Estimate says lithium-boron deposits 45% more than expected at Rhyolite Ridge
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — A new estimate indicates the Rhyolite Ridge mine site northwest of Las Vegas has 45% more lithium-boron deposits than previously calculated.
Ioneer, the Australian company behind the mine project, released the updated estimate less than a week after losing its biggest investor, a South African multinational mining company that dropped out citing low lithium prices. Ioneer is now the 100% owner of the Rhyolite Ridge project.
'Today's updated Resource reinforces the remarkable flexibility of Rhyolite Ridge's unique mineralogy,' Bernard Rowe, Ioneer's managing director, said in a news release. 'It allows Ioneer to match prevailing market conditions and blend our ore to produce a valuable boric acid coproduct, whose market is separate from the Project's primary lithium product.'
The mine site is in Esmeralda County, midway between Las Vegas and Reno. The mine was approved in October 2024. In January, the U.S. Department of Energy finalized a $996 million loan for the project
Only active lithium mine in US seeks expansion in Nevada's Esmeralda County
Analysis of samples from 12 drill holes completed in 2024 led to the 45% increase in the estimate. The analysis was completed by an independent mining consultant
'No other lithium project has this flexibility and economic advantage. In times of low lithium pricing as exists today, the Company can prioritize the high-boron ore (Stream 1) over the low-boron ore (Stream 2) to optimize the relative proportion of total revenue derived from boron,' according to Rowe.
Ioneer was not named in a lawsuit filed on Oct. 31, 2024, over the Bureau of Land Management's decision to approve the Rhyolite Ridge mine. A rare wildflower — Tiehm's buckwheat — found only at the site is likely to go extinct if the mine moves forward.
'This lawsuit is about much more than just preventing the extinction of Tiehm's buckwheat,' Patrick Donnelly, Great Basin director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said in a news release. 'The Bureau of Land Management's authorization of the Rhyolite Ridge Mine is a flagrant violation of numerous environmental protection laws, and the integrity of these bedrock conservation laws is at stake. We need lithium for the crucial transition to renewable energy, but the government can't break the law and drive species to extinction to get it.'
Tiehm's buckwheat grows on 10 acres that fall completely within the footprint of the boron- and lithium-rich soils of the Silver Peak Range in Esmeralda County.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
These Presidential Breakups From History Have a Lesson for Elon Musk
This week, the vaunted political marriage between President Donald Trump and multipreneur Elon Musk blew up in spectacular fashion, as both men — once a seemingly unstoppable force — traded barbs on their respective social media platforms. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election,' Musk posted on X. 'Elon was wearing thin, I asked him to leave,' Trump retorted on Truth Social. The blowup devolved into Musk saying Trump is in the Epstein files and the president's minions calling on him to deport Musk, a South African immigrant and naturalized citizen of the United States. Not since the Bennifer breakup — the first or second one, reader's choice — has a relationship's demise attracted such rapturous attention, especially in politics. But we have been here before. Presidents have long enjoyed symbiotic relationships with captains of industry and media. This isn't the first time such a relationship came to a bitter end. If history offers any insight, it's that these breakups always end better for the president than the mogul. Elon Musk is the richest man in the world, but the presidency comes with greater power and prestige. Just ask Nicholas Biddle. Biddle was a wealthy and influential Philadelphia financier who served as president of the Second Bank of the United States from 1823 until its closure in the 1830s. Born into a prominent family, he parlayed inherited wealth and social connections to become a central figure in America's early financial system. Under his leadership, the bank became a powerful and stabilizing force in the national economy, controlling credit and regulating state banks. Most historians today regard it as a successful precursor to the national banking system that emerged many decades later. Biddle was also the perfect embodiment of the nation's monied class. He viewed 'men with no property to assess and no character to lose' as social inferiors — so it was no surprise that he would eventually come to blows with President Andrew Jackson, an avowed populist. But for the better part of 1830 and 1831, Biddle put on a charm offensive. Even as he lined up support in Congress for the bank's re-charter, he attempted to ingratiate himself with the president, who in turn fired off vague smoke signals indicating that he was open to a dialogue. Jackson met with Biddle repeatedly and expressed no strong opposition to the bank — at least not publicly. Biddle, in turn, wrote flattering letters to and about the president and attempted to work closely with Jackson's key allies, including Senator Thomas Hart Benton and Vice President Martin Van Buren. More than a few people in the know were surprised that the bank president and populist chief executive seemed to have struck up a decent rapport. Until things inevitably turned sideways. When Jackson ultimately stuck to his populist guns and vetoed the bank's re-charter, Biddle, who was genuinely surprised by the move, undertook a furious and public effort to overturn the decision. He told Senator Henry Clay, an ally, that Jackson's message announcing the veto was 'really a manifesto of anarchy, such as Marat or Robespierre might have issued to the mob of Faubourg.' Jackson escalated the conflict in 1833 when he ordered that all federal government deposits be removed from the bank and placed in selected state banks. His goal was to drain the bank of its influence and effectively dismantle it before its charter expired in 1836. The ensuing debate was public and polarizing. Jackson announced his policy in a series of fiery public statements and annual messages to Congress, framing it as a defense of the common people against a 'monied aristocracy.' Biddle, meanwhile, defended the bank in editorials, letters and congressional testimony. Newspapers across the country took sides, and the issue became a litmus test of political loyalty: You were either with Jackson and democratic populism or with Biddle and financial conservatism. Biddle, who boasted that he had 'been for years in the daily exercise of more personal authority than any President habitually enjoys,' soon found his life in a downward spiral. His reputation, once that of a brilliant financial statesman and intellectual, was left in ruins as the bank's closure generated financial problems for its shareholders. Although he had long enjoyed the status of a cultured gentleman — financial engineer, patron to artists and writers — he grew politically toxic and isolated. After the bank's collapse, Biddle was sued for fraud and mismanagement. He was arrested on related charges in 1841 but never convicted. Still, the litigation and disgrace consumed his remaining years. Although he had once been wealthy, his fortune dwindled, and he died in 1844 at the age of 58, a broken man — largely forgotten and discredited in the eyes of the public. Jackson, of course, went on to serve two terms in office. His decision to kill the bank and remove the reserves threw the country into a massive financial panic — but that problem, as well as the blame for it, fell to his successor, Van Buren. Another case in point: William Randolph Hearst, the newspaper publisher, early movie mogul and two-term member of Congress. In the late 1890s and early 1900s, Theodore Roosevelt and Hearst shared a mutually beneficial, if uneasy, relationship. Hearst's newspapers, particularly the New York Journal, were strong proponents of the Spanish-American War, and through its sensationalist accounts of that conflict — critics derided it as 'Yellow Journalism' — his media empire made a national hero of TR, whose famous charge at San Juan Hill might never have been famous at all if not for Hearst. Though they overlapped ideologically on issues like trust-busting and anti-corruption — and, of course, a muscular foreign policy — their alliance was more tactical than personal. Roosevelt reportedly found Hearst vulgar and untrustworthy, while Hearst saw Roosevelt as an ambitious politician, lacking gravitas. Their mutually beneficial relationship crumbled when Hearst grew too big for his britches. The media mogul, who served two terms in Congress and made unsuccessful runs for mayor of New York City and governor of New York, complained that Roosevelt was 'a creation of newspaper notoriety.' He had made Roosevelt a famous man and assumed he could use that power to replace him in the White House. A bumbled run for the presidency in 1904 disabused Hearst of that illusion, but his acid relationship with Roosevelt only grew worse. The split became unmistakable after Hearst published inflammatory articles and editorials suggesting that President William McKinley's assassination was the inevitable result of capitalist corruption — a line of rhetoric that Roosevelt, deeply loyal to McKinley's legacy, found abhorrent. 'Wide and equitable distribution of wealth is essential to a nation's prosperous growth and intellectual development,' Hearst argued. 'And that distribution is brought about by the labor union more than any other agency of our civilization.' Roosevelt, in turn, called Hearst a 'swollen-headed liar' and accused his newspapers of fueling anarchist violence. Though Hearst's newspaper empire once dominated American public discourse, its credibility and power began to erode in the years after his split with Roosevelt, as yellow journalism fell into public disrepute. Moreover, his strident opposition to U.S. entry into World War I and later sympathy for fascist regimes in the 1930s cost him public and political goodwill. The 1930s saw his business empire drowning in debt. While he didn't exactly die in penury or obscurity, he spent his remaining years relatively quietly, in sharply diminished material circumstances. Finally, there is the case of Joseph Kennedy. Born to a well-connected Irish-American family in Boston, Kennedy parlayed early success in banking into lucrative ventures in shipbuilding, real estate, Hollywood film production and the stock market, where he made (and managed to preserve) a fortune by anticipating the 1929 crash. By the early 1930s, Kennedy was one of the richest men in America and increasingly influential in Democratic politics. He supported Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1932 campaign and was rewarded with a series of key appointments, ironically, as the first chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 1934. FDR saw Kennedy as the ideal regulator — someone who knew Wall Street's tricks and could, therefore, police it. Their relationship, cordial but pragmatic, reflected a mutual recognition of each other's political instincts and usefulness. When FDR appointed Kennedy to serve as U.S. ambassador to Britain — the first Irish Catholic to occupy the position — Kennedy began to envision himself as FDR's successor in the White House. That, of course, was not to be. While stationed in London, Kennedy grew deeply pessimistic about Britain's chances against Nazi Germany and became a leading voice for American isolationism, repeatedly breaking with the administration and warning against U.S. entry into another European war. His public statements, including a notorious comment in 1940 that 'democracy is finished in England,' outraged British officials and embarrassed the Roosevelt administration. FDR, who was moving steadily toward intervention and aid to the Allies, saw Kennedy's defeatism and political freelancing as liabilities. So, too, was Kennedy's virulent antisemitism, which placed him out of step with the increasingly liberal Democratic party. Their relationship collapsed entirely in 1940, when the White House compelled Kennedy to resign. FDR, who had once valued Kennedy's political acumen and fundraising prowess, now viewed him as a demagogue with alarming wealth and influence. As the American public rallied behind the president after the Japanese attack on Pearl Habor, Kennedy's future in public life dimmed. He turned his ambitions toward helping his oldest son, Joe Jr., achieve what he no longer could: the presidency. And when Joe Jr. perished in the war, his focus turned to another son, John F. Kennedy. To be sure, Musk has a lot going for him. He owns one of the most powerful media platforms in the country. He is the wealthiest man in the world. His companies have been singularly successful and provide him clout with foreign governments in need of anything from satellite capabilities to fight a war, to rockets able to reach space. But he's not the president — particularly this president, who has arrogated to himself unprecedented powers. Much like the rich men who came before him, Musk may soon learn that there is no breaking with the White House and coming out whole. It hasn't worked before, and if history is any guide, it seems unlikely to work today.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Australia's Afterpay says some BNPL users told to close accounts, then sold credit cards
By Byron Kaye SYDNEY (Reuters) -Some customers of Australia's Afterpay have been asked to close buy-now-pay-later accounts to qualify for a mortgage and offered a credit card upon qualification, the BNPL provider said on Tuesday, underscoring fierce competition in the consumer finance sub-sectors. BNPL loans, on-the-spot interest-free short-term loans with minimal credit checks, exploded as an alternative for younger shoppers after the COVID-19 lockdowns and stimulus payments spurred an online shopping frenzy. Customers are incentivised to pay on time by the promise of maintaining or increasing their borrowing limit. In a survey of 1,000 of its customers, Afterpay said more than 10% reported being offered a credit card by the same bank or mortgage broker that told them to close their BNPL account to qualify for a loan, without specifying which banks or brokers. Owned by U.S. tech billionaire Jack Dorsey's Block, Afterpay leads Australia's BNPL market with more than 3.5 million active monthly users, half the country's total BNPL accounts, according to government figures. Lenders are required by law to make reasonable inquiries about an applicant's finances but may not give financial advice. Spokespeople for Commonwealth Bank of Australia, the biggest lender, and No.3 lender National Australia Bank told Reuters that they did not tell applicants to close their BNPL accounts. A spokesperson for No.4 lender ANZ said the bank assessed BNPL liabilities alongside a person's other finances and "depending on the customer's overall financial position, goals, and objectives, they may choose to restructure or close certain debts – such as BNPL accounts – to support their application". TO RISK OR NOT TO RISK Afterpay claimed banks were capitalising on a perception of BNPL users as riskier than traditional borrowers to protect a declining lending category. Australian interest-accruing credit card debt is down 30% in half a decade as borrowers seek cheaper options. The company added that its survey found BNPL users had credit scores and on-time repayment records broadly in line with credit card users. The BNPL model has avoided regulation under Australian consumer credit laws so far as it doesn't involve interest. However, "if it looks and acts like credit, then it should be regulated as such," the Australian government had said last year. New legislation requiring BNPL firms to run credit checks on borrowers kicks in on Tuesday, which, Afterpay's Head of Public Policy Michael Saadat hopes, would improve transparency around user creditworthiness. The main reason Afterpay customers close their accounts is because their lender or broker told them to, and "this should not be something that is driven by misperception of the regulatory requirements," Saadat told Reuters in an interview. According to mortgage broker AFG, one in 10 Australian mortgages are arranged by brokers. Mark Hewitt, general manager of industry and partnerships at AFG, said the company does not distribute credit cards but responsible lending rules require it to "ensure adequate enquiry is made around an applicant's ability to meet their financial commitments".
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Australia regulator trials faster IPO process as listings hit decade low
By Christine Chen and Scott Murdoch SYDNEY (Reuters) -Australia's securities regulator said on Tuesday it would trial changes to speed up initial public offerings that are at a decade low by implementing recommendations from earlier reviews and allowing faster access for retail investors. The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) said the changes could shave as much as one week off the typical 20-week IPO process and reduce deal execution risk. The trial will begin on Tuesday and last for two years, the regulator said. "Creating a more streamlined IPO process underscores our commitment to ensuring our public markets remain attractive to companies and investors," ASIC Chairman Joe Longo said in a statement. Longo said the funds raised through IPOs were at the lowest level in more than a decade, with only A$4.2 billion ($2.74 billion) raised last year compared to A$22.9 billion in 2014. ASIC's new measures come just days after Virgin Australia launched a closely watched A$685 million IPO that attracted strong investor demand. ASIC said the changes applied to companies seeking to list on the Australian Securities Exchange (ASX) through "fast-track" status, with a projected market capitalisation above A$100 million and no ASX-imposed escrow. Most Australian IPOs are carried out through a front-end book-building process, which means the price is set and investor bids are taken ahead of the prospectus being reviewed and approved by Australian regulators. ASIC and the ASX have been under pressure to speed up the IPO vetting process, to reduce the time investors are exposed to market fluctuations while a prospectus is under review. Under the planned changes, companies would be able to submit a confidential prospectus or product disclosure statement at least 14 days before formal lodgement for ASIC review. ASIC said it would also adopt a "no action" position allowing eligible companies to begin accepting retail investor applications during the standard seven-day exposure period. Typically, retail investor orders are taken after the prospectus becomes public following the regulator's reviews. The trial was also a part of a broader review of regulatory settings around IPOs, ASIC said. "While we do not see regulatory settings as the silver bullet, we have received lots of ideas and are considering further regulatory adjustments to support a strong and well-functioning market," Longo said. ($1 = 1.5354 Australian dollars)
