How The U.S. Fell Behind China On Nuclear Power

By Haley Zaremba - Sep 04, 2026

• The US runs 96 reactors across 28 states, but the average unit is 44 years old, past the 40-year license most were built for.
• 
  
• China added 34 gigawatts of nuclear capacity in the past decade. The US added one plant: Georgia's over-budget, years-late Plant Vogtle.
• 
  
• A National Interest report argues the real holdup isn't just red tape. It's financial models too narrow to capture what nuclear actually delivers.
• 
  

The United States is the largest producer of nuclear power in the world, solely responsible for about one-third of global output. As of today, the U.S. has 96 operating commercial nuclear reactors in 57 power plants across 28 states. However, while that fleet remains highly productive, the domestic nuclear sector is rapidly aging out. All but two of the nation’s nuclear reactors are Gen II models, meaning they were constructed before the year 2000. The average reactor age in the United States is 44, when the vast majority of those reactors were initially only licensed to run for 40 years.

In the past decade, the United States added just one nuclear power plant – Georgia’s controversial Plant Vogtle. In the same time period, China added a staggering 34 gigawatts of nuclear capacity. At this rate, China is on track to overtake both France and the United States to become the world’s largest nuclear power producer within the next five years.

“By a wide margin, China will have the world’s most dynamic and significant nuclear industry through 2035,” Damien Ma, energy lead analyst for Gavekal Technologies, wrote in a recent report, as quoted by the South China Morning Post in June. “Construction efficiencies mean China can build a new plant in about six years, compared with more than a decade for the latest Vogtle reactors in the US,” Ma went on to say.

But why is the United States lagging so far behind China, especially when the Trump administration is so eager to “produce lasting American dominance in the global nuclear energy market”? Part of the reason is that the United States is out of practice, with a workforce that no longer knows how to build a nuclear power plant. Another reason is the miles and miles of red tape and regulatory hurdles that it takes to get a new reactor plan off the ground under the oversight of the (understandably cautious) Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But the biggest reason, as always, is money.

Nuclear power plants require an enormous amount of up-front capital to develop. And nuclear megaprojects, as any megaproject, tend to go over deadline and over budget. When Plant Vogtle finally came online in 2024, it was years late and billions of dollars over budget. While Plant Vogtle provided indispensable learning experiences that would likely help to streamline future projects, its high-profile reputation as a bloated disaster has proven to be a potent deterrent for would-be investors in similar projects.

“With each reactor a multi-billion-dollar endeavor, coupled with long development and construction phases and a complex regulatory process, investors are reluctant to invest in nuclear projects during the development phase, which can become ‘bet the company’ decisions for the developer/owner,” The National Interest wrote in a recent report. But, the article argues, this is because we’re thinking about the economics of nuclear energy all wrong.

This is because financial modeling is narrowly focused on project-level returns within the time frame of a given license, even though most power plants can operate efficiently for double that timespan. And, more importantly, these financial models fail to capture the broader long-term benefits associated with nuclear, including energy security and public welfare. Moving beyond traditional financial models to incorporate more sophisticated economic impact models could more accurately account for the long lifespans of nuclear reactors and the broader societal benefits they bring about, ultimately helping to reassure would-be investors and incentivizing the mobilization of government funds.

More sophisticated modeling would also help to make sure that each new plant can be better optimized to deliver these greater benefits. “Nuclear projects are important for public welfare and critical infrastructure with political implications, but they are costly and finite in number. This means that each potential plant should be fully scrutinized to maximize social utility,” writes the National Interest. This is particularly critical at a time that the AI energy demand boom is pushing the private and public sector to develop new energy resources as fast as possible, with diminished regard for public wellbeing, environmental impact, and oversight and safety measures.

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com

Rosneft CEO: China Calls The Shots in Oil Markets, Not OPEC

By Charles Kennedy - Sep 04, 2026

China and its crude oil buying behavior in the spring and summer have stabilized global oil markets as Beijing, not OPEC, is calling the shots now, according to Igor Sechin, chief executive of Russia’s biggest oil producer Rosneft.

China has strengthened its position of the ultimate swing buyer on the global market and has taken the initiative from OPEC, said the executive, who is considered to be a close ally of Vladimir Putin and who has been a long-time critic of OPEC.

“China has successfully turned from a major consumer and importer into an active market leader,” Sechin said at an economic forum in Vladivostok in Russia’s Far East.

“China took the initiative out from OPEC this year and without joining any cartels, it has managed to stabilize the global market by slashing its crude oil imports by about 5.5 million barrels per day (bpd),” Russia’s top oil executive said.

Arguably, the biggest cushion the market has had this summer was China’s crude oil import behavior. The world’s largest crude oil importer had amassed an estimated up to 1.4 billion barrels of crude in commercial and strategic stockpiles before the Iran war. The huge cushion allowed it to slash imports when the Strait of Hormuz closed, and prices spiked.

Ever the opportunistic buyer, China withdrew from the spot market amid the Middle East crisis, and by slashing this import demand, Beijing single-handedly offset part of the lost supply.

The market appeared to have underestimated China’s ability to be as flexible in its crude oil imports as to slash purchases by as much as 40% in June compared to pre-war levels.

In addition, during the crisis, China has also seen soaring EV use, a massive switch to coal, and rising shares of power generation from renewable energy sources.

“I believe that further growth of the strategic and commercial reserves will strengthen China’s role in the energy market, amid OPEC’s fading influence a shrinking number of members,” Sechin said.

Earlier this year, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), one of the cartel’s biggest producers, quit OPEC effective May 1 to pursue its national interests.

By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com

ECOCIDE

BLM Moves to Fast-Track Oil Permits in Alaska Petroleum Reserve

By Julianne Geiger - Sep 04, 2026

The Bureau of Land Management wants to cut the permitting time for some oil and gas projects in Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve to as little as 60 days, according to a Friday press release.

The proposed rule would replace separate case-by-case reviews for qualifying production sites with a standardized process covering common, repeatable activities that BLM says have already been studied extensively. Rights-of-way and some drilling permit applications meeting predetermined criteria could receive decisions within 60 days.

The National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska covers roughly 23 million acres on Alaska’s North Slope. About 3.5 million acres are currently under lease.

There are considerably more leases to develop after this year.

BLM’s March NPR-A auction drew bids on 187 tracts and generated more than $163 million, the highest revenue ever collected in a lease sale for the reserve. The auction also produced the largest number of tracts receiving bids and the second-largest acreage total sold in a single NPR-A sale. ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, and a Repsol-Shell consortium were among the successful bidders.

Getting acreage leased and getting oil out of it are two very different timelines in Alaska.

Operators still need drilling permits, rights-of-way and approvals for roads, pipelines, pads and other permanent infrastructure. BLM says more than two decades of permitting work in the reserve gives it enough environmental data to standardize reviews for projects similar to infrastructure already approved there.

The proposal followed a petition from the Alaska Oil and Gas Association requesting a uniform approval process and a 60-day timeline for qualifying projects. BLM is preparing an environmental impact statement alongside the new rule.

The agency has already rescinded a 2024 rule that restricted development in the reserve and reopened nearly 82% of the NPR-A to oil and gas leasing.

The administration has also expanded leasing elsewhere in Alaska, including this year’s first auction of drilling rights in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

The NPR-A proposal now enters a 60-day public comment period ending November 9. For companies holding acreage from the record March auction, the more immediate number is 60 days, which is the proposed clock for turning at least some permit applications into decisions.

By Julianne Geiger for Oilprice.com

 

Frontieras, Western Fuels to build coal processing facility at Dry Fork mine in Wyoming 

Staff Writer | September 3, 2026 | 

Dry Fork mine. (Image: Western Fuels Wyoming )

Houston-based Frontieras North America, Western Fuels — owner and operator of the Dry Fork mine — and Western Fuels Association, a not-for-profit fuel supply cooperative have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to jointly develop a mine-mouth FASForm processing facility at Dry Fork in Campbell County, Wyoming. 

Dry Fork is an open-pit coal mine located eight miles north of Gillette, in the Powder River Basin.

The MOU establishes a framework for the parties to negotiate long-term agreements covering a ground lease for a facility site at or adjacent to the Dry Fork mine; a coal feedstock supply agreement for Wyoming sub-bituminous coal, contemplated at up to approximately 2.7 million tons per year initially and up to approximately 5.4 million tons per year at full build-out; a diesel offtake agreement under which Western Fuels would purchase ultra-low-sulfur diesel produced at the facility for its mining, haul, and member operations; and a logistics arrangement that could engage Western Fuels Association’s rail and transportation capabilities to move FASForm’s product streams. 

The agreements are each expected to carry an initial 30-year term. 

Frontieras North America is commercializing its patented FASForm Solid Carbon Fractionation technology, which, rather burning coal, disassembles coal in a reducing atmosphere through a continuous, closed-loop, zero-waste process, separating it into clean solid carbon (FASCarbon), ultra-low-sulfur diesel, naphtha, and other high-value products, the company said.  

Under the MOU, FASCarbon produced at the Wyoming facility could be railed to WFA’s member utilities under separate commercial terms or transacted into international markets, making WFA and Frontieras a new global supplier, Frontieras North America said.  

As the nation’s largest coal-producing state, Wyoming is the anchor for the company’s plan to scale FASForm technology across the West — both through standalone mine-mouth facilities and through FASGEN, Frontieras’ co-location platform that integrates FASForm units directly into existing coal-fired power plants, it said.  

The Dry Fork Mine sits within the Gillette mine-mouth generation cluster, where more than 1,200 megawatts of coal-fired capacity operate within a few miles of the resource.  

Frontieras  said a facility at Dry Fork Mine would position it at the logistical center of one of the densest coal-power corridors in the country, positioning the company to extend its co-location strategy to the coal-fired utilities that power the region — and a fast-growing share of US data-center and industrial demand. 

“Frontieras shares our conviction that coal has a real and lasting future, and its FASForm technology gives us a way to transform Dry Fork mine production into fuels and products our members and the market genuinely needs,” Western Fuels CEO Adam Anderson said in a news release.  

“We are looking ahead to determine opportunities that expand this relationship across the full Western Fuels cooperative — broadly serving our member utilities and their communities,” Anderson said. 

“Wyoming produces more coal than any other state, which makes it the natural place to prove this resource can be commercialized — not just mined,” Frontieras North America chief commercial officer Andrea Moran said. “A mine-mouth site at the Dry Fork Mine puts a FASForm facility directly on top of that feedstock — no rail, no barge, no distance between the coal and the finished fuels and products we make from it.”  

Those are the economics that make commercialization work at scale and pairing them with Western Fuels’ operational strength is exactly how we intend to grow this platform across the West,” Moran said. 

 NIGERIA

Dangote says refinery IPO to open within days

Reuters | September 4, 2026 | 

(Image: Dangote Refinery.)

The initial public offering of Nigeria’s Dangote refinery, the largest on the continent, will open in the next 10 to 12 days, owner Aliko Dangote said on Thursday.

“So our dream is that we want to make sure we double the capacity of the refinery … which will take us to 1.4 million barrels per day. The IPO will open in the next 10 to 12 days,” Dangote told investors and analysts in Botswana, while visiting the Southern African country.

The refinery, owned by Africa’s richest man, is expected to seek to raise about $5 billion in what could become the continent’s largest IPO.

Dangote does not disclose refinery margins, but the refining industry has benefited from stronger profits as turmoil in the Middle East boosted demand for alternative fuel supplies.

The 650,000-barrel-per-day refinery reached full nameplate capacity in February and has already tested output at 700,000 barrels per day.

The businessman also said the secondary listing of Dangote Cement (NGX: DANGCEM), another flagship company in his industrial empire, on the London Stock Exchange would most likely be in October, a move that could broaden its access to international investors and capital.

Dangote is also planning to build a new refinery on Kenya’s coast in partnership with East African governments. The project, which is expected to take up to three years to complete, would supply refined petroleum products to Kenya and neighbouring countries, helping reduce East Africa’s reliance on imported fuels.

It would mark Dangote Group’s biggest refining investment outside Nigeria. “We are launching it on September 30,” he said.

(Reporting by Sfundo Parakozov and Chijioke Ohuocha; Editing by David Gregorio)

 

African Rainbow Minerals profit up 19% on higher platinum prices

Reuters | September 4, 2026 

(Image: African Rainbow Minerals.)

African Rainbow Minerals (JSE: ARI) on Friday posted a 19% increase in annual profit, as strong platinum group metal prices offset the impact of lower income from its coal, iron ore and manganese divisions.

The diversified South African miner’s headline earnings came in at 3.201 billion rand ($200.3 million) in the year ended June 30, compared with 2.695 billion rand previously.

ARM said it will pay a final dividend of 7 rand per share, up from 6 rand per share last year.

The company’s PGM operations swung back to profit with 1.345 billion rand in headline earnings against last year’s 1.288 billion rand loss, after metal prices rose by more than 50% compared to the previous year.

Its ferrous division, which consists of iron ore and manganese, reported a 42% decline in headline earnings to 2.028 billion rand.

Iron ore earnings hit by mothballing of mine

Income from the iron ore division was impacted by a 75% collapse in sales volumes at the Beeshoek Mine, which was mothballed last November.

Headline earnings at ARM’s other iron ore mine, Khumani, also decreased significantly due to a stronger rand, despite higher export volumes. Manganese income was also hurt by lower mineral prices and the stronger rand.

The coal unit made a 428 million rand loss, against last year’s 47 million rand profit, mainly due to lower prices.

ARM said in July it was undertaking a phased 15.2 billion rand upgrade of its Bokoni platinum operations, as well as a resumption of nickel mining at Nkomati.

The Bokoni project is expected to reach its peak in 2032, producing between 350,000 and 400,000 ounces of PGMs annually, doubling ARM’s current output.

ARM is restarting open-pit mining operations and nickel concentrate production at Nkomati, which was idled in 2021. Nkomati will produce 56,065 tons annually after agreeing ‌an off-take deal with Sweden’s Boliden BOL.ST .

($1 = 15.9803 rand)

(Reporting by Nelson Banya; Editing by Muralikumar Anantharaman and Jan Harvey)

 

Baowu eyes stake in BHP’s massive Jimblebar iron ore mine

Marina Meireles | September 4, 2026

Jimblebar produced roughly a quarter of BHP’s iron ore in fiscal 2026,.(Image courtesy of BHP.)

China Baowu Steel Group is considering buying a minority stake in BHP’s (NYSE: BHP) Jimblebar iron ore mine in Western Australia, a move that could deepen Chinese involvement in one of the miner’s biggest operations, two sources told Reuters.

The world’s largest steelmaker is weighing a 15% to 25% interest that would come directly from BHP’s holding, according to the report. Jimblebar produced about 62.5 million tonnes of iron ore in fiscal 2026, roughly a quarter of BHP’s iron ore output.

BHP owns 85% of Jimblebar, while Japanese trading houses Itochu and Mitsui hold minority interests. The mine, valued at about $3.2 billion when it opened in 2014, produces ore worth roughly $6.2 billion at current prices.

Baowu has expressed interest but has not made a decision, and there is no certainty that talks will result in a transaction, Reuters reported.

A deal would give the Chinese steel giant a direct interest in a major source of the raw material used to make steel for construction, automobiles and other industries, while potentially strengthening commercial ties between one of Australia’s largest miners and its biggest customer market.

Trade ties

Chinese investment in Australia has faced greater scrutiny in recent years as Canberra tightened its approach to transactions involving strategically important resources, including lithium and rare earths.

The potential investment also comes after BHP and China Mineral Resources Group resolved a six-month dispute in April, clearing the way for Chinese steel mills to resume purchases of some BHP iron ore cargoes that had been blacklisted.

BHP and Baowu already have ties in efforts to reduce emissions from steelmaking. The companies conducted commercial-scale trials using BHP’s Pilbara iron ores for direct reduced iron production at a Baowu facility, with the material deemed suitable for the process.

Baowu has also previously partnered with Australian miners. In 2022, it struck a deal with Rio Tinto to develop an iron ore project in Western Australia.

Strategic supply

An investment in Jimblebar would give Baowu greater exposure to Australian iron ore at a time when China remains central to global steel demand and Australian producers depend heavily on the country as an export market.

For BHP, selling part of its Jimblebar holding could bring a major customer directly into the ownership structure while leaving the miner with control of the operation. For Baowu, a stake could provide closer access to the raw material feeding its production of steel sheet, coils, bars and rods.

Any transaction, however, would come against the backdrop of Australia’s increased scrutiny of Chinese investment in critical and strategic resources, potentially adding a regulatory dimension to negotiations.

(With files from Reuters)

 

Silver’s unsung strength

Adam Hamilton - Zeal Intelligence | September 4, 2026 | 

Stock image.

Silver sentiment has sure felt pretty apathetic to bearish recently, with traders wanting little to do with it. That’s understandable after silver was more than cut in half earlier this year. Yet despite that perception, silver is showing much unsung strength. It weathered a dangerous post-parabola collapse relatively well, and remains quite high compared to its own history and its primary driver gold. Such resiliency is bullish.

In late January, silver skyrocketed with gold to an all-time high near $116 per ounce. That climaxed a spectacular bull run with 455.2% gains over 27.8 months! Overall that really outperformed gold’s parallel monster record cyclical bull, amplifying its gains by 2.3x. But silver’s performance sure wasn’t uniform, lagging gold early on before shooting parabolic near the end to catch up. That terminal moonshot was wild.

In just 3.1 months into late January’s peak, silver catapulted an incredible 149.0% higher! As I warned in mid-January about a week before silver’s climax, that was a dangerous extreme parabola. Decades of studying market history has led me to define those as doublings within two-to-three months following massive bull runs. And such one-sided popular-speculative-mania greed-fueled moves always end badly.

I used the infamous example from January 1980 in that essay. Way back then silver skyrocketed a truly-astounding 196.1% in just 2.0 months into that insane peak! Those levels wouldn’t be seen again until a staggering 31.3 years later in April 2011! By March 1980 just 2.2 months after that climax, silver crashed a soul-crushing 76.9%! So I concluded that mid-January-2026 essay on silver’s parabola with sober warnings.

“Vertical moonshots are super-risky, nothing to be trifled with. … Traders should avoid chasing silver’s popular-speculative-mania gains, and gird for an imminent big-and-fast selloff.” A bit over a week later, silver would stretch an eye-popping 144.3% above its key 200-day-moving-average baseline! That proved a terrifying 46.0-year high in overboughtness, silver’s most extreme witnessed since January 1980!

So after such a hyper-risky parabolic moonshot, silver was absolutely due for a symmetrical collapse like after similar past blowoffs. Indeed it arrived swiftly with brutal violence. Right out of late January’s peak, silver crashed a gut-wrenching 27.5% in a single trading day! That was its second-worst daily crash ever extending all the way back to 1971! I wrote another essay in mid-February analyzing its dire implications.

The aftermath of January 2026’s wildest extremes in nearly a half-century sure could’ve been way worse. Silver could’ve again collapsed 75%+ in its necessary

post-parabola reckoning. For reference a 3/4ths loss would’ve sledgehammered silver all the way back near $29! Yet at worst in mid-July, silver ‘merely’ fell 52.3% over 5.6 months bottoming above $55. Considering that situation, silver actually proved fairly resilient.

While getting cut in half is a serious, massive selloff absolutely, that’s up near best-case-scenario territory following an extreme parabola. At mid-July’s post-parabola low, silver was down 21.9% year-to-date which certainly contributed to recent bearish herd sentiment. Yet that perspective is myopic, distorted by the post-parabola reckoning. Very impressively at that recent low, silver was actually still up 46.7% year-over-year!

Despite all the savage carnage in silver in the half-year into mid-July, it has still averaged nearly $74 so far in 2026. That’s a phenomenal 116.7% higher than 2025’s comparable YTD period into early September! So it’s surprising if not perplexing to hear traders and analysts increasing bagging on silver recently. Are their perspectives so narrow-minded they don’t see silver weathering a post-parabola bust with flying colors?

Being in the financial-newsletter business for over a quarter-century now, I am blessed to receive lots of feedback from subscribers. That offers a unique window into prevailing sentiment. I can’t remember a single e-mail in recent months that was bullish on silver! Everyone who bothered writing on silver was generally disappointed it had collapsed this year and expected those outsized losses to continue mounting.

Several weeks ago I was interviewed on a podcast, and after a long discussion on gold the host asked me why silver is performing so poorly. Despite seeing the bearish sentiment, I was kind of taken aback by that question. I responded saying I thought silver was faring really well this year, showing impressive resilience relative to gold. That shocked the host, who moved on because clearly I knew nothing about silver!

Maintaining perspective is everything in the markets, because we humans all have the natural tendency to extrapolate the latest moves we’ve seen out into infinity. Psychologists have studied this in great depth giving it different names including recency bias, availability heuristic, and hyperbolic discounting. It is a huge problem for traders, as overweighting the present emotionally greatly impairs buying low and selling high.

Letting a few days, weeks, or even months of the latest price action fully inform your trading outlook is insufficient. The minimum-necessary perspective is to consider all recent moves within the past half-year of context. But not long after silver’s extreme parabolic-spike anomaly, it’s necessary to extend that essential framing perspective well beyond that to the last few years or so. This hybrid silver chart suffices.

It includes standard silver technicals, but overlaid on the silver/gold ratio. Gold is silver’s dominant primary driver, with gold’s recent price action overwhelmingly fueling prevailing silver sentiment and thus trading. But rather than use the actual SGR in this chart which is a hard-to-parse decimal like the 0.015x midweek, the identical gold/silver ratio with an inverted axis is much easier to understand running 67.3x Wednesday.

Had silver just cratered by half in six months after a normal bull run, it would be catastrophic. But after shooting parabolic rocketing up 149.0% in just 3.1 months to its most-overbought levels since January 1980, getting cut in half is quite resilient. Post-parabola losses out of nearly-half-century extremes could have again cratered 3/4ths+! Silver’s unsung strength in recent months is really underappreciated by traders.

In July surrounding that post-parabola bottoming, silver averaged a bit over $58. That was still 55.0% above the comparable July-2025 average! Had you told traders anytime last year silver would be up at recent levels, they would’ve beenecstatic. Silver’s performance this year only feels weak if myopically considered just from late January’s parabolic climax. Yet its crazy extremes never had any chance to be sustainable.

Even during that inevitable and necessary post-parabola collapse since, silver has carved a massive bullish falling-wedge chart pattern just like gold’s parallel one. Those tend to resolve in strong upside breakouts, which indeed happened in gold, its miners’ stocks, and silver. Silver’s decisive breakout portends much-bigger gains likely in coming months. So did the depth of its post-parabola bottoming in mid-July.

Again a bit over $55, silver had plunged to just 79.7% of that baseline 200dma. That proved a 3.9-year low, the most oversold silver had been since September 2022 over a year before its late monster bull got underway! Silver’s huge 52.5% selloff over 5.6 months had eradicated all the hyperbolic herd greed into that parabolic climax, resetting the technical and sentimental stages paving the way for another big bull run.

Yet silver’s unsung strength in recent months is most apparent in the silver/gold ratio, which isn’t widely followed. You want to talk about weak silver? From January 2020 to September 2023 just before silver’s late bull got underway, the SGR averaged just 81.7x. In other words, it took 81.7 ounces of silver to equal the value of one ounce of gold. That was very poor historically, with longer-term averages around 55x to 60x.

From October 2023 to October 2025 during silver’s late bull before its final three parabolic months into late January 2026, the SGR was even worse averaging 87.3x! As the SGR line on this chart shows, silver seriously lagged gold’s monster record bull for the great majority of its duration. Back then silver was performing so dismally that I rarely bothered writing about it. Silver remained the precious-metals pariah.

The three months into silver’s parabolic peak and symmetrical three months after was again an extreme anomaly, like nothing witnessed in nearly a half-century. So SGR reads in that weren’t representative of anything sustainable, but for reference they averaged 66.5x on the way up then 62.0x on the way down. But it is what came since that reveals silver’s unsung strength, starting in May after that anomaly reversed.

Over these latest four-plus months as silver sentiment languished in the bearish gutter and its price got sliced in half, the SGR still averaged 65.4x! With the brief exception of that unsustainable parabola, silver hasn’t been this strong relative to gold since mid-2014. Despite its necessary and healthy post-parabola collapse, silver is still doing its best versus gold in a dozen years! Myopic bearishness on silver is misplaced.

 

World’s biggest money managers are rebuilding gold positions

Bloomberg News | September 4, 2026 | 

Stock image.

Some of the world’s biggest money managers have rebuilt their gold holdings after prices dropped, betting that long-term drivers of the precious metal will endure even as the US Federal Reserve takes a more assertive stance on inflation.

Amundi SA, Europe’s largest asset manager, bought bullion on the expectation it will return to $5,000 an ounce by year-end. Fund managers at Pictet Asset Management Ltd., Robeco Institutional Asset Management BV and Fidelity International Ltd. also added to holdings cut earlier this year, during bullion’s retreat from an all-time high.

“Gold is an asset that we consider to be cheap, a good hedge and reasonably liquid,” said Lorenzo Portelli, head of cross-asset strategy at the Amundi Investment Institute. But greater visibility over the Fed’s interest-rate path would be needed, he said, before the firm would consider adding to last month’s purchases.

That was a common theme in interviews with more than a dozen asset managers, whose firms manage a combined $27 trillion. Without exception, each of them — including BNP Paribas Asset Management and Manulife John Hancock Investments — had either added back gold in recent weeks or were maintaining bullish allocations.

But any breakout above gold’s recent ceiling near $4,600 won’t be smooth, many of the money managers said. Higher Treasury yields and increased bets for at least one Fed rate hike before year-end are undermining support for bullion, an asset that tends to be less favored when borrowing costs rise because it doesn’t pay interest.

Investors’ resolve was tested by Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh’s Aug. 28 speech at the central bank’s Jackson Hole symposium, where he warned that US inflation isn’t meaningfully slowing toward a 2% target — comments that triggered increased bets on monetary tightening.

So far, these potential speed bumps haven’t dashed the renewed conviction of long-term investors. Gold’s enduring appeal, some of the money managers said, lies in its value as a hedge within a broader investment portfolio.

“It’s become a much more acceptable asset,” said Arnout van Rijn, a portfolio manager for multi-asset and equity solutions at Robeco, a Dutch firm that oversees some $464 billion in assets. “It’s become part and parcel of every regular or normal portfolio.”

After a blistering rally backed by speculative capital took gold to an all-time high near $5,600 an ounce in January, the metal has spent much of this year in retreat. Elevated energy prices and inflationary shocks from the Iran war dragged it back to $4,000 in June. That’s when funds began to show interest.

“The downdraft to $4,000, if you didn’t own it already, was a very good buying time,” said Michael Cuggino, president of the Permanent Portfolio Family of Funds. “The long-term macro story is still in place and that’s bullish for gold,” he said, adding that “higher highs and higher lows” could be expected over time.

Bullion was trading near $4,400 an ounce in London on Friday afternoon.

For Robeco’s van Rijn, the catalyst for buying gold again was an acceleration in central-bank purchases during the second quarter. Official-sector demand recovered sharply in the period, with net purchases of 289 tons the highest for any second quarter, according to the World Gold Council.

Sophie Huynh, a portfolio manager and strategist for dynamic-asset allocation at BNP Paribas, was drawn back by a fading correlation between bullion and risk assets like equities — a trend that suggests gold’s traditional value as a hedge has returned after a period of speculative trading.

“The froth of gold has come off,” said Huynh. Instead, the metal is being powered by “fundamental drivers such as central-bank purchases and multi-asset managers looking for portfolio hedge.”

That renewed appetite for gold is reflected in funds’ net-long position tracked by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which rose in the week ended Aug. 25 to its highest level so far this year.

In one of the starkest warnings of recent weeks, Ray Dalio, the billionaire founder of Bridgewater Associates, said investors should reduce their bond holdings and put as much as 15% of their money in gold to hedge against the risk of a US debt crisis.

His comments came as long-term US Treasury yields rose to multiyear highs, a trend that prompted Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to announce more buybacks of long-dated debt. The unexpected move caused gold to spike and revived interest in the so-called debasement trade — like central-bank buying, another pillar of gold’s 2025 rally.

“You’re seeing money move out of the dollar and into hard assets — gold, Bitcoin being some of that — because there’s a loss of confidence in our fiscal credibility,” said Anthony Saglimbene, chief market strategist at Ameriprise Financial Inc., referring to the US.

Bullion’s recent recovery, added Kevin Khang, head of global economic research at Vanguard Group Inc., “is very consistent with people being concerned about the US dollar again as a store of value.”

Some of the asset managers interviewed by Bloomberg News said alarm around the world’s dominant reserve currency was overstated, but most agreed that a steady shift toward more diversified portfolios would provide a lasting platform for bullion to appreciate.

Though there’s “no obvious replacement” for the dollar, according to Christopher Hamilton, head of client investment solutions for Asia-Pacific at Invesco Ltd., that doesn’t prevent investors from “increasing diversification at the margin,” which may prove to be a more sustainable trend than any dramatic shift.

Gold, after all, makes up a relatively small share of Western investors’ portfolios, particularly after years of stunning gains in US equities. That means that even modest diversification has the potential to move bullion prices sharply.

And no matter how the Fed tries to tackle inflation — and the effect of these efforts on the gold price — investors are still inclined to hold bullion as a counter to macroeconomic and geopolitical uncertainty, said Tracy Chen, a portfolio manager at Brandywine Global Investment Management LLC.

Gold “should still hold value as a hedge against what the Fed can’t control,” she said.

(By Yihui Xie, Yvonne Yue Li and Jack Ryan)

 

New deals sharpen South America’s critical minerals edge

Cecilia Jamasmie | September 4, 2026 |

El Pachón is a major Glencore copper-molybdenum deposit in Argentina, near the Chilean border. (Image: Glencore.)

South America is moving to turn its vast mineral wealth into a coordinated production and investment hub as governments race to secure critical minerals for energy, technology and defence.

Chile, Argentina, Bolivia and Peru signed a joint declaration on strategic minerals on Aug. 28, establishing a regional framework to promote responsible mining investment, technical cooperation and deeper integration across mineral supply chains. 

The agreement was reached during the first ministerial meeting on strategic minerals in Chile’s capital Santiago, attended by mining authorities from all four countries.

The governments said the initiative is intended to position the region as a reliable strategic supplier of minerals needed for decarbonization, electromobility and artificial intelligence.

“Argentina, Bolivia, Chile and Peru’s pact on geology, regulation, suppliers, skills and finance could turn multiple markets into a more coherent investment proposition — but only if governments sustain coordination,” Mariano Machado, Americas principal analyst at risk intelligence company Verisk Maplecroft, said in a note on Friday.

Supply squeeze

The alliance comes as demand for critical minerals rises while production remains concentrated and new supply is slow to develop. 

Based on the current project pipeline, the International Energy Agency projects global copper supply could fall 25% short of demand by 2035, with new mines typically taking more than 15 years to reach production. 

Lithium faces similar pressures, compounded by stagnant greenfield exploration spending and rising discovery costs.

Latin America is well placed to help fill that need, according to a recent World Economic Forum report produced in collaboration with McKinsey & Co.

The region holds significant reserves of copper, lithium, nickel, graphite, manganese, rare earth elements and other minerals essential to electrification, the energy transition and digital infrastructure. 

Argentina and Chile together account for about 40% of global lithium reserves, while Chile and Peru hold roughly 30% of the world’s copper reserves. Brazil has about a quarter of global graphite reserves and 15% of rare earth reserves, according to the report.

The WEF said Latin America’s competitive advantage extends beyond the scale of its deposits to the complementary resources and industrial capabilities spread across its economies. At the same time, Western efforts to reduce exposure to China are directing mining investors towards new markets, putting the region near the front of the queue, Machado said.

The new declaration seeks to capitalize on those advantages by coordinating policy in areas including geology, regulation, suppliers, skills and financing.

One treaty, $20.7 billion

Chile and Argentina are already putting that approach into practice. The countries have cleared operating protocols for major cross-border projects, reducing uncertainty where mineral deposits cross an international boundary but encounter separate permitting and operating regimes.

Clearer rules could make such projects easier to plan and finance. Still, unions, communities and provincial governments are likely to push to retain jobs, investment and revenue on their side of the border.

According to Chilean mining and economy minister Daniel Mas, reviving the mining integration treaty with Argentina would unlock more than $20.7 billion in investment and add 540,000 metric tons of copper a year to the market.

The larger challenge is turning South America’s geological strength into the industrial capacity needed to capture more value from its resources rather than simply exporting mined material.

Brazil’s newly approved critical-minerals framework illustrates that ambition. It pairs roughly $1 billion in tax incentives and a new guarantee fund with a drive to expand domestic refining and production of batteries and magnets.

The support comes with tighter government oversight. A new council will be able to scrutinize foreign partnerships, ownership changes and mining titles, creating a trade-off between incentives for downstream development and greater state control over investment.

Verisk Maplecroft’s country-risk data identifies Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Peru as attractive critical-minerals markets because they combine large deposits with relatively lower resource-nationalism risks and improving operating environments.

But geological potential and regional agreements alone will not unlock the capital needed to develop them. Permitting, fiscal stability and policy continuity will determine whether South America can convert its mineral power play into new mines, processing capacity and a lasting place in global supply chains.

South America has the resources to wield greater influence over critical-minerals supply. The harder task is creating the investment conditions to turn them into production.

---

Latin America has been at the centre of a growing global power struggle this year, as governments and investors focus on who controls critical minerals and the supply chains behind them.
If the region matters to you, don’t miss MINING.COM’s regional series tracking the geopolitical forces reshaping it and why markets are increasingly driven by global alliances as much as local politics.