Alaska Energy Metals Corporation (AEMC) continues to make significant progress at its flagship Nikolai Project in central Alaska. The company has announced exciting results from its 2024 drilling program, which extended the higher-grade core zone by 600 meters to the southeast and revealed coarse-grained magmatic sulfides—a new target for exploration.

These developments further strengthen AEMC Eureka Deposit’s position as a potential major source of critical minerals essential for clean energy and national security applications.

Its flagship Nikolai Project is a large-scale, polymetallic deposit with significant potential to support America’s clean energy transition. The nickel company also holds the Angliers-Belleterre project in Quebec, targeting high-grade nickel-copper sulfide deposits and potential white hydrogen production.

AEMC Nikolai Project – Property Location Map

Striking Gold—And Nickel: AEMC Expands Its High-Grade Core Zone

AEMC’s 2024 resource expansion drilling program consisted of four diamond drill holes, totaling 1,597.6 meters, per the company’s press release. Results from two of these holes—EZ-24-009 and EZ-24-010—were recently released, delivering highly encouraging outcomes.

Here are the summaries of the results for each drill:

Hole EZ-24-009

• Intersected 308.2 meters of polymetallic mineralization at 0.30% NiEq (nickel equivalent), including a 67.3-meter higher-grade core grading 0.39% NiEq.
• Discovered a 5.3-meter zone of coarse-grained magmatic sulfides grading 0.63% NiEq, with a peak interval of 0.9 meters at 0.95% NiEq.
• Extended the high-grade core zone by 600 meters to the southeast, increasing its total strike length to 2 kilometers.
• Provided a new exploration target with sulfide mineralization near a gabbroic dike.

Hole EZ-24-010

• Intersected 320.8 meters of polymetallic mineralization at 0.31% NiEq, including a 72.5-meter higher-grade core grading 0.39% NiEq.
• Confirmed mineralization extends further southeast, showing similar grades and thickness as EZ-24-009.
• Highlighted consistent mineralization, enhancing the deposit’s bulk-tonnage potential.
• Detected a downhole electromagnetic anomaly below the hole, warranting further investigation.

These results extended the strike length of the high-grade core zone to around 2 kilometers, significantly beyond the limits of the current Mineral Resource Estimate (MRE). This discovery is expected to drive a substantial increase in the AEMC’s indicated resource.

• READ MORE: Alaska Energy Metals Corporation Unlocks Vast Nickel and Critical Mineral Potential at Canwell Property, Nikolai Project, Alaska

A New Target Emerges: Coarse-Grained Sulfides

The most exciting discovery from this campaign is the identification of coarse-grained magmatic sulfides in EZ-24-009. Located near a gabbroic dike, these sulfides suggest a potential remobilized or coarser mineralization component within the Eureka Zone.

Alaska Energy Metals Chief Geologist Gabe Graf noted, 

“Drilling results continue to show the continuity and homogeneity of the Eureka Zone. With results from the remaining two drill holes anticipated soon, we can begin calculating an updated Mineral Resource Estimate. For the first time, coarse-grained magmatic sulfides were intersected and are being considered as an additional future exploration target.”

The sulfides could hold key insights into the geologic processes shaping the deposit, offering opportunities to uncover higher-grade zones and expand the resource base further.

The Expanding Promise of the Eureka Deposit

The results from EZ-24-009 and EZ-24-010 confirm the homogeneity of the Eureka Zone’s mineralization, highlighting its bulk-tonnage potential. The consistent grades and thick mineralized intersections reflect a robust system that is both predictable and scalable.

The remaining two drill holes (EZ-24-011 and EZ-24-012) are expected to provide additional data, potentially unlocking further extensions of the core zone. These findings will be incorporated into an updated MRE, which is already anticipated to reflect significant resource growth.

Strategic Importance of the Nikolai Project

The Nikolai Project is strategically located in Interior Alaska, benefiting from proximity to existing transportation and power infrastructure. This positions it as a highly accessible source of critical minerals, reducing logistical challenges often faced by remote projects.

The Eureka Deposit is particularly valuable due to its rich polymetallic profile, containing:

• Nickel, cobalt, chromium, platinum, and palladium: Designated critical minerals essential for clean energy technologies and electric vehicle batteries.
• Copper: A critical material for renewable energy systems and electrification.
• Iron and gold: Additional contributors to the deposit’s economic viability.

Remarkably, four of these materials are classified as Defense Production Act Title III materials, emphasizing their importance to U.S. national security.

• READ MORE: The Nickel Market is Changing Big Time: Is a Supply-Demand Shift Underway?

Sustainable Mining Meets Strategic Importance: AEMC’s Vision for North America

AEMC prioritizes sustainability and adheres to stringent environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices. This commitment is reflected in its exploration and resource development processes, which focus on minimizing environmental impact while delivering value to stakeholders.

The company’s quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols ensure the integrity of its data. Drill core samples are carefully processed and analyzed at SGS Laboratories, with rigorous oversight to prevent contamination and ensure accuracy.

For its next steps, AEMC’s immediate focus includes finalizing assays for the remaining drill holes and updating the MRE to reflect the expanded strike length and newly discovered sulfide mineralization. Additionally, the coarse-grained sulfides will undergo detailed evaluation as a priority exploration target.

These efforts align with AEMC’s strategy to advance the Nikolai Project as a major domestic source of strategic energy-related metals for North America.

All in all, Alaska Energy Metals Corporation is rapidly advancing its flagship project, demonstrating a combination of resource expansion, innovative discoveries, and sustainable practices. The extension of the higher-grade core zone and the identification of coarse-grained sulfides mark significant milestones for AEMC. It further strengthens the company’s position as a key player in the critical minerals space.

• MUST READ: Unlocking Alaska’s Nickel to Drive America’s Clean Energy Revolutio

 

---

Disclosure: Owners, members, directors, and employees of carboncredits.com have/may have stock or option positions in any of the companies mentioned: AEMC.

Carboncredits.com receives compensation for this publication and has a business relationship with any company whose stock(s) is/are mentioned in this article.

Additional disclosure: This communication serves the sole purpose of adding value to the research process and is for information only. Please do your own due diligence. Every investment in securities mentioned in publications of carboncredits.com involves risks that could lead to a total loss of the invested capital.

Please read our Full RISKS and DISCLOSURE here.

The post Alaska Energy Metals Expands Higher-Grade Mineralization and Unveils Promising Targets at Eureka Deposit appeared first on Carbon Credits.

Texas, alongside ten other Republican-led states, filed a high-profile lawsuit against BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street last week. The lawsuit, lodged in federal court in Tyler, Texas, accused the asset management giants of conspiring to restrict coal production and spike electricity prices, allegedly violating antitrust laws. This also marks the culmination of a years-long investigation focused on scrutinizing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) practices within financial markets.

The plaintiffs claim these firms, leveraging their collective influence in the coal industry pressurized them to curtail coal supply and cut carbon emissions by over 50% by 2030. This became the crux of the case, with states arguing that the actions led to inflated utility bills for consumers.

So, here’s the case at a glance

• Plaintiffs: Texas and ten Republican-led states
• Defendants: BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street
• Allegations: Antitrust violations, market manipulation to reduce coal production, and increased electricity prices
• Relief Sought: Civil penalties and restrictions on shareholder voting practices
• Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas

Texas Attorney General’s Stance

Media reports revealed that Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton taking charge of this case, labeled the defendants as an “investment cartel” that manipulated the coal market under the guise of advancing green energy objectives.

He accused the defendants of,

“ Promoting an illegal weaponization of the financial industry in service of a destructive, politicized ‘environmental’ agenda.”

The Battle Against ESG Policies Just Intensified…

This lawsuit represents the collective effort of Republican states to challenge the ESG initiatives, which they argue prioritize political agendas over economic value.

The coalition of states includes Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, West Virginia, and Wyoming. They are seeking billions in damages and a court order prohibiting the firms from using their investments to influence coal company policies.

Here are the allegations in detail.

States Slam $26 Trillion Influence in Coal Industry

The states came down heavily on BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street and further alleged the defendants exploiting their combined $26 trillion in managed assets to dominate the coal industry since 2021.

Reuters revealed that the complaint accused asset managers of holding significant stakes in nine coal companies. It includes combined respective stakes of 34.2% and 30.4% in Arch Resources and Peabody Energy which are the largest publicly traded U.S. coal producers.

The states said in the complaint.

“Let Markets Decide,” States Demand

The coalition criticized the asset managers’ influence, stating,

“Competitive markets — not the dictates of far-flung asset managers — should determine the price Americans pay for electricity.”

Additionally, they criticized the defendants for joining the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, which claims its members follow all antitrust laws. They also targeted BlackRock and State Street for participating in Climate Action 100+.

• MUST READ: Texas Withdraws $8.5 Billion from BlackRock Over ESG Investing

Vanguard’s Exit Doesn’t Erase Past Actions

Although Vanguard exited the Net Zero group in 2022 and BlackRock and State Street left Climate Action 100+ earlier this year, Paxton asserts their past actions continue to threaten the coal industry.

In addition, the lawsuit accuses BlackRock of misleading investors by using non-ESG funds to advance its climate agenda while claiming those investments were focused on shareholder returns.

BlackRock and State Street Dismiss Accusations

BlackRock dismissed the allegations, calling the lawsuit “baseless” and asserting that the claims contradict Texas’ pro-business ethos. It further added that this action discourages investment in companies critical to consumers’ energy needs.

State Street similarly denied the charges, emphasizing its commitment to enhancing shareholder value. Vanguard did not immediately respond to the lawsuit.

Who Wins, Who Loses?

The current lawsuit demands civil penalties for alleged violations of federal antitrust and Texas consumer protection laws. It also seeks to block the defendants from using their stakes in coal companies to vote on shareholder resolutions or take other actions that might constrain coal production. However, the case is still on and the verdict is awaiting.

Overall, this lawsuit highlights the growing backlash against ESG initiatives. Its impact could reshape corporate governance and environmental policies in the U.S. Energy markets.

From this report, we can strongly perceive the tense divide between climate advocates and critics of ESG policies. While Republicans argue that financial institutions undermine energy markets and consumer costs, climate proponents believe assessing environmental risks is vital for appropriate investment decisions.

Regardless of the outcome, the case could have significant consequences for the future of energy management and regulation. This applies even to the top asset managers, like BlackRock, whose role in shaping energy policies will be closely scrutinized.

Source: BlackRock, Vanguard, State Street sued by Republican states over climate push | Reuters

• FURTHER READING: ASIC’s Historic Court Win: Vanguard Found Guilty in Greenwashing Suit 

The post BlackRock, Vanguard, and State Street in Legal Soup: Texas Coalition Claims Coal Market Manipulation appeared first on Carbon Credits.

ArcelorMittal, the world’s second-largest steelmaker, announced a delay in its planned green steel investments in the European Union (EU), citing challenges posed by regulatory uncertainty. This decision underscores the tension between net zero commitments and economic pressures that ArcelorMittal and others face in the industry.

Major Decarbonization Plans in Limbo

The steelmaking industry is responsible for around 7% of global carbon emissions. This substantial carbon footprint prompts steelmakers to look for ways to cut their emissions.

In January, ArcelorMittal secured €850 million ($885 million) in subsidies from the French government to support its €1.7 billion decarbonization program at its Dunkirk and Fos-sur-Mer sites in France. A key component of this plan involves replacing 2 of 3 blast furnaces in Dunkirk with green hydrogen-powered facilities.

Despite the substantial funding, the company has yet to finalize these investments.  ArcelorMittal stated in an email:

“We are operating in a difficult market, and there are a number of policy uncertainties that are impacting the industry… We need an effective carbon border adjustment mechanism, as well as more robust trade defense measures, to strengthen the business case.”

The steelmaker emphasized the need for robust EU policies to support such initiatives.

• RELATED: ArcelorMittal and Microsoft Back MIT Green Steel Firm With $120M

EU Policy Uncertainty Hampers Progress

A significant factor in the delay is the lack of clarity regarding the European Commission’s Steel and Metals Action Plan. It is expected to address emissions reduction targets and competitive challenges. 

Industry analysts, like Philip Gibbs from KeyBanc, note that ArcelorMittal has been clear about its stance: it will not commit to substantial decarbonization investments unless supportive EU policies are in place.

Eurofer, the European Steel Association, echoed similar concerns. It highlighted that steelmakers face mounting pressure to cut emissions while maintaining profitability in a fiercely competitive global market. 

The production of green steel hinges on emerging technologies like green hydrogen, which is produced by splitting water into hydrogen and oxygen using renewable energy sources. It is considered a cleaner alternative with green electrical energy used to producing green steel as shown below. 

However, green hydrogen remains expensive and technologically nascent, adding to the challenges faced by steelmakers.

ArcelorMittal is not alone in grappling with these issues. German steel giant Thyssenkrupp announced in October that it is reviewing its €3 billion plan for green steel production, further highlighting the economic and policy hurdles in achieving emissions targets.

How the EU’s Green Deal and CBAM Impact the Steel Industry’s Transition

European steelmakers, among the largest global CO2 emitters, are under intense scrutiny to decarbonize. At the same time, they face fierce competition, particularly from China, where lower production costs allow for cheaper steel exports.

The European Commission’s Green New Deal, introduced in 2020, aimed to replace coal-fired blast furnaces with hydrogen-powered facilities. The initiative included a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), intended to level the playing field by imposing tariffs on imported goods with high carbon footprints.

However, delays in its implementation and uncertainty over its effectiveness have added to the hesitation among companies like ArcelorMittal. The company pointed out critical weaknesses in the CBAM. 

They have seen green steelmakers remain uncompetitive in the face of imports from coal-fired steelmakers in China. These flaws have allowed cheaper, high-emission imports to undercut European green steel producers, undermining efforts to make decarbonized steel cost-competitive.

ArcelorMittal’s Commitment to Net Zero: A Path Forward or a Stalled Dream?

Despite these challenges, ArcelorMittal reaffirmed its dedication to sustainability. The company had initially outlined plans to achieve net zero by 2050 through innovative technologies, including hydrogen-powered furnaces.

CEO Aditya Mittal remarked on the company’s commitment to reaching net zero emissions, saying that:

“ArcelorMittal remains absolutely committed to decarbonization. It is the right thing to do, both for the company and the planet. I remain confident that we can still achieve our net-zero by 2050 target, but the shape of how we will achieve this could differ from what was previously announced.”

ArcelorMittal Net Zero Roadmap

The world’s leading steel producer has outlined 5 key levers to achieve its net-zero emissions target by 2050, which include:

1. Steelmaking Transformation: Using innovative technologies such as Smart Carbon and direct reduced iron (DRI) processes to significantly reduce carbon emissions.
2. Energy Transformation: Shifting to clean energy like green hydrogen, Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), and circular carbon solutions from sustainable sources.
3. Increased Scrap Usage: Enhancing recycling methods to integrate more scrap metal into steel production.
4. Sourcing Clean Electricity: Transitioning to renewable energy sources to meet operational energy needs and partnering with clean energy providers to ensure sustainable electricity supply. 
5. Offsetting Residual Emissions: Purchasing high-quality carbon offsets or developing carbon credit projects that rely on its direct intervention.

The steel giant’s decarbonization strategy unveiled in 2020, relied on favorable policies, technological advancements, and supportive market conditions to offset the high capital and operating costs of transitioning from coal to green hydrogen-powered steel production. However, significant challenges put a break in its decarbonization efforts. 

The slow progress of green hydrogen adoption and inadequate policy support have made large-scale investments risky. This forced the company to reconsider its roadmap.

The Path Forward

While ArcelorMittal remains committed to decarbonization, its delays reflect a broader challenge for the steel industry: achieving ambitious climate goals without undermining competitiveness. Clearer EU policies will be critical to unlocking investments in green steel technologies.

For now, the industry’s ability to transition to greener operations hangs in the balance. Companies like ArcelorMittal are waiting for the right combination of market conditions and policy support to move forward toward their net zero goal.

The post ArcelorMittal Delays €1.7B Net Zero Plan: Is The EU Policy to Blame? appeared first on Carbon Credits.

According to industry experts, the cobalt market is currently under pressure due to an oversupply and slow demand. The heat is palpable more on cobalt sulfate prices, which are gradually declining, indicating weaker demand. One reason is China’s passenger electric vehicle (PEV) sector, which strongly prefers lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries that do not rely on cobalt.

However, as revealed by S&P Global Commodity Insights, the Platts-assessed European cobalt price has held steady at approximately $11.00/lb since October 11, but with suppressed trading activity.

Let’s see what the report reveals further about the current and future cobalt market.

China’s Move to LFP Batteries Weakens Cobalt Market

The report revolved around the cobalt market in China. It highlighted that China’s cobalt metal price stabilized after hitting a low in late September. From September 25 to November 21, the price rose by 5.6% and increased another 2.0% month to November 21, despite some fluctuations.

This recovery was driven by stronger feedstock costs, as cobalt hydroxide prices remained more stable compared to refined cobalt products.

However, according to Shanghai Metals Market, margins for cobalt sulfate production using imported cobalt hydroxide turned negative in Q3 2023. This strained margin significantly impacted China’s cobalt sulfate output.

• From January to October 2023, combined production dropped by 28.1% compared to the same period last year.

The reason for the decline remains the same- a slowdown in the PEV sector. The other significant reason is automakers shifting to lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries as they are cost-effective and avoid using critical minerals like cobalt and nickel. This transition has reduced the demand for cobalt-containing batteries in China.

Additionally, S&P Global noted, that in October 2024, cobalt-containing batteries accounted for only 20.6% of vehicle installations in China. This figure is a steep drop from nearly 50% in 2021.

• SEE MORE: Cobalt Crash: Why Prices Hit a 7-Year Low and What’s Next

Unlocking Cobalt’s Role in Battery Chemistry

Cobalt remains a vital component in many battery chemistries, offering stability and safety benefits. In 2023, demand for cobalt-containing chemistries grew by 15% year-over-year (y/y) to approximately 500 GWh, accounting for 55% of total battery demand.

While this represents a decline from 63% in 2022, cobalt chemistries are expected to maintain a significant market share in the medium to long term as demand continues to grow. Let’s study how experts explain this evolving landscape…

A Shifting Landscape

Cobalt Institute’s latest report revealed that demand for cobalt was mainly driven by high and mid-nickel chemistries driving this growth in 2023. High-nickel chemistries saw a 32% increase, while mid-nickel grew by 15%. Meanwhile, low-nickel and lithium cobalt oxide (LCO) chemistries experienced declines of 11% and 13% y/y, respectively.

It further highlighted,

• Demand for cobalt-containing chemistries rose 15% y/y in 2023, to ~ 500
  GWh. This equated to around 55% of battery demand in 2023, down from 63% in 2022.

High-nickel chemistries also increased their market share to 11%, while low-nickel chemistries fell behind nickel-cobalt aluminum oxide (NCA) chemistries for the first time.

These cobalt-free chemistries now make up 45% of global cathode demand, driven largely by lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries. For the first time, LFP overtook nickel cobalt manganese (NCM) cathodes, claiming a 45% market share compared to NCM’s 43%. While manganese-based chemistries also contributed, their impact was minor.

Beyond batteries, cobalt is needed in aviation, energy storage, and electronics and its recyclability makes it sustainable.

Image: LFP vs. NCM: the share of NCM battery cells declines

Source: Cobalt Institute report

Pressures Facing Cobalt

Cobalt, despite its critical role in batteries, faces significant challenges in the supply chain related to cost, composition, and sourcing. Cobalt is costly, but falling prices have improved battery cell cost competitiveness.

The report highlighted that in 2023, NCM and LFP chemistries dominated the global lithium-ion battery market, making up 88% of cathode demand. Automakers in North America and Europe preferred NCM batteries for their higher energy density and longer range and they were mainly used in high-performance EVs.

On the other hand, LFP batteries have gained market share globally, particularly in China, where their lower cost and reduced reliance on critical minerals like cobalt make them a popular choice. This also means that although NCM chemistries have high energy density they are globally less widely adopted.

Image: 2023 Cathode active materials (CAM) product mix from the major ex. China CAM suppliers, %

Additionally, ethical and environmental concerns regarding cobalt sourcing, particularly from the DRC and Indonesia are extensively scrutinized over its sustainability and responsible extraction practices.

Cobalt Forecast 2024: Price and Production

As cobalt demand continues to face challenges with automakers favoring lithium-iron-phosphate (LFP) batteries, cobalt-containing batteries are considerably losing market share. CMOC expects cobalt-containing batteries to eventually make up less than 10% of the total battery mix.

This declining demand is further reflected in price forecasts as rolled out by S&P Global Commodity Insights noted below:

• Analysts now estimate the cobalt market surplus will widen significantly in 2024, reaching 53,000 metric tons, which is more than 2X of its earlier predictions.
• The growing surplus has also led to a downward revision of cobalt price estimates, with prices now expected to fall to $12.72/lb by 2028.

Batteries now drive three-quarters of global cobalt demand, making the market highly sensitive to changes in cathode chemistries and technologies. As demand for EVs grows, cobalt’s role remains crucial, but the rise of alternatives like LFP will reshape the landscape.

The EV sector’s trajectory in key regions, including the US, China, and the EU, will play a critical role in shaping cobalt’s future. However, with battery technology shifting rapidly and economic policies uncertain, the path ahead remains unpredictable.

Supply Surge from CMOC, DRC, Australia, and Indonesia

The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Australia, and Indonesia are the three major countries that control about 73% of the world’s cobalt reserves. Last year, DRC topped the list, accounting for more than 70% of global production.

Source: Cobalt Institute

S&P Global forecasts that cobalt production is expected to soar in 2024. It will be significantly driven by Indonesia’s high-pressure acid leaching (HPAL) projects and surge in output from the DRC. Additionally, China’s CMOC, a major producer, has already surpassed its 2023 full-year cobalt production guidance by 21% within the first nine months.

In H1 2024, the company secured the position of the world’s largest cobalt producer with an impressive output of 54,024 tons, marking a staggering 178.22% year-over-year (YoY) growth. This surge not only reflects the company’s pivotal role in the global cobalt supply chain but also signifies a contribution to meet rising demand for battery-grade cobalt.

Notably, CMOC’s production surge is primarily linked to its copper-focused strategy that resulted in increased cobalt inventories.

From this report, we can fairly infer that cobalt can still hold its ground as a key material in high-performance batteries, particularly in Western markets. However, its future will depend on balancing cost, sustainability, and evolving technology trends.

• FURTHER READING: Canada’s Cobalt Cache: Pentagon Invests US$20 Million on Electra Battery Materials 

The post Cobalt at Crossroads: How Will Oversupply, Price Drops, and LFP Boom Impact Its Future? appeared first on Carbon Credits.