Latest news with #NEPA
Newsweek
6 hours ago
- Business
- Newsweek
Alaska Governor: Don't Blame Trump Tariffs for Copper Price Inflation
Record-high copper prices have some observers blaming the introduction of tariffs for the recent spike in prices. But pointing the finger at President Donald Trump misses the underlying problem. We need to increase our supplies of, and access to, copper and the other critical materials so vital to our 21st-century infrastructure. And whether we're able to expand access to copper and other important natural resources depends on four simple letters: N-E-P-A. "NEPA" stands for the National Environmental Policy Act, which has constrained the development of mining and refining facilities, and much else along with it, for decades. The law—or, more accurately, courts' and radical leftists' interpretation of the law—has resulted in incessant delays for important infrastructure projects, which get bogged down in never-ending red tape. In Alaska, for instance, the Ambler Mining District offers multiple deposits of high-grade copper totaling 9.3 billion pounds, as well as other critical minerals. Yet the Biden administration, after a years-long NEPA review, rejected permits for a road the state needed to gain access to the district, preventing the development of Alaska's natural resources for the good of all Americans. The Biden administration took this action to block the road last year even though federal law explicitly requires the Department of the Interior to permit access to the District. Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center at National Harbor in Oxon Hill, Maryland, on February 21, 2025. Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) at the Gaylord National Resort & Convention Center at National Harbor in Oxon Hill, Maryland, on February 21, 2025. ALEX WROBLEWSKI/AFP/Getty Images But NEPA doesn't just interfere with energy exploration. It impedes approvals for refineries that process raw ore, and slows down permitting for the bridges, railroads, and highways that companies use to transport finished products. While our adversaries like China have been building projects that can grow their economy, the radical Left has utilized NEPA to keep our infrastructure projects stuck in neutral. Fortunately, two factors should help to bring an end to this foolish regulatory overkill. First, the Supreme Court in a recent unanimous decision ruled that courts should not "micromanage" agencies' approval of environmental impact statements, and should instead give them "substantial deference." For instance, courts should not consider upstream or downstream impacts—such as the oil that might travel on a new railway—when evaluating the impact of a particular project (in this case, the railroad). The Court's ruling will rein in the ability of judges to collude with the environmental lobby in ways that prevent projects from ever getting approved. Second, President Trump, unlike his predecessor, wants to supercharge growth, and is taking numerous steps to move in that direction. Several of his executive orders, including a day-one executive order specifically dedicated to "unleashing Alaska's extraordinary resource potential," have focused on marshaling all our nation's natural resources to release our economy's full potential. The new National Energy Dominance Council will help coordinate these efforts, and the Supreme Court's ruling can cut through unnecessary permitting bureaucracy. In announcing his tariffs, President Trump said he wanted the United States to "once again, build a DOMINANT Copper Industry." With a new mine taking an average of 29 years to develop—the second-longest such process in the world—it will take permitting reforms and an impatience for red tape to see that vision through to success. Here's hoping that President Trump's actions and the Supreme Court ruling will help make it happen. Mike Dunleavy is the governor of Alaska. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
a day ago
- Business
- Business Standard
China leads the AI race as US struggles on energy, warns AI firm Anthropic
The United States is lagging behind China in terms of energy generation, warned Anthropic, a Silicon Valley artificial intelligence startup in its report. The company has urged Washington to cut down 'red tape' surrounding the power infrastructure development to stay competitive with China. Citing data from a February 2025 report by Australian think tank Climate Energy Finance, Anthropic stated that China, last year, added 400 gigawatts of power capacity, whereas the US only added 'several dozen', amounting to just one-tenth of China's total. Anthropic, the firm that is behind the Claude large language models (LLM), noted that the artificial intelligence sector in the US would require at least 50 gigawatts of power capacity by 2028 to maintain its leadership in global AI. It further mentioned that the disparity with China in terms of power capacity was 'concerning'. The report further added that while US President Donald Trump's Administration has already taken steps toward removing barriers by setting ambitious nuclear power targets and accelerating National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews, to compete with China, the US must take further action to address regulatory challenges that can delay energy projects. As the world's two largest economies engage in a tech race — from advanced semiconductor technology to artificial intelligence algorithms — energy generation has emerged as a critical new frontier. According to Matty Zhao, co-head of China equity research at Bank of America Securities, in an interview last month said that while the US capital expenditure on artificial intelligence was heavily focused on hardware like semiconductors, a significant chunk of China's artificial intelligence investments would go in building data centers, the energy infrastructure needed to support them. Earlier in May, billionaire and Tesla chief Elon Musk warned that the US could face power capacity issues related to artificial intelligence development by 2026, CNBC reported. The report comes at a time when China announced its plan to build a mega dam project in Tibet. With an estimated investment of about 1.2 trillion yuan ($167 billion) and an expected annual electricity generation capacity of 300,000 gigawatt-hours, the dam in Tibet would make it the world's largest hydropower facility. According to a report in South China Morning Post, China, in 2024, accounted for 71 per cent of the global rise in hydro power generation, adding more wind and solar power than the rest of the world combined. However, the Anthropic report suggests that in comparison, the US 'is not on track to meet the energy needs of AI training or inference by 2028'. This, according to the report, is partly because of regulatory issues, including the construction permits and approvals needed to build transmission lines. It further claimed, 'China – also vying for AI leadership – does not face the same set of regulatory constraints that we do. While China's infrastructure projects also required permits, regulators processed them far more quickly."
Politico
6 days ago
- Politics
- Politico
From green icon to housing villain: The fall of California's landmark environmental law
'The air is going to be cleaner, the water we drink is going to be purer and we are going to alert the people of California to the indisputable fact that the protection of our natural environment must rank as one of our major priorities,' Reagan wrote in an op-ed adapted from a speech. CEQA was heralded for ushering in a new age of clean air and water in an era when an oil-slicked river in Ohio caught on fire and Joni Mitchell sang about replacing paradise with a parking lot. It was relatively modest at first, requiring government entities to analyze and mitigate the impact of proposed public projects. President Richard M. Nixon signs the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) January 1, 1970. | Richard Nixon Library But two years later, a court case changed everything. A group of property owners in the Eastern Sierra region of majestic mountains and crystalline water sued to block a proposed development. Warning of issues with sewage, water and vanishing open space, they argued their county had erred in approving a permit — and they had backup from a new environmental unit created by the state's attorney general, Evelle Younger. 'Evelle Younger, a moderate Republican — remember when we had those? — he charged us with making him look good and doing good on the environment,' said Clement Shute, Jr., then a young attorney for Younger who would go on to become one of CEQA's most resolute defenders. The California Supreme Court's response would shape environmental and housing politics for generations. Justices ruled in 1972 that CEQA applied to private projects if they required a public agency's approval — in other words, virtually everything. 'Most activity that takes place is private activity, which usually requires a permit from the government, so if you want to make a real difference that has to be included,' said Nick Yost, an attorney who backed the homeowners as a young deputy attorney general. The impact was immediate. Many projects halted as lenders, builders, real estate agents, and 'anybody engaged commercially in putting two sticks of wood together descended on the Legislature in a panic,' then-Sierra Club lobbyist John Zierold recounted in an oral history. Industry backlash intensified through the years as CEQA continued to expand through various court rulings. In the mid-'70s, Dow Chemical launched a concerted campaign to dilute the law, which it faulted for stalling economic activity, and irate loggers drove their trucks around the Capitol, horns blaring, after a ruling applied CEQA to timber projects. CEQA has long been 'the scapegoat for everything,' said Shute, and 'under attack almost constantly' since its inception.
Yahoo
7 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Survey released on proposed new Luzerne County home rule charter
Jul. 17—In This Together NEPA Voting and Elections Manager Beth Gilbert said the organization's recent survey found 70.8% of Luzerne County voters who responded are unlikely or very unlikely to vote in favor of the proposed charter in the November general election. Approximately 1,000 voters completed the survey, Gilbert said. It was sent by text to more than 124,000 voters with cell phone numbers available to the organization, she said. Gilbert said the respondents were a "diverse sample" — 50.4% Republican, 37.9% Democrat and 11.7% Independent/other. Ted Ritsick, chair of the seven-citizen government study commission drafting the proposed charter, said he has issues with the survey because he believes the questions were "biased" in their wording and did "not tell the full story" of the reasoning behind the proposed changes. Ritsick also noted that there is no information on how many of the 1,000 voters regularly cast ballots in non-presidential election years. He said he would have to see the full data set for the survey to determine if conclusions can be drawn from the responses. He said he never received a dataset from the organization's last survey in May. "We will have extensive lead-up to the election, where we will have an opportunity to make our case as opposed to sensationalized surveys to people who don't necessarily have the context of what's going on," Ritsick said. "If anything, this tells us we have some work to do in communicating what we're doing and why we're doing it," he added. "I think we have a good product, and when people have an opportunity to understand the reasoning behind this they can make an informed decision." Gilbert's release said the survey was an opportunity for voters to "weigh in on major proposals" related to the proposed charter. "These changes would impact the independence of our Election Board, the future of ethics oversight and term limits for local elected officials," her summary said. "The results are clear: Luzerne County voters, regardless of their party affiliation, want accountability, not more political control." Election board Legal analysis from commission solicitor Joseph J. Khan, of Curtin & Heefner LLP, that said the Pennsylvania Election Code, or Title 25, is clear that election boards have employee appointment authority and other responsibilities currently performed by this county's administration. As a result, a commission majority concluded council must have flexibility to change from an all-volunteer, five-citizen board if the board's powers must increase to comply with state election law, which could include authority to hire the election director, choose the voting system and prepare annual election budgets. The proposed charter would keep the board at five members, require at least two Democrats and two Republicans and allow the four council-appointed members to then choose someone to serve in the fifth seat — all provisions in the charter. However, it would permit council to eliminate prohibitions barring county employees and elected officials from serving in these board seats. To make such a change in composition, council would have to amend its administrative code. Majority-plus-one council approval would be mandated for code changes related to the election board. In This Together said 91.9% of survey respondents believe the election board "should remain independent and bipartisan and should not be subjected to changes by county council." Also, 91.3% "support the current protections in place for the Election Board and do not support allowing political figures to serve on the Election Board," the organization said. Ethics commission Under the current charter, the county district attorney, controller, county manager or his/her designee and two council-appointed citizens (one Democrat and one Republican) serve on the commission that enforces the council-adopted ethics code. The proposed charter would keep the current commission structure plus two more citizens for at least the first two years. A majority-plus-one council vote would be required if council wants to change the composition after this two-year trial period. The proposed charter also would create an advisory committee, including citizens, that would make nonbinding recommendations on ethics code changes to council. In This Together said 90.5% of survey respondents "believe we should continue to have an independent ethics commission." Term limits The three-term limit in the current charter would be kept, but elected or appointed terms of two years or less would not be counted toward the limit in the new proposal. The revised charter provides a clean slate to the DA and controller by not counting terms prior to the new charter's effective date toward the three-term limit. In This Together said 91.7% of survey respondents support term limits for local elected officials, and 86.2% support "keeping existing term limits in place for current elected officials." Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes. Solve the daily Crossword
The Market Online
16-07-2025
- Business
- The Market Online
The fast track to gold production is underway in Nevada
Lahontan Gold Corp. has been gaining ground fast in 2025 with drill rigs turning at the Santa Fe project in Nevada. Fresh permits just green lit and a full scale metallurgical testing program now underway. It's all part of an aggressive push to unlock near term production potential at one of the state's most promising past producing gold and silver sites. Now, joining me today is the powerhouse behind it all. Kimberly Ann, the Founder, President, CEO and Executive Chair of Lahontan Gold. She's a deal maker, a builder, and one of the most driven voices in the junior mining space right now The following is a transcription of the above video, and The Market Online has edited it for clarity Lyndsay: Let's just get right to it because I'm sure there's more information that you can actually roll out for us. Right out of the gate, though a lot has really been happening already this year for all of you. New drill campaigns, more permits and now metallurgy. I mean, can you walk us through how it's all coming together and what you're really trying to accomplish this year at Santa Fe? Kimberly Ann: Absolutely. First of all, we're up over 350% since the beginning of the year. And you know, the goal here is, let's not forget, is to make money. So my number one goal is to make money for our shareholders and for the company. And that means fast tracking Santa Fe back into production as fast as possible. So we're deep in the weeds, as I like to say, of our permitting. We're about, oh my gosh, two and a half years into permitting. This is a mine under closure. The Santa Fe mine was in production from 1988 to 1994 open pit heap leach. So inexpensive and, and we're considered a mine under closure. So for us, fast tracking it back into production really is fast tracking because there's so many things we already know about the project that we don't have to spend the dollars and time to do. Kimberly Ann: So, where we sit today is we're about ready to hit the NEPA phase of our permitting, which means a comment period of the public. This is for the plan of operation, which allows us to draw out the project completely project wide. But also once we have that document in hand, then it goes into the mine permitting process. So it's quite complicated. But that being said, we are in Nevada. They just put president Trump just put gold on the critical medals list, which is fantastic. It's about time. And the legislation is really pushing the agenda forward. So it's really just about having people in the office that can help us get to the finish line. Why are we doing all this drilling and met work? Well, this project is 26.4 square kilometers. It's got massive upside of drilling. I mean, right now we have 2 million ounces. It's a great number. Our PEA looks great. We can make a heck of a lot of money right now, but there's so much to explore. So this last round of drilling was only about 1,800 meters and was specifically driven on four different areas to target. You know, where we can really massively expand in the Slab Calvada area. So once we get those drill results back, we'll go back in October, but I don't believe in, as, you know, wasting dollars. So we drill a little bit, let's get the results back and then go back at it. So that's underway. And then the metallurgical work you're talking about. Well, you know, every time we try to check a box on our permitting and try to de-risk this asset, there's more things that come up. For example, when we put out our PEA in December the recoveries weren't what I would like to see them at. For example, over at our Slab Calvada area, the recoveries from historic mining was 63%. And because we use a third party to write these reports, they would only put in 50% because they didn't specifically do the work. Which, you know, this 43-101 process, you know, upsets me as a CEO because I can't actually tell the public the truth in a lot of ways. And 13% is a huge amount when you're talking about recovery. So when we put out our PEA, we have a checklist of everything that has to happen to get us to the finish line and get the numbers we actually need to see. And that's what we're doing. So we're checking every box that they want see to you know, bring up the recoveries and all the different deposits because we have four different deposits that we know of on the property and we're just going through that list, just checking 'em all off. In Q1 of next year we can be talking about, okay, here's the new resource estimate and the PEA to come with all the new numbers. because we're so close to getting this permit that we have to have run a separate model internally to make sure that we really are moving X amount of rock versus what is publicly out in space, right? Because we all do these models at certain gold prices, et cetera, et cetera. Ours was done at 1950 gold, which feels like it was a hundred years ago right now. So all these things matter and you know, day by day that's what we're doing. Just de-risk, de-risk, de-risk. And moving it to the point where we're hoping by early 2027 we'll be breaking ground, which is a blink of an eye in mining as we both know. Lyndsay: I want to talk a little bit about some approvals, though. That new BLM approval sounds like a big deal. So what does it actually mean for your team on the ground and when do you think we'll start seeing drill results from this next round? Kimberly Ann: Good question. Well, I mean the permitting that we have gotten approved allows us to continue to drill under a notice of intent. It's acre by acre in a lot of ways. And so, we can do that incrementally as we go along. So it never stops us drilling when we're going for a plan of operation on the exploration side. But what it does do is once we have that document, we never have to go back to the Bureau of Land Management to get anything approved, which is amazing- Yes. But it's millions of dollars and a lot of time. So we've gotten through all of the studies, we call them the 'bugs and bunny' studies and we've had those approved, which is really important because now they can't come back and say, oh, I need you to go look for the raptors again, or, you know, they can't go back on their word. So we are at the point where those have been cleared and moving forward and that's taken us almost three years. So that's a really important part of the equation. But all those studies go into the mine permit. So it's a really big deal for the company to be where we are right now. Because now it's time of getting it out in the public space, letting them look at the document. We have no first nations, we have no communities around us at all. So it's not like we have a lot of people that are going to go, oh no, you can't go back into production. They're there to basically to be our workforce, which is three kilometers away. On the drill results, we should have our first round of drill results out next two to three weeks. So it's, it's we'll be in the next month. You'll see all of them. So very short timeline. Lyndsay: I want to actually also flip over and unpack the metallurgy aspect of that. So met testing, we all know is one of those things that sounds very technical, but it really actually does matter. So what are you hoping to learn from this phase and how much could that move the needle on the Santa Fe's overall economics? Kimberly Ann: Well, what we do know is we will be able to report what happened in the past, if not better. And that's specifically on the oxides. When we look at our transition and sulfide materials, we have shipped a thousand pound of this off to a third party that I can't really talk about who it is, but it's a new technology that they're doing that essentially turned sulfides into oxides which could be heap leachable and it's literally rock dependent. If it works, then it opens up so much for the company. Because We have high grade sulfides underneath all of our pits. I mean, amazing material that we're not even focused on right now because we have so much oxides ready to be mined. So, I mean, there is a lot to learn through this process and I think January will have information back. So it's going to be, if this, if this works, it's revolutionary to the industry because it changes our recoveries from, you know, 50% to 90%. So, you know, every percent counts. That's how much more money we'll make, right? Yeah. We're already going to print money at 1,200 cash costs all in for the company, and that's the first pass in our PEA and golds at what, you know, I mean it's really important and it's not sexy to the public, but it's sure as hell as sexy when you're looking at how much more money you're going to make in the process. Lyndsay: You've actually been quite vocal about the Santa Fe having near term protection potential. What still needs to fall into place, whether it's from a permitting, technical or operational perspective to make that happen? Kimberly Ann: It's simply the permitting process because every step along the way is, you know, them asking us to do more studies on air quality or you name it, they come up with it and we're there to facilitate that so we can move the project forward. But the drilling we are doing is simply to just add more ounces. And you know, right now the studies that we have on the PEA is 15,000 tons per day. I think that's probably going to get changed to 18,500 tons per day. So we're trying to like really put a narrow scope on it, right. Because the CapEx for it right now is a 130 million with 20% contingency. So a hundred million and that's not that much money to find, but we really want to get these numbers to per to as much perfection as we can before we are raising the money. Because, right now, next year I will be raising the money to build this thing. And people always say, well, how are you going to do that? At what market cap and blah, blah, blah. It doesn't matter what market cap we are sitting at the time. These are non-dilutive dollars. This is a rapid payback. So when you talk to debt funds, like I used to work for one, I know what they're looking for. 70% of that CapEx will be probably in debt. We also barely have any royalties on the project. So we have royalty flexibility and maybe we'll take equity, but right now let's just keep going and moving the share price forward and doing all the work on the ground that's necessary. Lyndsay: Looking ahead to the rest of the year, Kimberly, what's the one thing you think investors should really be watching for from Lahontan? What's the next big moment? Kimberly Ann: They should be watching every result that comes out because all of this is the breadcrumbs to production. And look, we've been trading at 10, 11 cents and in December we were at 2 cents and I think you probably remember we did have that block from Victoria. We finally got that out purgatory in December. And those were things that we didn't expect to happen, but they're done. And the reality is that block of shares has moved into fantastic hands that don't run a mine like our friends and aren't at risk for that situation again. So since then we're having massive trading volume and the stock keeps going up because people are starting to see this. So people should be getting in now because this the reason why I'm talking to you and everybody else I can because the stock is so inexpensive still right now. It's not going backwards, it's just going to continue to skyrocket. And the path to production of what we're going to build along the way from Santa Fe to West Santa Fe to mojo is massive. It's not going to, there's not going to be a sit around and wait for something to happen. It's going to be okay. We can now focus on west Santa Fe and start drilling that out, which is 10 kilometers away or satellite operation to be. There's so much going on right now and I just, I don't want to have a shareholder come to me in a year when we're trading it. God knows what that great number is and say, gee, I wish I would've heard your story a year ago. So at minimum get on our newsletter list so you get our information, my phone number, my email specifically is on there. Give me a call anytime. I love talking to our shareholders and buy some stock. You can find Lahontan Gold trading under the ticker symbol LG on the Venture and on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange under the symbol Y2F. If you're looking for a junior with big upside potential and real near term moves in play, check them out at This is one story that's not waiting around. Join the discussion: Find out what everybody's saying about this stock on the Lahontan Gold Corp. investor discussion forum, and check out the rest of Stockhouse's stock forums and message boards. The material provided in this article is for information only and should not be treated as investment advice. For full disclaimer information, please click here
