Monday, October 23, 2023


Indonesian copper-gold company storms ranking of world’s 50 most valuable mining stocks
Frik Els | October 19, 2023 

Reasons to smile. Workers at Amman Minerals Internasional’s Batu Hijau copper gold mine. Image: Amman Minerals

Amid a wider slump, MINING.COM’s ranking of world’s biggest miners was lit up by newcomer Amman Minerals, which now sits just outside the top 10 after minting at least six new billionaires since its July IPO.


At the end of Q1 2022, the MINING.COM TOP 50* ranking of the world’s biggest miners hit an all-time record of a collective $1.75 trillion as copper spent time above $10,000 a tonne, real nickel trades were being made above $40,000, lithium shipped for over $60,000 and everything from gold and platinum to uranium and tin were rallying hard.


Uranium prices have doubled since then to above $60 a pound, tin is also trading higher, although well below its March 2022 peak while gold’s recent safe haven rally means the precious metal is also trading higher compared to March 2021.


Iron ore, where the top diversified mining companies dig for most of their profits, has also held up remarkably well, trading at $120 a tonne this week, little changed from end-June.

Base and battery metals however have entered a deep slump since those heady days. Copper, zinc and aluminium are firmly in bear market territory down by a fifth or more, nickel and palladium investors are nursing 40%+ losses, cobalt is nearing record lows and lithium prices are hovering above $20,000.

After defying weakness on metals markets due to high expectations of strong future demand, particularly for copper, lithium and nickel, mining stock valuations have now succumbed.

At the end Q3 2023, mining valuations for the industry’s top tier have slumped a total of $516 billion since the all-time highs. Declines so far this year total $145 billion for a combined market value of $1.38 trillion – back to levels seen at the end of September 2021.

Just how bad sentiment is across the board is evident from the best performer list for Q3, which includes for the first time three counters which lost ground over the period.
Archipelago ascent

The first Indonesian company to make it into MINING.COM’s ranking of world’s 50 most valuable mining companies, Amman Minerals Internasional, has surged 213% in US dollar terms since its July debut in Jakarta to reach a market capitalisation just shy of 450 trillion rupiah, or more than $28 billion.

Amman Minerals is the owner and operator of the giant Batu Hijau copper and gold mine in production since the turn of the millennium and is developing the adjacent Elang project on the island of Sumbawa.

Elang is one of the world’s largest undeveloped copper and gold porphyry deposits and is currently in the feasibility stage. Elang boasts 4.7 million tonnes of proven and probable copper reserves and over 15 million ounces of gold.


Indonesia has become a red-hot IPO market this year and Amman was the largest of the year so far raising more than $700m in its IPO, and now sits at number 11 on the ranking.

Bloomberg reports Amman Minerals’ ascent has minted at least six new billionaires, including chairman Agus Projosasmito, whose stake in the company is now worth $2.7 billion. The miner’s spectacular market performance has also added $4 billion to the net worth of Anthoni Salim, who helms one of Indonesia’s largest conglomerates, taking the tycoon’s paper billions to within shouting distance of double digits.

Indonesia’s other major mining IPO, Harita Nickel, is on a different trajectory altogether. Listed on the Indonesian Stock Exchange in April raising $672m, the company has had a tough go of it and the stock has shed more than 60% since then as nickel prices continue to decline.
Lithium losses

The strength of the lithium sector outside China had been remarkable given the precipitous decline in prices for the battery metal since hitting all time highs above $80,000 a tonne in November last year.

But during Q3 the slump in prices of the battery raw material caught up with the six stocks represented in the Top 50, for a combined loss of over $30 billion in market cap over the three month period to just over $70 billion.


Measured from their 52-week highs the correction in the sector has been brutal – Perth-based Pilbara Mineral has bled 31% in market cap, making it the best performer. Mineral Resources has given up 37% while the declines for Albemarle, SQM, Ganfeng and Tianqi have been over 50%.

Pilbara Minerals, which unlike its peers is clinging onto year-to-date gains, joined the Top 50 last quarter and brought the number of companies based in the Western Australia capital to five, surpassing the tally of Vancouver, British Columbia as the top home base in the ranking.

The chances of another Perth-based lithium miner, IGO, of entering the Top 50 has dimmed. With a market cap of $5.4 billion, the company is down to the mid-60s in the ranking.

The merger of US-based Livent and Australia-Argentina lithium miner Allkem, expected to close before 2023 is out, may also not be enough for the combined firm to enter the Top 50. Together the two companies are now worth $7.4 billion, which would edge out AngloGold Ashanti for the last spot, but the fortunes of lithium and gold going into 2024 are diverging widely.

The blocking tactics of Gina Rhinehart’s Hancock Prospecting against the takeover of Liontown Resources by Albemarle turned out to be successful with the US lithium giant deciding to walk away from the deal this week.

Liontown’s 127% surge this year afforded the Perth-based company a market value of $4 billion before the collapse of the takeover which halted trading in the stock. Liontown on Thursday said it has secured the necessary funding to bring its Kathleen Valley project into production.
Enriched uranium

In September, uranium scaled $60 per pound for the first time since 2011. The breakthrough for the nuclear fuel comes after a decade in the doldrums following the Fukushima disaster in Japan.

The World Nuclear Association predicts world reactor requirements for uranium to surge to almost 130,000 tonnes (~285 million pounds) in 2040. That’s up from an estimate of 65,650 tonnes in 2023.

A significant portion of the WNA’s upward growth adjustments can be attributed to the accelerated adoption of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) as part of decarbonisation efforts for a range of industries from shipping to data centres with powering remote mine sites near the top of the list for SMR potential.


Canada’s Cameco makes the best performer list over the three months again in Q3 after spending much of the post-Fukushima period in the wilderness. The Saskatoon-based company enters the top 30 for the first time after jumping 19 places so far this year.

The value of shares in Kazatomprom, the world number one uranium producer, topped $10 billion at the end of Q3 placing it at position 36. Until this year the state-owned Kazakh company was outside earshot of the Top 50 since its dual-listing in London and Astana in 2018.
Diversified drop

BHP’s market position has also been supported by uranium prices as the Melbourne-based company boosts output at its Olympic Dam operations.

The world’s top mining company’s market value has declined by less than 8% year to date for a $142 valuation, outperforming other diversified heavyweights Rio Tinto, down 17%, Glencore (–21%), Vale (–25%) and Anglo American (–38%).

London-listed Anglo American has had a rough year in part due to its exposure to platinum group metals and control of Anglo American Platinum, and is now valued at $32 billion after peaking at $70 billion in March 2021.

Investors in Anglo, with a history going back more than a hundred years on the South African gold and diamond fields, have had a particularly wild ride over the last few years. In January 2016, Anglo’s market cap fell below $5 billion after it came close to suffocating under a pile of debt.

The dramatic slump in palladium prices (down 38% this year) and platinum (–16%) have also seen AngloPlat drop to its lowest position ever at a valuation of $10 billion, down from nearly $40 billion end-March 2021.

Former PGM high flyers Impala Platinum and Sibanye Stillwater, both valued around the $4 billion mark today, have lost sight of the Top 50 altogether.




*NOTES:

Source: MINING.COM, Mining Intelligence, Morningstar, GoogleFinance, company reports. Trading data from primary-listed exchange at Sep 29-Oct 5, 2023 where applicable, currency cross-rates Oct 7, 2023.

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, which owns the world’s largest gold mine, 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 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 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 specialised 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 where power, ports and railways make up a large portion of revenues pose a problem as does battery makers like CATL which is increasingly moving upstream, but where mining still make up 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.

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.
IN THE DESERT. . . 
Cuajone’s expansion project would not increase water usage – Southern Peru exec 


Valentina Ruiz Leotaud | October 21, 2023 |

Cuajone mine. (Image by Southern Copper Peru, Facebook.)

Southern Copper Peru’s (NYSE: SCCO) superintendent of environmental services, Eduardo Talavera, said over the weekend that water use would not increase at the Cuajone copper mine as a result of its expansion project.


During a presentation at the Institute of Mining Engineers of Peru, Talavera also noted that the project’s water use will be efficiently managed by applying technical procedures for water restitution and recycling. As an example, he mentioned the implementation of high-efficiency thickeners that allow for a reduction in freshwater consumption and an increased use of recovered water.

The executive also said that Southern Peru is evaluating the possibility of recycling 90% of the water employed at Cuajone, as well as the idea of switching to dry and muddy tailings. The latter would create additional opportunities to recycle water.

In addition to the new tailings management system, Talavera said there are also plans to start building, in March 2024, a landfill with two safety cells for the disposal of hazardous waste. The landfill is expected to have an operational life of 15 years and will be run under the standards of the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Law.

He also said that Cuajone will employ mobile misting cannons, which use catalyzed water and are transported by a large truck, and whose function is to suppress dust and reduce emissions of particulate matter in areas such as the waste rock deposit, the intermediate piles, the primary crusher and the conveyor belt.

“Among other initiatives, we hope to complete a new forest nursery by 2024, which will have better infrastructure and equipment for efficient water management, as well as for the propagation of better quality seedlings,” Talavera said. “We also expect to optimize our compost production areas to make better use of this material.”

Located in the southern Moquegua region, Cuajone is Southern Copper’s second-largest mine in Peru. Its $850-million expansion project, yet to be started, would increase the capacity of the concentrator plant to 120,000 tonnes per day from the current 85,000 tonnes per day, relying on estimated resources of 2,000 million tonnes of ore.

The mine, however, has been sieged by protests led by the nearby Tumilaca-Pocata-Coscore-Tala farming communities who have expressed ongoing concerns -among other things- about the operation’s water usage and future water management plans.

Southern Copper, part of Grupo Mexico, is one of the biggest copper companies by mineral reserves.

Peru, on the other hand, is the world’s second-largest copper producer after Chile and is also a significant silver and zinc global supplier.
JSW steel boss says ‘nothing concrete’ with Teck

Reuters | October 23, 2023

Elkview is one of Teck’s four steelmaking coal operations located in British Columbia, Canada. (Image by Teck Resources).

India’s JSW Steel Ltd’s discussions with Canada’s Teck Resources over buying a possible stake in its coking coal unit have yielded “nothing concrete”, JSW Steel chief executive Jayant Acharya told Reuters on Monday.


Last month, Reuters reported that JSW Steel, India’s largest steelmaker by capacity, had slowed down the process to buy a stake in Teck Resources because of a diplomatic spat between New Delhi and Canada.


“There is nothing concrete on Teck. We are in discussion with strategic possibilities among which Teck is one,” Acharya said in an interview.

Teck did not immediately respond to a Reuters email seeking comments.

Ties between India and Canada deteriorated after New Delhi and Ottawa expelled each other’s diplomats following the murder of a Sikh separatist leader in the Canadian province of British Columbia in June.

Acharya said the diplomatic row should not impact business decisions, adding “let us see how those situations evolve”.

Acharya said the company was exploring overseas coal assets in different countries, including Australia, without elaborating.

He further said an increase in prices of coking coal, used in steelmaking, in the last one and a half months would affect costs during October-December unless they moderated.

The steelmaker reported a second-quarter profit last week, helped by robust domestic demand and lower input costs.

It imports coking coal from Australia, Canada, the US and some grades from Russia, he said.

Acharya said the company would continue to focus on sales in the local market because of strong demand.

“We are not pursuing exports since domestic demand is very strong,” he said, adding that exports were likely to be in the range of 10-15% of overall sales.

The company’s presence in the Middle East was also “very minimal”, he said, sheltering the company from any impact from the conflict in the region.

(By Neha Arora and Divya Rajagopal; Editing by Mayank Bhardwaj and Barbara Lewis)


Japan’s JFE Steel eyes stake in Teck’s coal business – sources

Reuters | October 20, 2023 | 

Teck’s Coal Mountain operations are located about 30km southeast of Sparwood in southeastern British Columbia, Canada. (Image courtesy of Teck Resources)

Japan’s JFE Steel Corp is in talks to buy a stake in the metallurgical coal business of Canada’s Teck Resources, two people aware of the development told Reuters, adding to the list of suitors that also includes miner Glencore.


Major steelmakers are seeking to diversify their supplies of coking coal due to sanctions on Russia, one of the leading producers.

The previously unreported talks between JFE and Teck have been ongoing since September, another source said. The sources declined to be identified as they are not authorized to speak publicly.

“We will continue to consider the acquisition of interests in coking coal, but we cannot answer individual questions,” a spokesperson for Tokyo-based JFE Steel said in an email. JFE is one of Japan’s largest steelmakers.

Teck said it does not comment on speculation and referred to its earlier statement that the company is engaging with various counterparties regarding the steelmaking coal business.

The talks are early and may not result in a deal, one of the sources added. It was unclear what stake JFE was seeking or what price it was offering.

There are only handful of steelmaking coal producers in the world, with the biggest in Australia, Canada and Russia.

Japan’s Nippon Steel has previously said it was looking to buy a 10% stake in Teck’s coal business for C$1.15 billion, valuing the overall business at about C$11.5 billion, with an option of increasing its stake to 17.5%.

Teck has been considering splitting its coal and copper businesses since March, but shareholders voted down its original proposal. In April, Teck rebuffed a $22.5 billion unsolicited takeover offer for the entire company from Swiss mining and trading firm Glencore.

Glencore has said it will consider buying the coal business for about $8.5 billion.

Teck shares were trading down 0.6%, while the benchmark Toronto share index was down 0.1%.

JFE Steel holds 15% equity in India’s JSW Steel, which was also exploring an investment in Teck’s coal business. But Reuters reported in September the process had slowed down due to India-Canada diplomatic tensions.

Earlier this month, Teck CEO Jonathan Price said the company had received multiple suggestions from investors on how to separate its coal and metals businesses and he was hoping to make a decision on the split by the end of this year.

Price said the company had two options — a 100% sale of the coal business for cash or a partial sale of the coal business, with proceeds going to growing the copper business.

(By Divya Rajagopal and Neha Arora; Editing by Denny Thomas, Nick Zieminski and Rod Nickel)



Teck CEO “very confident” about selling company stake to JSW despite India-Canada geopolitical row

Teck Resources CEO says the company wants a continued partnership with India given that trade in steelmaking coal will only increase in the future.

Ashima Sharma and Smruthi Nadig
October 5, 2023
Jonathan Price, the CEO of Teck Resources, addressing the audience at the FT Mining Summit on 5 October. 
Credit: Ashima Sharma/Smruthi Nadig.

In the first signs of a diplomatic spat affecting trade between India and Canada, India’s largest steelmaker, JSW, has slowed down the process of buying a stake in Teck Resources.

Speaking at the FT Mining Summit in London on Thursday, Jonathan Price, the CEO of Teck Resources said: “We are still very confident in the process we have on foot here, and the news about geopolitical events between Canada and India is not something that is causing us to slow down.”

In August 2023, JSW Steel said it planned to pick up a 20–40% stake in Elk Valley Resources, a coal unit of Teck Resources.

Teck produces high-grade metallurgical coal required for steelmaking. India is heavily dependent on imports of steelmaking coal, with the country’s coal imports increasing by 30% to 162.46 million tonnes in the 2022–23 financial year. As JSW plans to double its steelmaking capacity by 2030 to 50 million tonnes, the deal with Teck is key to the company’s expansion.

Given the Canadian company is being acquired by a foreign entity, Canada’s industry ministry said it would require a national security review under the Investment Canada Act for the deal to go through.

Price added: “India is a significant growing customer for steelmaking coal, and they are also a significant buyer of metals. We would like to continue to maintain very long-standing trade relationships.”

As part of expanding trade and investment between Canada and India, the two countries had two-way merchandise trade – international trade in which countries import and export the same or similar goods – of $10.1bn in 2019.

However, on 1 September, Canada unexpectedly paused talks on a proposed trade treaty with India, three months after an initial agreement this year.


After attending the G20 summit held in New Delhi this September, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau accused India of having a “credible link” to the killing of Sikh separatist leader Hardeep Singh Nijjar, who was shot dead in Canada in June.

While India has strongly rejected any such allegation, trade talks have been put on hold between the countries amid a diplomatic row.

Canada and India have been talking about an economic partnership agreement since 2010. On 15 September, Canada postponed its trade mission to India planned for October. On social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi posted, “We discussed the full range of India-Canada ties across different sectors.”


Earlier in June, Glencore, one of the world’s largest coal producers, had proposed to buy the whole of Teck’s steelmaking coal business for $8bn.


INTERNECINE LABOUR DISPUTE
Labor dispute keeps 540 South African miners stuck underground
Bloomberg News | October 23, 2023 

Stock image.

About 540 workers at Gold One International Ltd.’s Modder East mine have been prevented from returning to the surface by labor-union members after a dispute over recognition, according to a company spokesman.


Workers at the operation near Johannesburg were kept underground after the night shift ended by the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union, according to Jon Hericourt, a Gold One spokesman. “Last night we heard AMCU members prevented workers from coming back up,” he said.

For more than a decade, the company has identified the National Union of Mineworkers as the recognized labor group, Hericourt said. AMCU has claimed to meet the criteria needed to reach the status and threatened to strike in a court process that hasn’t been concluded, he said.

Jimmy Gama, an AMCU official, didn’t answer a call seeking comment.

Production is at a standstill as the company meets with labor and tries to gain access to the mine to help employees who have been injured in the dispute, Hericourt said.

(By Paul Burkhardt)

Over 500 gold miners held hostage at Gold-One mine in Springs

Story by Siyabonga Sithole  • 

Over 500 gold miners held hostage at Gold-One mine in Springs
© Provided by The Star

The DA has condemned the hostage situation which took place at the Gold One mine in Springs on Monday.

This comes after reports indicated that more than 500 miners were being held "hostage", allegedly by members of the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (Amcu).

It was reported that earlier in the day, members belonging to the union had downed tools underground, demanding that the employer recognise Amcu as the majority union.

The “SABC” reported that one person was injured after allegedly being attacked with a panga with the mine reporting that the miners were being held hostage underground.

Gold One mine's spokesperson Jon Hericourt told “Bloomberg” that at least 543 of their miners were being held hostage after they were prevented from coming up at the end of their shift on Sunday night.

Attempts to get comment from Amcu were still unsuccessful by the time of going to print. This is a developing story.

However, reacting to the news, the DA’s constituency head Ashor Sarupen said the party is deeply concerned over the safety of these miners who were being kept against their will.

“I am deeply concerned and appalled by the ongoing hostage situation at the GoldOne-Modder East mine, where approximately 543 miners are allegedly being held against their will.

“As a town built on mining, the safety and well-being of the mining community in Springs is critical, and all acts that threaten the lives and security of these miners are unacceptable,” Sarupen said.

Sarupen said the DA is calling for the immediate and safe release of all miners involved in this situation as well as for the union to co-operate with law enforcement authorities.

“It is crucial that those responsible for this illegal and dangerous act be held accountable. We expect law enforcement agencies to act swiftly in investigating and bringing those behind this incident to justice.

“We also call upon Amcu to co-operate fully with law enforcement authorities and facilitate the safe release of the miners,’ he said.


Column: China ups critical minerals heat with graphite controls

Reuters | October 23, 2023 |

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


China is upping the critical minerals stakes by curbing exports of graphite, a key raw material in electric vehicle batteries.

The West can’t say it wasn’t warned.

When China announced restrictions on exports of gallium and germanium in July, former Vice Commerce Minister Wei Jianguo was quoted in the China Daily as saying it was “just the start” if the West continued to target China’s high-technology sector.

Restricting the flow of two metals used in the manufacture of silicon chips was “a well-thought-out heavy punch” in reaction to the U.S. Chips Act, Wei said.

The Biden administration has since tightened restrictions on the flow of advanced artificial intelligence chips to China, announcing on Friday a new raft of measures aimed at closing previous loopholes.

China is responding in kind, this time taking aim at the West’s electric vehicle (EV) ambitions.

There is much potential for further escalation in this unfolding critical minerals battle between China and the West.
Critical input

Graphite has slipped under the radar in the broader critical raw materials debate. China’s control of other battery inputs such as cobalt, nickel and lithium has grabbed the headlines.

Those are all used to make the battery cathode. It won’t work, however, without an anode, which is invariably made of graphite.

Indeed, graphite is the largest EV battery component by weight, typically accounting for between 50 and 100 kg.

China is the dominant player in the global supply of both natural graphite and synthetic graphite, which has been taking an increasing share of the market.

The country accounts for around two-thirds of all natural graphite production and, according to consultancy Benchmark Minerals, supplies around 98% of the world’s synthetic graphite anodes.

The West’s dependency on Chinese supply has seen graphite recently join the likes of cobalt and rare earths on the U.S. Department of Energy’s list of super-critical raw materials.


The machining mold and die by EDM graphite electrode. 

The U.S. and its metals allies are investing in non-Chinese supply.

The Department of Defense awarded $37m in July to Graphite One to accelerate a feasibility study on its Graphite Creek project in Alaska, thought to be one of the largest 10 identified deposits in the country.

Australia has used its A$2 billion Critical Minerals Facility to lend A$185 million to Renascor Resources’ Siviour graphite project and A$40m to EcoGraf Ltd’s battery anode plant.

However, none will be in operation by the start of December, when China’s export restrictions come into place.
Squeezing supply

The big question is how tightly China will squeeze the graphite export pipeline.

It’s worth noting the ban is not on all forms of graphite. The new measures, which prohibit any exports without a licence, cover high-purity synthetic graphite and natural flake graphite, including spherical and expanded forms.

Previous restrictions on lower-grade graphite exports destined for the steel and lubricants sectors have been rescinded.

The curbs are clearly targeted at the EV battery sector but which parts?

If gallium and germanium are anything to go by, expect a flurry of export activity in the run-up to the Dec. 1 deadline and then a collapse in activity.

Some Chinese companies have received their licences and many more applications are under review but the process has essentially halted exports of both metals for the time being. Prices of both have unsurprisingly increased.

The world’s graphite supply chain could well be in for a similar short-term shock.
Jaw-jaw or war?

Western governments are still evaluating their response, waiting like the rest of us to see how China’s graphite volumes play out in the coming months.

One potential avenue would be challenge the export curbs at the World Trade Organization (WTO), an option the Japanese government is already evaluating.

This was a tactic successfully used when China cut off exports of rare earths in 2010. A joint complaint by the U.S., the European Union and Japan was upheld in 2014 and China was forced to back down.

Indeed, the Obama administration launched multiple complaints against China at the WTO and won all of them other than the last, which challenged the country over its subsidised aluminium industry.

The Trump administration, by contrast, was outright hostile to the WTO and preferred unilateral trade action such as the Section 232 tariffs on imports of steel and aluminium.

The Biden administration has so far been equally dismissive. When the WTO last year upheld China’s complaint about the Section 232 tariffs, Assistant Trade Representative Adam Hodge rejected the finding as “flawed” and said “these WTO panel reports only reinforce the need to fundamentally reform the WTO dispute settlement system.”

While the European Union and Japan might prefer to use the old world order trade dispute system, the U.S. quite evidently won’t be leading the way.

Rather, the more likely response will be to double down on the country’s already heavy investment in building out a domestic critical mineral supply chain and working with allied countries to source what it cannot produce itself.

With no sign of any let-up in the campaign to cut off the flow of high-end chips to China, the risk of further heavy counter punches in the metals sector looks high.

If gallium and germanium were, to quote China’s Wei, “just the start”, graphite is unlikely to mark the end of this escalating global tit-for-tat.

(Editing by David Evans)

Global Stocktake Report Reveals Urgent Climate Action Needs at COP28


So, the picture the Report paints is one of a glass quarter full but, seen another way, a glass three-quarters empty.           

D Raghunandan 


This Report is, or should be, a watershed moment in the international climate negotiations, certainly in the post-Paris Agreement phase. However, it barely received any attention in the media worldwide.

Climate change protesters march in Paris. Representational Image. Image Courtesy: Wikimedia commons

Climate change protesters march in Paris. Representational Image. Image Courtesy: Wikimedia commons

The Paris Agreement (PA) had mandated a periodic five-yearly cycle of assessments of climate action called the Global Stocktake (GST) starting in 2023. GST is a process involving both country Parties i.e. governments, as well as non-party stakeholders to review progress made on the different actions agreed upon in the international negotiations under the aegis of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to tackle the greatest crisis to confront humankind, namely climate change. GST is expected to go beyond a retrospective review to chart out pathways to achieve the goals set by the Paris Agreement and, implicitly, raise ambitions towards ensuring these goals. The current cycle, underway for about two years now, will culminate in December 2023 at COP28 in Dubai where governments would examine the results of the GST and, hopefully, take appropriate decisions binding on all countries.

The GST consists of several processes such as data collection and analysis, technical assessment and political decision-making at the COP. The data collection process started in end-2021 during COP26 in Glasgow, then proceeded in parallel with the technical assessment which began in mid-2022, with both concluding in mid-2023 at the inter-sessional meeting in Bonn. Currently, the findings are being studied in what is termed the Consideration of Outputs phase which would culminate at COP28.  The assessment process has been taking place through three Technical Dialogues (TD 1, 2 and 3) at the inter-sessional meetings in mid-mid-2022 and 2023 along with the intervening COP27 in the end-2022. A final Synthesis Report was released towards the end of September 2023 and will be the main input into follow-up decision-making at the forthcoming COP28.

This Report is, or should be, a watershed moment in the international climate negotiations, certainly in the post-PA phase. However, it barely received any attention in the media worldwide. Perhaps it got crowded out by the wall-to-wall coverage of the war in Ukraine in the Western media. Maybe the perception was that the real action is to take place in December at COP28, when there will be a media circus anyway, so why not wait? Or perhaps climate fatigue has set in, at least as regards news about steps to curb emissions, since nothing special seems to be happening on that front. The increasingly frequent and more severe forest fires, heat waves, floods, polar and glacial ice-melts, and droughts in different parts of the world should be drawing attention as much to what needs to be done to check them as to the disasters themselves.

Preliminary stocktake findings


The tragedy is that, indeed, international efforts to cut down emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), especially carbon dioxide, mostly from the burning of fossil fuels, are progressing extremely slowly and lack the required urgency, even while climate impacts are worsening, that too far more quickly than earlier projected.

The Synthesis Report of the Technical Dialogue of the First Global Stocktake (GST-TD Syn) says just that. But this is not news. Every recent Report from every scientific agency has said the same thing and has been repeating it over many years before that too. The Synthesis Report of the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC/AR6) which puts together and summarizes the three volumes of the IPCC report covered this ground thoroughly, with detailed estimates of how far short the world is from where it ought to be in order to restrict global average temperature rise to 2 degrees C or as close to 1.5C as possible. So did the Emissions Gap Report, and so on.

It is no surprise then that GST-TD Syn too sums up the current status in similar, stark terms.  However, it downplays it somewhat by also emphasizing the improvements achieved, even if these are much less than required, albeit better than before. The Report notes this pattern of mixed results by individual countries, especially developed nations, as well as when put together on a global level, in all the major parameters being monitored under the Global Stocktake viz. mitigation or reduction of GHGs, adaptation, and resilience to climate impacts, and implementation mechanisms such as assistance to developing countries in finance, technology, capacity-building, and the recently added loss and damage. So, the picture the Report paints is one of a glass quarter full but, seen another way, a glass three-quarters empty.           

The intention clearly is to show that the international negotiations are indeed showing progress, and some positive results on all fronts so that despondency or frustration do not set in. On the other hand, such a portrayal has the danger of lulling governments, other non-state players, and the general public into believing that everything is going in the right direction, that there is nothing to worry about, and emissions will gradually come under control to the required level, stopping or reversing climate change.

The hard truth is that, whatever gains have been made, are woefully short of requirement and that emissions remain at dangerous levels, global temperature rise appears set to go above the 2C leave alone 1.5C mark, with impacts already being witnessed and threatening to get much worse.

The question therefore is: will COP28 look at the situation as a glass quarter full and end with good-intentioned but airy promises, or will it confront the glass three-quarters empty, seize the moment, and arrive at a serious round of revised national targets or Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) committing to sharp reductions n emissions as badly needed.

Status of Emissions Control

The elephant in the room is, of course, the level of emissions and the foreseeable trend in the near and medium term.

The Report first notes the feel-good aspect that the Paris Agreement has triggered considerable momentum to mitigation, i.e. emissions reduction, efforts and “has led to contributions that significantly reduce forecasts of future warming” compared to such forecasts before PA.  Yet, current global emissions and trends are not in line with… the temperature goal, and there is a “rapidly narrowing window to raise ambition and implement existing commitments in order to limit warming to 1.5 C” by 2030. In fact, the gap between where we are, and where we should be, is a wide chasm of about 20.323.9 Gt CO2 eq (gigatons or billion tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, that is, levels of all different greenhouse gases standardized to their equivalent carbon dioxide levels in terms of global warming potential). This is almost 40 percent of global annual emissions of very approximately 50-odd GtCO2-eq.

The Report projects that global GHG emissions need to reduce “by 43% by 2030 and further by 60% by 2035 compared with 2019 levels, and reach net zero CO2 emissions by 2050 globally.”

Significantly, the Report underlines that “the timing of achieving net zero emissions will vary by country.“ Contrary to popular narratives pushed by vested interests in developed countries, unfortunately, echoed even by the UN Secretary General, who would like to see the same targets set for both developed and large developing countries like India, thus defeating the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR) which takes into account the much greater historical emissions by developed countries and hence their far greater responsibility for climate change. It may be recalled that while most developed countries had announced net zero CO2 emissions by 2050, China had announced a 2060 date and India had set 2070 as its net zero date.

Therefore, if global net zero CO2 emissions have to be reached by 2050, then developed countries must reach net zero CO2 well before 2050 so as to allow developing countries more time to reach their own respective net zero levels. This should be one of the major goals set for COP28 based on the GST.

Peaking and fossil fuels

Similar issues arise with regard to other performance parameters.

It had been agreed at Paris COP21 that global peaking of emissions should be reached sometime in 2020-25. We are far away from that. Several developed and some developing countries, amounting to over 50 countries in all, have already peaked, most of this has to do with energy consumption having plateaued out in stagnant economic growth.

This has also contributed to slowing down of the transition to renewable sources of electricity generation, or the convenient shift from coal to natural gas, both fossil fuels, rather than to renewables. In several parts of Europe, coal power plants are being revived or their shutting down has been slowed. In Germany, long the poster boy of green policies, coal power generation has gone up from around 20 percent to about 30 percent and Sweden has postponed its shift to renewable to 2040. China’s emissions reduction trajectory also seems to have been affected by a slowdown in its economy.

The Joe Biden US administration has pledged to close down coal-fired power plants by 2030. Despite the share of coal power continuing its declining path till its 20 percent figure in 2022, most analysts do not see it reaching zero by 2030. And even if it does, it is likely to be replaced by natural gas.

The UN has called on developed countries to shut down unabated fossil fuel-based power, ie power plants without carbon capture, by 2030. This is another target going abegging and needs tough decisions at COP28.

Lessons for India

In a similar vein, the GST-TD-Syn Report points out the substantial underperformance of developed countries on finance, technology transfer, loss, and damage getting. This writer has long argued that developed countries have used these as leverage against, and have supposedly conceded ground in these areas by promising more funds which have never come through, while getting developing countries to ease up on pressure to cut their own emission reduction targets. Whether one calls it adaptation or loss and damage, the funds are to come from the same developed countries who have proved to be extremely tight-fisted. India should take the bit between its teeth, and strong pressure on developed countries to up their game and undertake sharp emissions at COP28 based on the GST.

The official Indian stance has long been very defensive on this count, for fear that this will prompt developed countries to demand more cuts by India as well. There is perhaps some slack in India’s NDCs to make an offer of further emission cuts conditional upon the developed countries committing to the deep cuts required.

The GST-TD-Syn Report points to some directions which again this writer too has argued for in the past. The Report calls for “whole-of-society” emission reduction pathways. India’s NDC has restricted itself to just 3 sectors, namely reduction in emissions intensity of GDP, shift of electricity generation to renewables, and increase in carbon sequestration by forests/tree cover. The shift to renewables is losing momentum, although the commitments made had enough margin in terms of target installed capacity and timelines to mask this. The carbon sequestration goal is sure to be affected by the government’s severe dilution of forest regulations and encouraging a shift from natural forests to production “forests” or tree plantations.

The time has perhaps come for India to review its Emissions Intensity based reduction pledge.  an idea borrowed from China which put forward such an idea first. This metric makes it quite difficult to plan, monitor, and review emissions reductions. A simple target in terms of reduction in emissions would be much better and have greater accountability both within and outside the country.

The other idea is to considerably expand the areas brought under emission reduction targets, at least partly moving towards a “whole-of-economy” transformation. Transport, buildings, energy demand management, and waste readily come to mind. Agriculture is a sensitive subject, but win-win approaches which improve soil health, reduce inputs and costs, and reduce emissions are quite feasible.

The Report also points out that in adaptation and resilience-building, most countries’ activities have been restricted to plans but little action, and even less systematic efforts. For instance, very few countries have submitted National Adaptation Plans (NAP) to the UNFCCC. India has not made any progress in developing an NAP, and has only taken up scattered individual projects funded by NABARD, whose impacts has never been properly evaluated.

It is time for big changes, at COP 28 and at home in India.