Novare Holdings invests in ReElement to expand rare earth refining in Indiana
American Resources, through its subsidiary ReElement Technologies, has secured an anchor investment from South African investment firm Novare Holdings.
This strategic funding is set to catalyse a significant expansion of rare earth element refining operations in Marion, Indiana, US.
The investment from Novare will unlock approximately $150m in financing, combining equity and debt, to enhance ReElement's refining capabilities at its 42-acre site.
This site, formerly the RCA-Thomson television factory, is being transformed into an advanced manufacturing hub.
ReElement Technologies CEO and chairman Mark Jensen said: 'This is a historic moment. With Novare as our anchor investor, we are not just expanding capacity – we are reshaping the global critical minerals supply chain.
'Together, we are proving that African capital can invest in America's best technology, and that same technology can deliver lasting value back to Africa. The former RCA factory in Marion will once again power American industry, and Africa will rise as a full participant in high-value mineral processing.'
ReElement's patented chromatographic separation technology, developed in collaboration with Purdue University, enables the production of ultra-pure light and heavy rare earth oxides.
The new capital injection will allow ReElement to boost its output of these high-purity elements, which are crucial for advanced technologies in commercial and defence sectors.
Novare's investment not only supports US technological growth but also sets a precedent for international partnerships that enhance economic opportunities between Africa and the US.
Furthermore, the partnership between ReElement and Novare extends to deploying the refining technology in Africa, where a significant investment from Novare will establish the continent's first multi-mineral refining facility.
This initiative aims to shift from the traditional mining model to one that promotes local industrial development and secure supply chains for manufacturing-grade minerals.
ReElement's refining platform, adapted from pharmaceutical purification technology by Purdue, offers a more efficient, scalable and environmentally friendly alternative to traditional solvent extraction methods.
The platform's programmability allows for the handling of various feedstocks and minerals, facilitating rapid deployment and minimal environmental impact.
Novare Holdings CEO Ola Leepile said: 'Novare is proud to stand behind ReElement as it scales groundbreaking American technology. This investment reflects our belief that African institutional capital has a powerful role to play in global industrial transformation.
'We are backing US innovation at home and abroad – supporting jobs and growth in Indiana and bringing long-overdue value addition and industrial development to the African continent.'
Furthermore, American Resources and ReElement Technologies have expanded their antimony refining contract to bolster the supply of ultra-pure antimony products for the US defence and commercial industries.
The extended ten-year agreement, with automatic renewals, is expected to generate more than $29m in annual tolling revenues.
"Novare Holdings invests in ReElement to expand rare earth refining in Indiana" was originally created and published by Mining Technology, a GlobalData owned brand.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
12 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
What ‘China shock'? Trade didn't wreck the U.S. economy
When Donald Trump first campaigned in 2016, he capitalized on a potent narrative: that China's rise gutted American manufacturing, leaving countless blue-collar communities devastated. Known now as the 'China shock,' that idea paved the way for a dramatic resurgence in protectionism, culminating in sweeping tariffs including Trump's controversial 'Liberation Day' duties. Yet we continue to learn just how shaky the theory's foundations are. Pioneered by economists David Autor, David Dorn and Gordon Hanson, the China shock trope suggests that American regions heavily exposed to Chinese imports suffered significantly greater job losses than did less-exposed areas. Populists seized upon it to argue that China's 2001 accession to the World Trade Organization caused millions of job losses in the U.S. and social disintegration. But a theory's easy and outsized application to policy does not settle questions about its accuracy. That's what American Enterprise Institute scholar Scott Winship wanted to determine in a recent comprehensive review that set out to prove whether the China shock reduced American manufacturing employment. By examining alternative studies and methodological adjustments, Winship contends that the negative effects of trade with China have been significantly exaggerated and that populist narratives blaming this trade for U.S. economic decline aren't supported by rigorous evidence. The originators of China shock examined how Chinese imports affected certain U.S. locales compared with others — not with the entire country — based on initial industry composition and employment size. By these metrics, areas heavily exposed to Chinese imports showed disproportionately worse manufacturing job losses. However, Winship points out that even if we accept these estimates, the findings suggest only relatively modest employment effects. To put things in perspective, Winship gives the example of two hypothetical commuting zones with 200,000 working-age residents and 20,000 manufacturing workers. Data from the theory's proponents indicate that moving from low (10th percentile) to high (90th percentile) exposure to Chinese imports would result in a loss of roughly 2,700 manufacturing jobs — just a 1.4 percentage point drop in overall manufacturing employment. While significant, this does not convincingly explain the community decline, social disruption, and populist backlash often blamed specifically on Chinese trade. In addition, Winship flags multiple methodological issues. Once other economists revised the proponents' methods, the estimated negative impact shrank dramatically. Various follow-up studies found the China shock effect on manufacturing employment to be 50% smaller than initially claimed. Further research revealed that job losses in exposed areas were often offset or even outweighed by employment gains in other sectors. One detailed Census Bureau study even found that firms with greater Chinese import exposure increased manufacturing employment, reallocating jobs to more efficient domestic production lines enabled by cheaper imports. Moreover, the steady decline in U.S. manufacturing employment began decades before China's WTO entry. Between the late 1970s and 2000, factory employment had already decreased substantially, mostly because of technological advances and shifting consumer demand. Notably, there was no sudden acceleration of this decline after China joined the WTO. The rate of manufacturing job losses remained consistent with earlier trends, undermining claims that Chinese trade uniquely devastated American manufacturing. Furthermore, former manufacturing workers generally did not face permanent unemployment. In fact, unemployment rates among this group were lower in recent years compared to the late 1990s, before the peak of Chinese imports. Many workers transitioned successfully into other sectors, belying the notion of an enduring displacement crisis. It's also worth noting that there are around a half of a million unfilled manufacturing jobs today. Despite these realities, the exaggerated narrative persists as a political force. Trump's tariffs — taxes on American consumers raising prices on everyday goods from cars to clothing — have greatly increased economic uncertainty. American manufacturers reliant on imported components face higher input costs, dampening their competitiveness and causing unintended layoffs. In fact, evidence from Trump's first term showed that his tariffs often hurt American firms more than their foreign competitors. With broader and higher tariffs, we can only fear the worst. Instead of doubling down on tariffs and isolation, we need to empower U.S. workers to adapt to economic changes, whether caused by trade or economic downturn. Economists have shown that to the extent that workers sometimes don't recover from shocks, it tends to be a failure to adjust because of obstacles erected by government. Winship's critical reassessment of the China shock clarifies the actual, limited role Chinese imports have played in manufacturing-employment trends. The real 'shock' America faces in 2025 is not from Chinese imports, but from a resurgence of misguided protectionism based on a misdiagnosed problem. The path forward harnesses trade's real benefits rather than chasing economic illusions. Veronique de Rugy is a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate.
Newsweek
13 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Set to Square Off With New German Chancellor Merz on Trade, Ukraine
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump will meet Thursday with new German Chancellor Friedrich Merz for the first time since Merz swept into power vowing to distance Germany from the United States. The centrist conservative German leader won an election in February with a promise to establish "independence" from Washington, signaling a potential break between the U.S. and one of its most important European allies. "Merz will be trying to create a positive working relationship, but he probably won't just come into the Oval Office and endorse Donald Trump's view of the world," said Jeff Rathke, the president of the American-German Institute, a think tank in Washington. The White House meeting between Trump and Merz will take place amid a backdrop of tensions between the U.S. and Europe over issues ranging from free speech to trade to Russia's war in Ukraine. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz takes part in the Bundestag's topical hour on transatlantic relations. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz takes part in the Bundestag's topical hour on transatlantic relations. Kay Nietfeld/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images Berlin and Washington have maintained a close relationship for decades, with Germany — the largest economy in Europe — serving as a key ally on economic and national security issues. Former President Joe Biden and Merz's predecessor, Olaf Scholz, maintained close ties even as they debated how to best aid Ukraine in its fight with Russia. But Merz signaled a new approach after winning the February election and forming a coalition government with his center-right Christian Democratic Union party and Scholz's center-left Social Democrats. Merz told the U.S. not to meddle in German domestic politics after Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio criticized Germany's intelligence agency for labeling the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) group a "right-wing extremist organization." Billionaire Trump ally Elon Musk had sparked an uproar in Germany by backing the AfD last year. "That is our business. We decide that, not the American government," Merz told reporters after he was sworn in last month. The episode followed Merz's election night promise to upend the transatlantic partnership. "My absolute priority will be to strengthen Europe as quickly as possible so that, step by step, we can really achieve independence from the U.S.A," Merz said at the time. "For Germany the partnership with the U.S. dating back to the Cold War has been a cornerstone of its policy," said Garret Martin, an expert on transatlantic relations at American University. "Real independence, depending on how you define it, would be a major shift." Merz's approach will be tested on issues like aiding Ukraine in the war with Russia. Trump is eager to end the conflict, but he has been far more critical of Ukraine than Russia since returning to the White House. More recently, the president's tone has shifted somewhat, marked by social media posts in which Trump wondered aloud "what the hell happened" to Vladimir Putin, who had gone "absolutely crazy." It's also unclear if Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress will approve more military aid for Ukraine once the current tranche of funding runs out later this year. From left, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk speak at the Presidential Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday May... From left, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, French President Emmanuel Macron, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Poland's Prime Minister Donald Tusk speak at the Presidential Palace in Kyiv, Ukraine, Saturday May 10, 2025. More Stefan Rousseau/Pool Photo via AP In contrast, Germany and other EU nations have promised to continue aiding Ukraine even without a negotiated peace in sight. Germany is the third-largest provider of aid to Ukraine, trailing only the U.S. and European Union as a whole. Merz has also joined other foreign leaders in criticizing Trump's trade war, a topic that will be front and center when the leaders meet at the White House. The administration is negotiating tariff deals with individual countries as well as the EU. The German leader would be wise to avoid provoking Trump on tariffs, said Emily Kilcrease, the director of the Energy, Economics and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. "Germany and Europe can work with the U.S. to address some of the concerns that [Trump] has raised," Kilcrease said. There are other areas where it may be easier for Trump and Merz to find common ground. Earlier this year Germany changed its debt rules to ramp up defense spending, an initiative backed by Merz that was passed before he took office. Trump has long urged NATO members to meet their defense spending obligations and may welcome Merz's efforts to boost Germany's defense industry. Under Merz, Germany has also taken steps to toughen its immigration system to reduce the number of asylum-seekers entering the country. The changes have been challenged in court, like many of Trump's own immigration policies in the U.S. "Immigration is an area where I imagine Merz would try to placate and court Trump," Martin said. FILE - Vice President JD Vance, right, speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, as President Donald Trump listens in the Oval Office at the White House, Feb. 28, 2025, in Washington. FILE - Vice President JD Vance, right, speaks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, left, as President Donald Trump listens in the Oval Office at the White House, Feb. 28, 2025, in Washington. Mystyslav Chernov/AP The two leaders are scheduled to attend a lunch together Thursday and also meet separately with a small group of advisers. Analysts said not to expect the public fireworks that marked Trump's meetings with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa. "Merz is not coming here to pick a fight," Rathke said. Germany understands "there are major tectonic shifts underway on the international scene, but they also want to preserve the transatlantic relationship to the extent they can."
Newsweek
14 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Hooters Closing Locations Across US: Full List of Restaurants Shutting Down
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Restaurant chain Hooters abruptly shuttered more than 30 company-owned restaurants across several states on Wednesday. The move, first reported by USA Today, follow the chain's Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in March, which did not warn of any closures. Hooters leadership said the company is committed to supporting affected staff. Newsweek has reached out to Hooters via email for comment. Why It Matters The sudden closures signal challenges for the popular American restaurant chain during a period of financial distress and rising industry costs. With more than 300 locations nationwide, the decision by Hooters—known for its skimpy uniforms and all-female waitstaff—to shutter dozens of outlets comes as the brand reassesses its business model and responds to inflation, changing consumer habits, and operational pressures. The development reflects broader instability within the U.S. casual dining sector, as chains try to adapt to evolving market demands while safeguarding jobs and customer loyalty. What To Know On Wednesday, Hooters confirmed the closure of more than 30 company-owned outlets across the United States. A statement issued to USA Today said the closures were a "difficult decision." The company cited the need to streamline operations as it undertakes bankruptcy restructuring. Hooters did not specify when employees were notified of the closures. List of Confirmed Closed Locations The following sites were confirmed closed, based on phoneline recordings and website removals tracked by USA Today on Wednesday: Sanford, Florida Orlando, Florida—Kirkman Road Kissimmee, Florida—Osceola Parkway Melbourne, Florida Atlanta, Downtown Douglasville, Georgia Gwinnett, Georgia Valdosta, Georgia Greenwood, Indiana Rockford, Illinois Newport, Kentucky Flint, Michigan Taylor, Michigan St. Louis, Downtown Charlotte, North Carolina—South Boulevard Columbia, South Carolina Rock Hill, South Carolina Murfreesboro, Tennessee Memphis, Tennessee—Downtown Nashville, Tennessee—Harding Place Grapevine, Texas Houston, 120 Farm to Market 1960 Road W San Marcos, Texas Additional locations in Madison, Wisconsin, and Fort Smith, Arkansas, appeared to be shuttered following removals from the company website and malfunctioning phonelines. Other sites reported closed include branches in Tuscaloosa, Alabama; Tallahassee and Jacksonville, Florida; Lafayette and Evansville, Indiana; and Detroit. Bankruptcy Filing and Restructuring In late March, Hooters' parent company HOA Restaurant Group filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, reporting $376 million in debts. The company plans to sell its 151 corporate-owned outlets to a group of franchisees led by its original founders, as part of a strategy to transition to an all-franchise model. Despite the bankruptcy action and closures, the brand said it "remains open to serve customers" and intends to continue normal operations during the financial restructuring. "For many years now, the Hooters brand has been owned by private equity firms and other groups with no history or experience with the Hooters brand," Neil Kiefer, CEO of the franchise group Hooters, said in a statement. "As a result of these transactions, the Hooters brand will once again be in the hands of highly experienced Hooters franchisees and we will be well-positioned to return this iconic brand to its historic success." Industry and Economic Pressures Hooters attributed the closures in part to inflation, increased labor and food costs, and waning consumer spending—trends that have placed financial pressure on many casual dining chains in the United States last year and this year. Earlier in 2024, Hooters had also shuttered additional underperforming outlets in states including Alabama, Kentucky, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia. These closures have impacted both small towns and major metropolitan areas. As of Wednesday, Hooters operated 305 locations—151 previously owned by the company and 154 by franchisees. Hooters also faced lawsuits over its business model of hiring only "Hooters Girls" to serve its customers. Additionally, It was forced to fork over $250,000 last year in a race and color discrimination lawsuit settlement brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. What People Are Saying Hooters said in a statement to USA Today on Wednesday: "We are committed to supporting our impacted team members throughout this process and are incredibly grateful to our valued customers for their loyalty and dedication to the Hooters brand." The restaurant chain also said in a statement on its website: "Hooters is here to stay, and with a stronger financial foundation and streamlined operations on the other side of this process, we will be well-positioned to continue delivering the guest-obsessed hospitality experience and delicious food our valued customers and communities have come to expect well into the future." Retail expert Dominick Miserandino previously told Newsweek that Hooters' financial difficulties were caused by "multiple factors," including an evolving business environment and market-wide challenges, as well as the company's "antiquated business model." What Happens Next Hooters expects to complete its restructuring within 90 to 120 days, pending bankruptcy court approval, after which the remaining locations will be operated by franchisees. The company said it will continue serving customers and supporting impacted staff at its ongoing locations throughout the process.
