The Conversation (0)
March 26, 2025
St-Georges Eco-Mining Corp. (CSE: SX) (OTC: SXOOF) (FSE: 85G1) announces that it has received preliminary results from surface sampling and early-stage mineralogical analysis on its Notre-Dame Critical Minerals Project, located within the Nitassinan, the traditional and ancestral territory, of the Innu First Nation of Mashteuiatsh in Québec. The results have confirmed the presence of niobium, tantalum, gallium and rare earths in multiple samples collected from a channel at surface and select drill intervals.
These results support the Company’s initial exploration hypothesis and reinforce the project's growing potential to host valuable technology and energy transition metals. The discovery stems from detailed earlier geochemical assays conducted over the past several months. The past and recent sampling reveal consistent anomalous values of niobium, tantalum, gallium and other rare earth minerals occur in multiple targets throughout the Notre-Dame Project. This new data confirms the presence of these critical elements in concentrations that warrant further investigation and support expanding exploration activities in the upcoming field season.
"These initial findings validate our ongoing efforts on the Notre-Dame Project and underscore the potential significance of this underexplored region," said Herb Duerr, CEO of St-Georges Eco-Mining. “(…) it is particularly encouraging to identify a carbonatite body that appears to extend at least 75 meters in length and up to 20 meters in width, based on limited early drilling. Even more significant is the surface mineralization, which can be traced consistently to depths ranging from 16 to 36 meters. Notably, every drill hole targeting the lens observed at surface successfully intersected the expected geological structure and encountered niobium mineralization at depth, with several intercepts over meaningful widths. Drilling has outlined 75 meters of strike along a shallow-dipping system that remains open at depth and begins virtually at surface (…)."
The company will initiate additional fieldwork this spring, including trenching, detailed mapping, and expanded sampling, to delineate mineralized zones and better understand the geological controls behind these critical metal occurrences. Further metallurgical testing will also be undertaken to assess the extractability of niobium, tantalum, gallium and the suite of rare earth minerals under the company’s eco-friendly approach.
The mapping, drilling, and sampling works carried out at the Notre-Dame Project in 2024 confirmed the presence of a carbonatite dike measuring 75 meters by 20 meters that is open in several directions and at depth, inside which anomalous REE, and Nb-Ta elements were found. Some analysis triggered the analysis overlimit threshold and will be sent to the labs for further analysis. The Company is providing the available preliminary results in the table below.
The Company’s surface sampling, taken from one channel of 8 meters at surface, yielded the following results with the lower number considered as a background value on the project:
Niobium (Nb) – from 100 to 2,360 ppm (143ppm to 3,376 ppm or 0.3376% of niobium pentoxide (Nb₂O₅)
Tantalum (Ta) – from 10 to 60 ppm
Gallium (Ga) – from 15 to 48 ppm
Total Rare Earth (TREEs) – from 200 to 4,000 ppm
The exploration drilling campaign yielded the following results in the table below on one of the targeted zones adjacent to the project access road. These values contained intervals of Nb that exceeded the assay detections limit of 2,500 ppm (in excess of 3,578ppm or 0.3578% of niobium pentoxide or Nb₂O₅)
Drill Hole # | From (m) | To (m) | Interval (m) | Nb ppm* | Ta ppm | Ga ppm | TREE ppm |
24-02 | 20.0 | 24.0 | 4.0 | >2,215** | 103.0 | 15 | 1,390 |
24-04 | 19.0 | 20.0 | 1.0 | 1,085 | 38.0 | 19 | 578 |
24-05 | 13.4 | 15.0 | 1.6 | 335 | 11.0 | 13 | 3,023 |
and | 15.0 | 21.0 | 6.0 | 845 | 22.0 | 15 | 1,008 |
24-06 | 13.0 | 16.0 | 3.0 | 470 | 18.0 | 9 | 1,320 |
and | 18.0 | 20.0 | 2.0 | 1,240 | 30.0 | 18 | 786 |
24-09 | 47.0 | 50.0 | 3.0 | >1,907** | 106.0 | 24 | 449 |
24-12 | 7.3 | 8.2 | 0.9 | 1,250 | 36.0 | 17 | 1,842 |
24-13 | 36.0 | 37.0 | 1.0 | 715 | 6.0 | 21 | 1,199 |
24-14 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 2.0 | 1,405 | 35.4 | 18 | 1,069 |
Channel-1*** | 0.0 | 8.0 | 8.0 | 670 | 17.0 | 15 | 1,217 |
included | 2.0 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 2,124 | 39.2 | 25 | 1,615 |
* | Geochemistry done via Li Borate Fusion Method with ICP-MS finish (ALS, ME-MS81) | ||||||
** | Assay value of some samples is greater than 2500 ppm Nb (over limit) and results could increase or decrease after further analysis | ||||||
*** | Mineralization in channel sampling conducted at surface intersected the same carbonatite at depth via drilling |
DRILL HOLES | |||||||||
Hole Name | UTM-X* | UTM-Y | Elev | Az(°) | Dip (°) | Length | Qty | From | To |
NDL24-02 | 682578E | 5441883N | 224 | N225 | -45 | 81 | 24 | L273389 | L273412 |
NDL24-03 | 682578E | 5441883N | 224 | N225 | -70 | 48 | 26 | L273363 | L273388 |
NDL24-04 | 682578E | 5441883N | 224 | N265 | -45 | 78 | 22 | L273341 | L273362 |
NDL24-05 | 682578E | 5441883N | 224 | N265 | -70 | 51 | 26 | L273315 | L273340 |
NDL24-06 | 682578E | 5441883N | 224 | N290 | -45 | 87 | 21 | L273294 | L273314 |
NDL24-07 | 682598E | 5441843N | 218 | N215 | -45 | 60 | 25 | L273269 | L273293 |
NDL24-08 | 682598E | 5441843N | 218 | N310 | -45 | 150 | 30 | L273239 | L273268 |
NDL24-09 | 682551E | 5441882N | 219 | N60 | -45 | 54 | 51 | L273188 | L273238 |
NDL24-10 | 682551E | 5441882N | 219 | N60 | -60 | 30 | 0 | No sample taken | |
NDL24-11 | 682551E | 5441882N | 219 | N140 | -38 | 21 | 13 | L273175 | L273187 |
NDL24-12 | 682564E | 5441874N | 218 | N315 | -45 | 54 | 13 | L273162 | L273174 |
NDL24-13 | 682564E | 5441874N | 218 | N50 | -45 | 69 | 50 | L273112 | L273161 |
NDL24-14 | 682564E | 5441874N | 218 | N235 | -45 | 51 | 11 | L273101 | L273111 |
Quality Control
An 8-meter surface channel was cut directly above the mineralized carbonatite intersected in drilling. The channel was sampled at 1-meter intervals, with cuts 20 cm deep and 2 cm wide. Each sample was geo-referenced, described, tagged, sealed, and placed in identified transport bags. These were securely shipped to Magnor Exploration Inc.’s warehouse in Saguenay, Québec, and then forwarded to ALS Laboratories for analysis. No company-inserted standards, blanks, or duplicates were included. Instead, ALS Laboratories added certified reference materials (OREAS L11, OREAS 232b, and OREAS 243), blanks, and duplicates upon receipt. Results were verified by an ALS geochemist.
All recovered drill core was stored in NQ-sized boxes, labeled, sealed, and securely stored before shipment to Magnor’s facility. The core was logged, measured, and geologically characterized. Selected intervals were tagged, split in half, sealed, and sent via secure transport to ALS Laboratories in Val-d'Or, Québec. Samples were crushed to 70% passing <2 mm, split by riffle splitter, then pulverized to 85% passing <75 µm. Geochemical assays were performed for 36 trace elements (including REEs) by lithium borate fusion with ICP-MS (ME-MS81). A separate analysis using four-acid digestion with ICP-MS was conducted for 60 trace elements, including lithium.
The technical information contained in this report has been reviewed by Jean-Paul Barrette Géo/ P.Geo, is is an independent project geologist and consultant. Mr. Barrette is a member of the Ordre des Géologues du Québec (OGQ, # 619). Mr. Barrette has sufficient experience (40 years) relevant to the style of mineralization and the type of deposit under study and the activity undertaken to qualify as a competent person as defined by NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 43-101, Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects. Mr. Barrette carried out several geological reconnaissance works in the Notre-Dame sector and recently made a of compilation of historical works.
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
‘Herb Duerr’
HERB DUERR
President & CEO
About St-Georges Eco-Mining Corp.
St-Georges develops new technologies and holds a diversified portfolio of assets and patent-pending Intellectual Property within several highly prospective subsidiaries including: EVSX, a leading North American advanced battery processing and recycling initiative; St Georges Metallurgy, with metallurgical R&D and related IP, including processing and recovering high grade lithium from spodumene; Iceland Resources, with high grade gold exploration projects including the flagship Thor Project; H2SX, developing technology to convert methane into solid carbon and turquoise hydrogen; and Quebec exploration projects including the Manicouagan and Julie (CSM) projects on Quebec’s North Shore, and Notre-Dame niobium Project in Lac St Jean.
Visit the Company website at www.stgeorgesecomining.com
For general information: public@stgeorgesecomining.com
The Canadian Securities Exchange (CSE) has not reviewed and does not accept responsibility for the adequacy or
the accuracy of the contents of this release.
SX:CNX
02 May
Deep-Sea Crisis: Can the ISA Regain Control of the Deep Ocean?
The world’s oceans are increasingly becoming an important new frontier in the geopolitical and economic race for critical minerals, with countries fast-tracking plans for deep-sea mining.
Meanwhile, the global body tasked with regulating such activities is struggling to keep pace.
As sovereign states ramp up efforts to access seabed resources crucial for clean energy and defense technologies, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) finds itself sidelined — raising alarms among environmentalists and nations alike.
Stoking these tensions, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order earlier this month with the aim of expediting deep-sea mineral extraction in both national and international waters.
The directive, which calls for faster permitting and exploration, bypasses multilateral negotiations at the ISA and uses a 1980 domestic statute — the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act — to justify the unilateral action.
The order “establishes the US as a global leader in seabed mineral exploration and development both within and beyond national jurisdiction," signaling Washington’s intent to secure independence from Chinese mineral supply chains.
But the move has drawn fierce criticism from multiple fronts.
“The US authorization ... violates international law and harms the overall interests of the international community,” said Chinese foreign ministry spokesman Guo Jiakun. Such sentiments echo concerns that unilateral actions could unravel decades of work toward collective seabed governance under the United Nations (UN) Convention on the Law of the Sea.
At the heart of the dispute lies the ISA, the UN agency responsible for regulating mining in international waters.
Though it has issued over 30 exploratory permits, it has yet to finalize rules for commercial extraction. That regulatory vacuum has encouraged countries to approach the issue alone and in accordance with their own different agendas.
Norway reverses course on deep-sea mining
In January 2024, Norway became the first country to approve commercial-scale deep-sea mining within its own exclusive economic zone, greenlighting exploration across 280,000 square kilometers — an area larger than the UK.
The move, passed through parliament despite strong domestic and international opposition, is part of the country’s bid to secure metals like cobalt, scandium and lithium for green technologies.
“We will have a relatively long period of exploration and mapping activity to close the knowledge gap on the environmental impact,” Walter Sognnes, co-founder of Loke Marine Minerals, a Norwegian company focused on deep-sea exploration, told the BBC in an interview at the time the news was announced
However, environmentalists argued that the plan undermined Norway’s own standards.
“The Norwegian government always highlighted that they want to implement the highest environmental standards,” said Martin Webeler of the Environmental Justice Foundation.
“That is hypocritical whilst you are throwing away all the scientific advice.”
The Norway Institute of Marine Research also criticized the government’s decision, saying the existing environmental impact assessment was based on limited data and not representative of the vast areas opened for mining. It called for an additional five to 10 years of research before proceeding.
Against that backdrop, Norway reversed course, suspending its deep-sea mining plans at the end of 2024 following mounting political and environmental pressure.
The first licensing round, originally set for 2025, was blocked after the Socialist Left Party threatened to withhold support for the government’s budget unless the initiative was halted.
India eyes Clarion-Clipperton zone, Pacific Islands at crossroads
For its part, India has announced plans to ramp up its presence in the Pacific's Clarion-Clipperton zone, one of the world’s most mineral-rich deep-sea regions. Although the ISA has already granted India two exploration contracts, the country has opted to hold off on operations as regulations remain in flux.
M. Ravichandran, secretary of the country's Ministry of Earth Sciences, said the country is seeking to apply to the UN-backed ISA next year to focus on exploring the zone.
Meanwhile, the resource-rich Pacific Islands are emerging as battlegrounds in this high-stakes race.
Kiribati, a small island nation with jurisdiction over 75,000 square kilometers of prospective seabed, is reportedly in talks with China after a previous deal with Canada's The Metals Company (NASDAQ:TMC) collapsed late last year.
In a statement dated March 17, the Kiribati government called discussions with Chinese ambassador Zhou Limin “an exciting opportunity” to explore its deep-sea resources.
But critics say such moves by smaller nations are often driven by economic desperation and can lead to exploitative outcomes. This tension is familiar in Papua New Guinea, where the failure of the Nautilus Minerals project left environmental damage and financial losses in its wake.
Some Pacific nations are now calling for a global moratorium on seabed mining, citing concerns about the unknown risks to ecosystems and the climate.
Patchwork governance, fragmented oversight
The race toward seabed mining is exposing a critical flaw in global governance: fragmentation. The ISA, which was supposed to provide a unified framework, is losing relevance as more countries chart independent courses.
“The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn’t restricted to the ocean floor: it will impact the entire water column, top to bottom,” Jeff Watters, vice president for external affairs at the Ocean Conservancy, told the Guardian.
A study by the Natural History Museum and the UK’s National Oceanography Center analyzing a 1970s test site concludes that some sediment dwellers were able to recover, but larger animals dependent on polymetallic nodules did not return — likely because the nodules, which take millions of years to form, were destroyed.
Despite these warnings, the Metals Company continues to push forward. It has said it plans to mine by the year’s end, pending US government approval, as CEO Gerard Barron remains unfazed by the backlash.
“Here there’s zero flora,” Barron told the BBC in a January 2024 interview. “If we measure the amount of fauna… in the form of biomass, there is around 10g per square metre. That compares with more than 30kg of biomass where the world is pushing more nickel extraction, which is our equatorial rainforests.”
Beyond environmental concerns, the deep-sea mining surge is reshaping geopolitical dynamics. China, which dominates global production and processing of rare earths, has long used its position as leverage in trade disputes. In response to US tariffs, Beijing recently introduced new export controls on rare earths — further intensifying the mineral arms race.
Trump’s executive order makes clear that seabed mining is now viewed as a national security imperative.
“It’s not just drill, baby, drill. It’s mine, baby, mine,” said Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum at a recent conference. “We will literally be at the mercy of others that are controlling our supply chains,” he warned.
But this approach risks setting a dangerous precedent. If powerful nations begin issuing their own licenses outside multilateral systems, others are likely to follow suit. The result could be a patchwork of conflicting claims and reduced protections, particularly for vulnerable maritime nations.
With the ISA still developing a mining code and more countries rejecting its pace, the world faces a dilemma: how to balance the urgent demand for critical minerals with the equally pressing need to preserve fragile marine ecosystems.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
02 May
Opportunity or Overreach: Is Australia Making the Right Moves for Critical Minerals?
Australia is currently betting big on critical minerals.
Government support is growing, with the country positioning itself as a key player in the global energy transition; however, some are convinced that the nation is rushing into a crowded race.
The Albanese government recently vowed to establish a critical minerals strategic reserve upon re-election, pledging an initial investment of A$1.2 billion. In an April 24 announcement, the government outlines that the reserve would build on the Australian government's extensive investment in critical minerals through two new mechanisms.
Does an Australian critical minerals reserve make sense?
National offtake agreements are one of the planned mechanisms. These would allow the government to acquire agreed-upon volumes of critical minerals from commercial projects via voluntary agreements, or to establish an option to purchase at a given price, holding security over these assets as part of the strategic reserve.
The second mechanism outlined is selective stockpiling, wherein the government promises to establish Australian stockpiles of certain key critical minerals produced under offtake agreements as required.
Following the government's announcement, Tania Constable, CEO of the Minerals Council of Australia, published a piece on the move, questioning whether a critical minerals strategic reserve is the best approach.
In her view, the initiative is “certainly not without domestic risk,” and “may impact the commercial viability of operations through continued downward pressure on commodity prices.”
She recommends that Australia focus on fundamentals that will give it back an edge over other mining nations.
“That means lower energy prices, a windback of draconian industrial relations laws, and faster environmental approval times," Constable's statement reads.
Australia's current critical minerals strategy
Australia’s current Critical Minerals Strategy is focused on the period from 2023 to 2030, and is centred on developing strategically important projects, attracting and unlocking investment and promoting the country as a world leader in environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance.
It also includes a commitment to reviewing the country's critical minerals and strategic materials list every three years, updating it in response to global strategic, technological, economic and policy changes.
As of writing, 31 critical minerals were recognised in Australia, plus six strategic materials.
AU$4 billion in total commitments are covered under the strategy, including AU$2 billion from the Critical Minerals Facility via Export Finance Australia, and an extra AU$2 billion in 2024.
In an article in the Australian, Lynas Rare Earths (ASX:LYC,OTC Pink:LYSCF) CEO Amanda Lacaze criticises the government's critical minerals policy, arguing that it is “flawed and uneconomical.”
She notes that even a significant portion of the fund wouldn't match Lynas' annual production costs. Lynas is recognised as the largest separated rare earths producer outside of China.
In a separate article written by the Australia-China Relations Institute, James Laurenceson, director at the University of Technology Sydney, says that the current strategy may be too optimistic.
In his view, the real problem is that Australia’s strategic partners aren’t delivering on their end of the supply chain further downstream. His recommendation is to focus on upstream activities like mining and processing, where Australia has a clear comparative advantage.
Critical minerals deals and funding heat up in Australia
Since the announcement of the Critical Minerals Strategy, Australia's critical minerals industry has seen various developments in mergers and acquisitions, as well as government project funding.
Notable M&A activity includes mining giant Rio Tinto's (ASX:RIO,NYSE:RIO,LSE:RIO) acquisition of Arcadium Lithium, first announced as an all-cash transaction for US$6.7 billion in October 2024.
Another is the AU$560 million deal between Pilbara Minerals (ASX:PLS,OTC Pink:PILBF) and Latin Resources, made legally effective last January. The transaction gives Pilbara ownership of Latin’s Salinas lithium project in Brazil.
On top of these acquisitions are government funding to accelerate critical minerals projects.
Under the Critical Minerals Facility, Iluka Resources (ASX:ILU,OTC Pink:ILKAF) received AU$400 million from the Australian government in December, granted for the Enneaba rare earths refinery.
According to Iluka, the refinery will establish Western Australia as a strategic hub for the downstream processing of rare earths. It is expected to produce neodymium, praseodymium, dysprosium, terbium and more starting in 2027.
Alongside these moves, Australia is strengthening its rare earths strategy.
On February 12, Australia passed the Critical Minerals Production Tax Incentive, which will provide a refundable tax credit on 10 percent of eligible costs associated with the production of critical minerals and rare earths.
“The incentives are valued at AU$7 billion over the decade,” said Federal Resources Minister Madeleine King.
“The passing of this legislation is a historic moment for the resources industry and a big deal for resource states like Western Australia and Queensland,” she added. “By processing more of these minerals here in Australia we will create jobs and diversify global supply chains.”
Will history repeat itself?
The Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI) states in an article that the critical minerals reserve would be an important step in securing Australia’s economic future, but warns that the nation must learn from “past mistakes.”
It points to the Pinjarra gallium refinery in Western Australia in its May 2 statement, saying that it represented one of the boldest critical minerals initiatives outside China in the late 1980s.
“Designed to produce 50 tonnes of gallium per year, it promised to place Australia at the heart of the global gallium and rare earths value chain, just as the modern world’s appetite for advanced materials was accelerating.”
However, in only a few years, Pinjarra encountered delays due to environmental permits; meanwhile, gallium prices crashed due to oversupply and China’s competitive spirit strengthened.
“Australia’s lack of midstream and downstream refining capacity added crushing costs and complexity,” ASPI explains in its commentary. “In short, Pinjarra had the ambition — but not the resilience — to withstand the inevitable shocks from operating in niche, high-risk commodity markets.”
The question ASPI poses now is: Can Australia guarantee that the same mistake will not be repeated?
According to the institute, Australia has the resources and strategic location.
“It must now summon the strategic patience and coordinated leadership needed to build true critical minerals sovereignty," ASPI concludes.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
02 May
Ontario Tables Sweeping Bill to Restrict Foreign Access to Critical Minerals
Ontario has introduced legislation aimed at tightening control over the province’s mining and energy sectors by limiting foreign involvement, fast-tracking resource development and scaling back species-at-risk protections.
The Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, 2025, also known as Bill 5, was announced at the Toronto Stock Exchange on April 17 by Premier Doug Ford and Energy and Mines Minister Stephen Lecce.
According to the government, the new bill is designed to “safeguard Ontario’s critical minerals, secure the province’s energy infrastructure, and reduce regulatory bottlenecks that hamper development.”
“With President Trump taking direct aim at our economy, it cannot be business as usual,” Ford declared during the announcement, referring to recent US moves to prioritize domestic supply chains for critical resources.
The proposed law would grant the Ontario government sweeping new powers over the mining sector.
These would include the ability to suspend or revoke mining claims, deny transfers or leases and limit access to Ontario’s Mining Lands Administration System — particularly for entities linked to “hostile foreign regimes.”
It would also allow the government to restrict foreign participation in the province’s energy sector.
“In today’s changing world, we need to be clear-eyed about the risks from those who want to exploit our resource bounty,” Lecce said in an April 25 press release that covers the legislation. “That is why it is essential that Ontario is protecting our critical minerals and energy sector from getting into the wrong hands.”
Kevin Holland, member of provincial parliament for Thunder Bay-Atikokan, added that the measures are especially significant for Northern Ontario, where the economy is deeply tied to resource extraction.
“Ontario is taking important actions to protect our mining and energy assets during this volatile time,” he said.
Rolling back environmental protections
According to the provincial government, the legislation is partially a response to concerns raised in a 2021 national security report in which Canada’s natural resources are identified as a strategic vulnerability.
However, the proposed legislation has sparked sharp criticism from environmental advocates who warn that Bill 5 undermines Ontario’s Endangered Species Act. It would be replaced with a much narrower Species Conservation Act that redefines what constitutes a species’ habitat.
Under current law, a habitat includes all areas a species needs to live, migrate and reproduce. The new definition reduces this to “a dwelling place, such as a den, nest or other similar place,” plus the immediate surrounding area.
Critics argue that this change all but guarantees habitat loss for vulnerable species.
“The definition of habitat is so narrow that what it means is less habitat than the species has now,” Laura Bowman, a lawyer with the environmental law charity Ecojustice, told CBC. “And less habitat than the species has now, for a species already in decline, virtually ensures extirpation or extinction,” she added
The bill would also eliminate the requirement for recovery strategies once a species is declared at risk — a key mechanism under the current law that sets out steps to restore populations to sustainable levels.
The legislation is part of Ontario’s push to accelerate development in the Ring of Fire, a mineral-rich region in the province’s far north. The Ford government has long touted the area’s potential to supply key inputs like nickel, lithium and chromite for electric vehicles and clean technologies. According to the government, Bill 5 will “cut red tape and streamline approvals” to jumpstart projects that are currently mired in lengthy environmental and consultation processes — often involving Indigenous communities whose territories overlap with planned developments.
Despite the growing need for secure critical minerals supply chains, the decision to pair national security rhetoric with the rollback of environmental protections is likely to ignite political and legal challenges in the months ahead.
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
29 April
Quarterly Activities/Appendix 5B Cash Flow Report
American Rare Earths Limited (ARR:AU) has announced Quarterly Activities/Appendix 5B Cash Flow Report
28 April
Western Australia to Fund 77 Mining Projects Through Exploration Grants
Western Australia’s Exploration Incentive Scheme (EIS) has announced another round of successful applicants.
In an April 23 statement, Mines and Petroleum Minister David Michael said 77 projects will benefit from total funding of AU$11.2 million. The projects are divided into three EIS programs: Round 31 of the Co-funded Drilling Program (CDP), Series 8 of the Energy Analysis Program (EAP) and Venture 2 of the Co-funded Geophysics Program (CGP).
A total of AU$7.8 million will be awarded as drill funding to 49 projects, while AU$3.2 million will be spread across 25 geophysics ventures. The remaining AU$200,000 will be divided between three projects under the EAP.
"The EIS plays a pivotal role in overcoming the financial barriers that often prevent early-stage projects from reaching their full potential, and we are committed to ensuring these opportunities prosper,” Michael said.
Among the 49 drill funding recipients are Wildcat Resources’ (ASX:WC8,OTC Pink:WDCTF) Tabba Tabba project and Western Mines Group’s (ASX:WMG) Mulga Tank, which are targeting critical minerals such as lithium, nickel and copper.
According to the government, approximately half of the drill funding recipients are targeting critical minerals, while 75 percent of CGP ventures are focused on uncovering new deposits.
Major diversified miner BHP's (ASX:BHP,NYSE:BHP,LSE:BHP) West Musgrave project, which is part of its Western Australia Nickel division, is among the latest recipients of CGP funding.
The project has been suspended since October 2024, and the new funding is expected to help advance development.
The EIS has assisted in advancing various projects over the years. Recently, Ora Banda Mining (ASX:OBM,OTC Pink:ESGFF) from Round 29 of the CDP identified high-grade gold mineralisation at its Little Gem discovery.
This round’s number of CDP recipients falls only one company short of the 50 successful applicants in Round 30, which was dedicated to projects drilling between December 2024 and November 2025. Round 32 of the CDP will open on August 4, 2025, while submissions for Series 9 of the EAP and Venture 3 of the CGP will have to wait until February 2026.
"I encourage all eligible companies to take advantage of the EIS and continue their valuable work in researching, exploring, and developing the minerals that are shaping our future," said Michael.
Don’t forget to follow us @INN_Australia for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
10 April
Canadian Election Candidates Unveil Plans to Fast Track Mining and Energy Projects
With Canada’s energy and critical minerals sectors at a crossroads, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre has unveiled a sweeping plan to overhaul the country’s resource project approvals process, fast tracking 10 major projects and pledging over US$1 billion in funding to open up Ontario’s mineral-rich Ring of Fire region.
At a Monday (April 7) press conference held in Terrace, BC, Poilievre introduced his “One-and-Done” policy — a streamlined permitting system aimed at eliminating regulatory bottlenecks and cutting multi-year wait times, which he blames for stalling development and weakening Canada’s global economic position.
Under the proposal, a new Rapid Resource Project Office would act as a centralized hub to manage all regulatory approvals across the federal and provincial levels. Each project would be subject to a single application and environmental review, with decisions promised within a year and a target of six months.
“After the Lost Liberal decade, Canada is poorer, weaker, and more dependent on the US than ever before, especially as a market for our natural resources,” Poilievre said in a release. “My ‘One-and-Done’ rule will quickly and safely unleash Canada’s natural resources by rapidly approving the projects Canadians need more of now: mines, roads, LNG terminals, hydro projects, and nuclear power stations, so we can stand on our own two feet and stand up to the Americans."
LNG Canada, Ring of Fire projects top Conservative agenda
Among the most significant commitments is the LNG Canada Phase II expansion in Northern BC, which would double liquefied natural gas output from 14 million to 28 million metric tons annually.
The expansion has faced numerous delays due to emissions caps and concerns over power supply.
A Conservative government, Poilievre said, would repeal federal legislation he calls obstructive — notably Bill C-69, which he brands the “No Pipelines - No Development Law” — and lift the emissions cap that could impede Phase II.
Also at the top of Poilievre’s list is development of the Ring of Fire — a vast area in Northern Ontario rich in chromite, nickel, cobalt and other critical minerals essential for electric vehicles and defense technologies.
Three weeks ago, Poilievre pledged that a Conservative government would approve all federal permits for Ring of Fire projects within six months and commit C$1 billion over three years to build a long-awaited access road connecting mineral deposits and Indigenous communities to the provincial highway network.
“We could boost our economy with billions of dollars, allowing us to become less dependent on the Americans, while our allies overseas would no longer have to rely on Beijing for these metals, turning dollars for dictators into paychecks for our people,” Poilievre said at the time, emphasizing the importance of supply chain security.
He also said companies operating in the Ring of Fire would be allowed to redirect a portion of their federal corporate taxes directly to local Indigenous groups, a move he argues would foster economic reconciliation and local buy in.
Nine other projects slated for acceleration
In addition to LNG Canada Phase II and the Ring of Fire road, Poilievre named nine other projects that his government would prioritize for review and approval:
- Suncor Energy's (TSX:SU,NYSE:SU) Base mine extension (Alberta): A 225,000 barrel per day bitumen expansion that has been under review since 2020.
- NexGen Energy's (TSX:NXE,NYSE:NXE) Rook 1 uranium project (Saskatchewan): A major uranium development awaiting Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission approval since 2019.
- First Mining Gold's (TSX:FF,OTCQX:FFMGF) Springpole gold-silver project (Ontario): A proposed gold-silver mine with an on-site mill, in review since 2018.
- Agnico Eagle Mines' (TSX:AEM,NYSE:AEM Upper Beaver gold-copper project (Ontario): A gold-copper underground mine pending review since 2021.
- Northern Road Link (Ontario): A key multi-use road to connect Ring of Fire deposits, under review since 2023.
- Canada Nickel Company's (TSXV:CNC,OTCQX:CNIKF) Crawford nickel project (Ontario): A nickel project and mill, pending since 2022.
- Troilus Gold's (TSX:TLG,OTCQX:CHXMF) Troilus gold-copper project (Québec): In federal assessment since 2022.
- Sorel-Tracy port terminal (Québec): A new terminal in the St. Lawrence industrial corridor.
- AuMEGA Metals' (TSXV:AUM,OTCQB:AUMMF) Cape Ray gold project (Newfoundland): In review since 2017.
Each of these projects has faced lengthy delays under the current review framework, Poilievre said, and would be reviewed immediately to identify and remove administrative barriers.
Carney outlines "One Project, One Review" agenda
At a campaign stop in Calgary, Alberta, Prime Minister and Liberal Party leader Mark Carney introduced the "One Project, One Review" policy, which is intended to expedite approvals for major mining projects in Canada.
The initiative aims to eliminate redundant federal and provincial environmental assessments by recognizing provincial evaluations, thereby streamlining the permitting process. The policy is designed to accelerate the development of critical minerals, such as lithium, cobalt and nickel, which are essential for clean energy technologies.
By reducing regulatory delays, the government would seek to enhance Canada's competitiveness in the global mining sector and support its transition to a sustainable energy future.
Carney told the crowd his goal is to make Canada an "energy superpower."
“We are going to aggressively develop projects that are in the national interest in order to protect Canada’s energy security, diversify our trade, and enhance our long-term competitiveness — all while reducing emissions,” Carney explained in a written statement on Wednesday (April 9). “We can lead the energy transition while ensuring affordable energy at home and building the strongest economy in the G-7.”
He pledged to expand Canada's critical mineral exploration tax credit to cover minerals used in defense, semiconductors, energy and cleantech. Carney also plans to broaden eligible exploration expenses to include technical studies and extend the clean manufacturing tax credit to support brownfield site development.
"This is huge,” Pierre Gratton, CEO of the Mining Association of Canada, told Bloomberg. “It includes an awful lot of stuff that we’ve been advocating for for a while, and not getting.”
He added, “This could really help increase Canadian production of critical minerals in the short- to medium-term.”
Don't forget to follow us @INN_Resource for real-time news updates!
Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.
Keep reading...Show less
Latest News
Latest Press Releases
Related News
TOP STOCKS
American Battery4.030.24
Aion Therapeutic0.10-0.01
Cybin Corp2.140.00
Investing News Network websites or approved third-party tools use cookies. Please refer to the cookie policy for collected data, privacy and GDPR compliance. By continuing to browse the site, you agree to our use of cookies.