In the latest thinkpiece from Hallgarten & Company, editor Christopher Ecclestone analyzes the issue of critical metal and mineral supply, drawing attention to the complexities faced by both China and the West. The report, titled “Criticality & China: A Matter of Perspective,” points out that China, commonly perceived as dominating the supply of various critical metals, faces significant challenges in maintaining this control. The document highlights how critical metals such as Antimony, Heavy Rare Earths, and Cesium, although seen as China-dominated, are also problematic for China to procure and maintain due to long supply lines and geopolitical instabilities.

Ecclestone argues that the West, particularly the U.S., has overlooked Chinese encroachments in the global metals market due to an inward-looking approach. “The US allowed its total dominance of Cesium to transfer to total China dominance at the stroke of a pen,” he states, underscoring the strategic missteps in managing critical metal supplies. Furthermore, he discusses the geopolitical risks associated with metal supply chains, noting that a change in government in supplier countries like the DRC, Zambia, and Burma can quickly turn supply certainty into doubt.

The report criticizes the current state of criticality rankings, which Ecclestone claims are corrupted by “carpetbagging promoters” who influence government listings to favor their interests, thereby devaluing the concept of criticality. He stresses the need for more rigorous methodologies in evaluating critical metal lists to prevent them from becoming as valueless as “Monopoly money.”

Ecclestone’s analysis also contemplates a hypothetical Chinese criticality list, considering the metals and minerals China truly needs, especially in potential conflict scenarios. He points out the strategic disadvantage China faces due to its dependence on foreign sources for essential metals required in wartime, drawing parallels with historical precedents where resource scarcity impacted military campaigns.

Overall, the thinkpiece serves as a wake-up call to the West to reevaluate its approach to critical metals and the broader implications of geopolitical dynamics on global supply chains. To read the full report, click here

In today’s monthly edition of Hallgarten & Co.‘s “Resources Monthly” for March 2024, titled “Debasing Criticality’s Currency,” the firm offers an intricate analysis of the evolving landscape in the critical metals and minerals sector. The publication navigates through the performance of various commodities, assessing geopolitical impacts and strategic movements by both governments and corporations within the space.

The issue begins with an overview of the metals market, noting, “Gold added massively to its price during the month as international tensions lit a fire under the price.” It goes on to describe the broader metals market, mentioning that “Inflation has stabilized and, in many places, has retreated,” and highlighting uranium’s unique position in the current market context. The analysis of tin and tungsten prices, alongside silver’s momentum, provides a comprehensive picture of the metals market dynamics.

The narrative shifts to critique the expansion of critical metals lists by governments, which the report suggests dilutes the actual concept of criticality. The publication humorously recounts instances where “Every man, and his dog, now thinks he has a critical metal,” pointing out the somewhat arbitrary expansion of these lists. It highlights a specific case where boron was lobbied to be recognized as a critical mineral due to its wide applications, despite there being “no shortage of Boron” and the US producing a significant portion of the global supply.

Further analysis is provided on regional strategies to promote local mining prospects through critical metals lists, with particular emphasis on the practices in Ontario, Quebec, and Australia. The report skeptically asks, “What are the criteria for inclusion beyond a desire to feather the nest of some projects?” pointing out the lack of genuine supply concerns for many of the metals being promoted.

On the corporate front, Hallgarten & Co. updates its Model Resources Portfolio, notably adding Applied Graphite Technologies Corporation (TSXV: AGT), citing the company’s promising position in the graphite market in Sri Lanka. The discussion extends to graphite mining’s prominence in Africa, with Tanzania and Mozambique mentioned as key players. Blencowe Resources PLC (LSE: BRES), with its significant graphite project in Uganda, is identified as a particularly promising investment.

Alphamin Resources Corp.‘s (TSXV: AFM) favorable position in the tin market is detailed, with the firm’s operational expansion poised to significantly increase its production capacity. Sheffield Resources Limited‘s (ASX: SFX) strategic investment in Capital Metals PLC (LSE: CMET) for the development of mineral sands in Sri Lanka is another highlight, demonstrating the firm’s focus on diversifying its investment portfolio. The issue concludes with a critique of the TSX 30, described as “nothing more than a ‘List of Successful Promotes’, not an index at all.” This critical view underscores the skepticism Hallgarten & Co. holds towards promotional tools that may not accurately reflect the genuine performance or potential of listed companies. To access this Hallgarten + Co. Report, click here

Atkins to Present Progressing from Resource to Production – The Rare Earth Conundrum at the CMI Summit II in Toronto on June 14-15, 2023

Toronto, June 1, 2023 – The Critical Minerals Institute (CMI), founded for education, collaboration, and to provide professional opportunities to meet the critical minerals supply chain challenges, is pleased to announce that Geoff Atkins, Vice President of Business Development of Ucore Rare Metals Inc. and Managing Partner of Strategic Minerals Group Pty Ltd., has joined the Board of Directors of the Critical Minerals Institute (CMI).

“Geoff Atkins is one of the giants of critical minerals,” said CMI Founder Tracy Weslosky, “long before people recognized the vital importance of critical minerals. Geoff is one of the few mining executives outside of China who has played a critical role in establishing two landmark rare earth operations – Mt. Weld with Lynas Rare Earths Limited and Nechalacho with Vital Metals Limited. He joins a growing team of distinguished experts and industry leaders as a Director of the Critical Minerals Institute and will participate in a number of panels at the upcoming Critical Minerals Summit being held on June 14-15, 2023, in Toronto.”

Mr. Atkins is a mining executive with over 30 years of experience, including over 15 years in the critical mineral sector, focusing on the development of rare earth projects. He was a key player in establishing Mt. Weld with Lynas Rare Earths Limited (ASX: LYC) and Nechalacho with Vital Metals Limited (ASX: VML l OTCQB: VTMXF). While at Lynas, he was responsible for a range of functions, including the construction of the Mt. Weld rare earth project, providing corporate construction oversight for the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant in Malaysia, and developing long-term strategic plans. Mr. Atkins founded Cheetah Resources, which was subsequently taken over by Vital Metals. Mr. Atkins finalized the acquisition of the Nechalacho rare earth project in Yellowknife, NWT, Canada, in 2019. Nechalacho was the first new rare earth project brought into production in nearly 10 years. In March of 2023, Mr. Atkins is the Managing Partner of Strategic Minerals Group Pty Ltd, where he is joined by his fellow Lynas and Vital Metals’ executives providing specialist advisory services to rare earths and other critical minerals development companies. He has also joined Ucore Rare Metals Inc. (TSXV: UCU | OTCQX: UURAF) to lead its feedstock acquisition efforts as part of its North American SMC strategy.

Presenting a keynote presentation at the upcoming Critical Minerals Summit II being held next month on June 14-15, 2023, in Toronto titled “Progressing From Resource to Production – The Rare Earth Conundrum”, Geoff is also hosting the panel on Day 01 titled: The Priority Critical Mineral Debate – From Selection Criteria to Ranking, Industry Experts Weigh In.

“Progressing rare earth projects from a defined resource, or feasibility, to an operational asset has proven extremely difficult for companies around the world over the past 15 years,” said Mr. Atkins. “This presentation will examine the unique challenges faced converting rare earth resources into operational assets and the traps that companies continue to fall into preventing success.”

The Critical Minerals Institute will be holding its second annual Critical Minerals Summit on June 14-15, 2023, in Toronto. This year’s Summit has the theme “Under Pressure: The Critical Minerals Industry Addresses EV 2030 Demands.” It will feature two days of panels and international speakers including keynote speakers Constantine Karayannopoulos, CEO & Director from Neo Performance Materials Inc. (TSX: NEO) on Wednesday, June 14, 2023, and Mark Chalmers, President, CEO & Director, Energy Fuels Inc. (NYSE American: UUUU | TSX: EFR) on Thursday, June 15, 2023. The full schedule of panels will include representatives of Canadian and American governments. Details and registration for the Summit is now open at CriticalMineralsSummit.com.

The Critical Minerals Institute was created to offer education, collaboration, and an online resource to learn about critical mineral projects, emerging technologies, legislative initiatives, government funding, human capital needs, and capital market investment opportunities. There is no charge or sign up required for access to the Critical Minerals Institute website: CriticalMineralsInstitute.com. A range of enhanced benefits are available to individual and corporate members of the CMI, including attendance at the CMI Summit, virtual events and additional resources. For details see: www.criticalmineralsinstitute.com/cmi-membership/.

For more information, please visit the Critical Minerals Institute website at CriticalMineralsInstitute.com or to secure a CMI Corporate Membership, please contact CMI Director Tracy Weslosky at [email protected].

About the Critical Minerals Institute: The Critical Mineral Institute (CMI) is an international organization for companies and professionals focused on battery materials, technology metals, defense metals, ESG technologies and practices, the general EV market, and the use of critical minerals for energy and alternative energy production. Offering an online site that features job opportunities that range from consulting roles to Advisory Board positions, the CMI offers a wide range of B2B service solutions. Also offering online and in-person events, the CMI is designed for education, collaboration, and to provide professional opportunities to meet the critical minerals supply chain challenges.

————————

Special Thanks to the Critical Minerals Institute Summit II Sponsors: Albany Graphite Corp., American Rare Earths Limited, Appia Rare Earths & Uranium Corp., Ara Partners, Auxico Resources Canada Inc., Avalon Advanced Materials Inc., Canadian Securities Exchange, Clean Air Metals Inc., Critical Metals PLC, Critical Minerals Americas Inc., Defense Metals Corp., dynaCERT Inc.,  Ebury, Elcora Advanced Materials Corp., Energy Fuels Inc., F3 Uranium Corp., First Phosphate Corp., Fjordland Exploration Inc., Geophysx Jamaica Ltd., Imperial Mining Group Ltd., Karbon-X Corp., Kraken Energy Corporation, Lithium Ionic Inc., Molten Metals Corp., Nano One Materials Corp., Neo Battery Materials Ltd., Neo Performance Materials Inc., Panther Metals PLC, Power Nickel Inc., Sage Potash Corp., Search Minerals Inc., Silver Bullet Mines Corp., Ucore Rare Metals Inc., VATIC Ventures Corp., WCPD Inc., and Westwin Elements Inc.

————————

For more information, contact:

Tracy Weslosky, Managing Director for the CMI

[email protected]   |   D. +1 416 792 8228  

CriticalMineralsInstitute.com   |   Twitter   |   LinkedIn

Do national security trump globalization and free trade? Apparently so. The CMI Table of Comparative Critical Minerals’ Lists below tells the story. But, first, some background.

The surface and near-surface distribution and accumulation of the minerals, from which modern mechanical and chemical engineering extract useful chemical elements, is a result of billions of years of the geological evolution of the earth’s crust. Most recently some mineral deposits (accessible and economically workable concentrations) have also been created by volcanic activity and “weathering,” the breakdown and sometimes dissolution of minerals by the periodic freezing and heating, we call the seasons and by thousands, perhaps millions, of centuries of rain.

The only effect that humans have had upon the distribution of the minerals containing the metallic chemical elements is to have removed them to places of human habitation as technologies became available to recover them, extract the desired chemical elements from them, and process the chemicals thus obtained into metals deemed necessary for survival.

Metals, the first known of which either copper or gold, which can both be found in “native” (metallic) forms, and then, after that, probably tin and iron were “discovered” some 6 to 8 thousand years ago. The ancient world knew less than 10 metals and just a very few alloys of them (bronze, brass, electrum, tin, iron, mercury). All of the rest of them were “discovered” only in the last 250 years.

The “Birth” of Technology Metals

In fact, it is only during and after World War II that a new class of metals, which I have called the “technology metals” were prepared in commercial quantities and have now enabled the age of miniaturized solid-state electronics, alternate energy storage, and nuclear generation of electricity to flourish and transform our society.

Those minerals, which were critical up to World War II were pretty much the same ones that the Romans and the British needed to establish and maintain their empires: iron and copper.

There is a disconnect between the identification of the metals they deem to require sourcing critical minerals by individual nations and national groupings, and why they are in particular, critical.

Comparative List of Countries’ “Critical Minerals”

There are different emphases and priorities used by different nations in choosing critical minerals. But, it seems that all such selection agendas have one overriding theme, national self-interest. Most of the world’s nations consider the most critical minerals to be those that support their domestic economy first and their export economy second. For the two current “great economic powers”, the USA and China, we have so far only the USGS list, which is contained in the CMI Table of Comparative Critical Minerals’ Lists below. I have not seen a comparable list for the PRC.

In any case, the American USGS list is an “official” compilation that includes the needs of the world’s largest military, that of the United States. And, quite frankly, although it is the US military’s needs that get the most media coverage, that usage is just a fraction of the critical minerals contained in products for the American consumer economy. For example, I estimate that although the military may use 20% of all of the rare earths consumed annually in the USA, by far the biggest user of them is the OEM transportation (cars, trucks, passenger planes, railroad rolling stock, and civilian ships and boats, etc.) industry followed by the manufacturers of industrial motors and civilian appliances and infotainment devices.

In the table below, the elements in the solid blue lines are those that all of the shown national or regional (EU) critical minerals list agree upon. Those in the lighter blue background are chosen by some but not all of the nations/groups, and those with no background represent the choice of individual nations alone.

The perspective of most of the lists is either (almost) all-encompassing or ridiculously narrow.

The key metal of our age of technology, copper, does not appear on anyone’s list!

The structural metals for both the peacetime and war economies, iron, aluminum, and copper do not appear at all!

China is Winning the “Critical Minerals” War

More than 50% of the production of end-user forms of all of these metals (copper, iron, and aluminum) are today produced in China, for which we have not yet found a critical minerals list, but I suggest that we simply look at the relative proportions of any metal today processed and produced in China to reason out the Chinese critical minerals’ list. In fact, China has a monopoly on all of the critical war minerals and metals processing.

This is the result of the first successful industrial policy in history.

Talking doesn’t produce structural or technology minerals and metals. Only action does.