm ACCIONA Energía to explore converting the 7,000-hectare site into a pumped hydro energy storage facility. The proposal aligns with community calls to repurpose the site for long-term regional benefit.

“The community has told us they want to see Mt Arthur repurposed when mining ends,” BHP president Australia Geraldine Slattery said in a statement. “This study will examine the role pumped hydro at the Mt Arthur site could play in the region’s future.”

Preliminary studies suggest the project could support about 1,000 construction jobs in the Upper Hunter region, stimulate local economic activity in Muswellbrook, and provide enough power for up to 500,000 homes in New South Wales each day.

Life beyond coal

ACCIONA Energía, which operates more than 14 GW of generation capacity worldwide and is expanding rapidly in Australia, will lead a 12-month due diligence program to assess the project’s technical and commercial viability. The company already manages 600 MW of operating assets in Australia and has 1.3 GW under commissioning.

BHP also announced a A$30 million ($19m) community fund to support the Upper Hunter region’s transition beyond coal. The fund will be co-managed with local stakeholders and focus on job creation, economic empowerment, and industry diversification.

Pumped hydro systems provide dispatchable electricity by storing energy in the form of water at elevation. When demand spikes, the water is released downhill through turbines to generate power. 

BHP said that Mount Arthur’s topography and catchment potential make it well-suited for such a transformation.

De Grey agreed to a A$5 billion ($3.2 billion) scrip takeover by Northern Star in December. The main question mark that hung over the deal was the intention of De Grey’s 17.26% shareholder Gold Road Resources (ASX: GOR), which had not publicly committed to vote in favour of the transaction.

That changed on Monday when Gold Road confirmed it would vote in favour, following the absence of any superior proposal. Its stake in De Grey is valued at more than A$1 billion.

Analysts expect Gold Road to sell the shares it receives in Northern Star to pursue acquisitions. Gold Road, which jointly owns the Gruyere mine with Gold Fields (JSE: GFI), was previously the subject of an unsuccessful acquisition proposal by its partner but did not plan to rival Northern Star for De Grey.

Shareholders vote

At a shareholder meeting in Perth on Wednesday, more than 99% of De Grey shareholders approved the deal. De Grey chairman Simon Lill said the share exchange offered a 37.1% premium based on prices at the time of the deal’s announcement in December. 

De Grey shares closed at A$2.61 on Wednesday, while Northern Star closed at A$22.09, both record highs, taking the value of the deal to more than A$6 billion.

Northern Star managing director Stuart Tonkin welcomed the result, saying the acquisition fits squarely with the company’s strategy of generating strong returns.

“We believe De Grey’s Hemi project will deliver a low-cost, long-life and large-scale gold mine in a tier-one jurisdiction, further enhancing our portfolio and earnings potential,” Tonkin told MINING.COM.

The acquisition still requires final court approval, with a Federal Court hearing scheduled for next Tuesday. De Grey shares will be suspended from trading the following day, with formal completion set for May 5.

Hemi advancing

The 13.6 million ounce (Moz) Hemi project is shovel-ready and has capital costs of A$1.3 billion for a 10 million tonne per annum open pit operation. It is expected to produce 530,000 ounces of gold annually over its first decade, at all-in sustaining costs of A$1,200–A$1,300 an ounce.

A 2023 definitive feasibility study valued the project at A$2.9 billion post-tax, with a 36% internal rate of return based on a gold price of A$2,700/oz. The current gold price is near A$5,200/oz.

Further studies have indicated potential production could rise to at least 700,000 ounces annually, pending additional approvals. De Grey is targeting federal and state sign-offs in the September 2025 quarter.

With A$743 million in cash and up to A$1.13 billion in proposed debt facilities at the end of March, funding for Hemi is expected to be fully covered. Northern Star, which operates production hubs in Western Australia and Alaska, plans to review and refine the development plan before kicking off construction.

Northern Star is expecting to produce between 1.65 and 1.8 million ounces of gold in the year ending June 30, 2025, at all-in sustaining costs of A$1,850–A$2,100/oz. It aims to lift annual production to 2 million ounces by 2027, not including any future contribution from Hemi.

The company now expects Pilbara iron ore shipments for 2025 to hit the lower end of its forecast range of 323 million to 338 million metric tons.

A series of tropical cyclones in the first quarter snarled activities at the Dampier port in the Pilbara region, with the company previously warning of total losses of 13 million tons of iron ore due to bad weather.

Rio Tinto has implemented recovery plans to recoup about half the weather-related losses at a cost of about A$150 million ($95 million) for repairs and additional contract mining across its Pilbara operations.

“Pilbara iron ore guidance remains subject to the timing of approvals for planned mining areas and heritage clearances. The system has limited ability to mitigate further losses from weather if incurred,” the company said in a statement.

Shares of Rio Tinto fell 1.2% to A$110.14, in line with the 0.2% drop in the broader mining sector.

The miner has been struggling to consistently ramp up production while shipping more lower-grade ore as it prepares to bring its next generation of iron ore mines online.

It risks losing its position as the world’s top iron ore producer if Brazil’s Vale SA, which reported on Tuesday, achieves the upper end of its 325 million to 335 million tons guidance for 2025.

Rio Tinto’s 2025 outlook of 323 million to 338 million tons excludes an expected 9.7 million to 11.4 million tons from its Canadian operations.

Meanwhile, copper production on a consolidated basis rose 16% to 210 thousand tons compared with a year ago, but fell 8% quarter-on-quarter.

At its Kennecott operation in Utah, copper production plunged 32% from the previous quarter due to unplanned conveyor failures, though it increased 7% year-on-year. The affected conveyor has since been restored to full functionality, the company said.

The world’s largest iron ore producer shipped 70.7 million tons of the steel-making commodity from its Pilbara operations in the three-month period ended March 31, down from 78 million tons last year, and missed a Visible Alpha consensus estimate of 73.6 Mt.

($1 = 1.5785 Australian dollars)

(By Roushni Nair, Rajasik Mukherjee and Melanie Burton; Editing by Devika Syamnath and Sherry Jacob-Phillips)