Breaking
True Market Story
Author

admin

Browsing
5 Mins Read

Centurion Minerals

Investor Insight

Centurion Minerals offers investors an early-stage entry point into a strategically located gold exploration company positioned within one of North America’s most prolific and active mining districts. With a restructured corporate foundation, and a highly experienced geological and corporate finance team, the company is primed for value-creating discoveries.

investingnews.com

Overview

Centurion Minerals (TSXV:CTN) is a Canadian exploration company focused on the acquisition, exploration and development of precious metals projects in the Americas.

The company’s strategy is centered on advancing high-quality, early-stage gold assets through systematic exploration to define drill-ready targets and unlock the discovery potential inherent in its three-part claim package: the Newman, Noseworthy and Hepburn properties. Situated near major operations and new discoveries, these claims benefit from excellent infrastructure, year-round road access and proximity to proven mineralized structural corridors. Centurion intends to increase shareholder value through targeted geophysics, ground truthing and drilling programs designed to reveal new high-grade zones, as well as through potential future acquisitions of complementary gold assets across the Americas.

Backed by a leadership team with decades of exploration, geology, corporate finance and project development experience, Centurion is positioned to capitalize on strong gold market fundamentals and renewed investor interest in junior exploration companies. With a low current valuation and advancing work program, the company provides leverage to both exploration success and broader trends in the gold sector.

Company Highlights

  • Highly prospective gold project in a world-class district located in the central north Abitibi greenstone belt, adjacent to major deposits and producing mines including Hecla Mining’s (NYSE:HL) Casa Berardi mine and Agnico Eagle’s (TSX:AEM) Detour Lake operations.
  • Exceptional closeology advantage, with its Casa Berardi West project situated just 12 km from AMEX Exploration’s (TSXV:AMX) 1.6 Moz “Perron” discovery and along the same structural corridors that have produced multi-million-ounce deposits.
  • Significant historic drilling across the three claim groups, including results up to 38 g/t gold and multiple intervals indicating gold-bearing iron formations and shear zones.
  • Clear exploration strategy including historic data compilation, geophysical surveys, target generation and a planned program to define new mineralized zones.
  • Experienced management and technical team with decades of experience in mineral exploration, and international corporate finance, enhances the potential of uncovering additional exploration opportunities.
  • Low market capitalization and recently reactivated corporate structure, offering investors a low entry point ahead of meaningful upside catalysts.

Key Project

Casa Berardi West Gold Project

The Casa Berardi West project is Centurion’s flagship gold exploration asset, encompassing approximately 6,732 hectares across three contiguous claim groups – Newman, Noseworthy and Hepburn – located 66 km northeast of Cochrane, Ontario. The project sits along structural corridors that host some of the region’s most significant deposits, including Hecla Mining’s Casa Berardi mine (3 Moz past production, plus 4 Moz in reserves and resources), Agnico Eagle’s Detour Lake mine (15 Moz reserve, producing ~659,000 oz of gold per year ), and AMEX Exploration’s Perron discovery (1.6 Moz measured and indicated resource at 6.14 g/t gold).

Location of the three claim groups at Casa Berardi West

Geological Setting & Closeology Advantage

The project is situated within the central north Abitibi Subprovince, an Archean greenstone belt known globally for its prolific endowment of gold and base metals. The claims lie adjacent to geological features associated with multiple major deposits – iron formations, shear zones and VMS trends – creating strong analogues to high-grade gold mines such as the Musselwhite mine in Northern Ontario.

This “closeology” positioning significantly enhances the potential for Centurion’s ground to host similar mineralization.

Historic Results & Target Areas

Historic exploration across the Casa Berardi West project – spanning more than 70 RC and diamond drill holes – has already confirmed the presence of gold-bearing structures and favorable host rocks. Notably, previous work returned multiple samples above 1 g/t gold, including a standout result of 38 g/t gold, demonstrating strong mineralization potential across the claim area.

Significant historic drill results at Newman target

Across the three claim groups, drilling and geophysical surveys have identified key geological features associated with major deposits in the region, including iron formations, shear zones and sulphidized horizons. Several zones of interest remain untested or underexplored, particularly along structural trends that extend from nearby high-grade gold and VMS systems such as the Perron and Normetal areas.

These findings provide Centurion with multiple high-priority target areas for follow-up exploration, forming the foundation for its next phase of geophysical work and upcoming drill targeting.

Management Team

David Tafel – Director, President and CEO

David Tafel brings over 30 years of experience in corporate structuring, strategic planning, financing and executive management across multiple public and private resource companies. He has raised several hundred million dollars for ventures in mining, technology and life sciences, and previously managed private investment funds at Canada’s largest independent securities firm.

Jeremy Wright – Director and CFO

A seasoned financial executive with more than 20 years of experience, Jeremy Wright serves as president & CEO of Seatrend Strategy Group and has held CFO roles across numerous public companies in the resource and technology sectors. His background includes financial management, negotiations and environmental economics, supported by extensive board leadership experience.

Joseph Del Campo – Director

Joseph Del Campo has served as CFO and Interim CEO across several mining companies, including Unigold and First Nickel. With decades of corporate financial leadership and board experience, he contributes deep governance, audit and operational oversight expertise to Centurion’s board.

Mike Kilbourne – Geological Consultant

A veteran geologist with 40+ years of industry experience, Mike Kilbourne has managed over 100,000 metres of drilling across North America and Mexico, worked as a production geologist in multiple mining environments, and generated over 700 exploration targets for private and public companies.

Jamie Lavigne – Geological Consultant

Jamie Lavigne is a senior exploration geologist with more than 30 years of experience in base and precious metals. He has held senior technical roles with major mining companies and specializes in advanced exploration, resource delineation and geological modeling across global mineral belts.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By
11 Mins Read

World juniors highlights: Sweden, Czechia win semifinals

The USA’s quarterfinal ouster means the world junior hockey championship will have a new champion.

And Canada’s loss to Czechia in Sunday’s semifinal means North America’s six-year run is also over.

Sweden (2012) and Czechia (2001) will look to end long gold medal droughts at the tournament for the world’s best under-20 players when they face off in Monday’s championship game (8:30 p.m. ET, NHL Network).

Sweden got past Finland 4-3 in a shootout, avenging a loss in last year’s semifinal. Draft-eligible Ivar Stenberg had a goal and an assist and Chicago Blackhawks draft pick Anton Frondell scored the shootout winner.

Czechia ended Canada’s gold medal hopes for the third year in a row with a 6-4 victory, a wild back-and-forth game that saw Canadian Michael Hage awarded back-to-back penalty shots. Czechia’s Vojtech Cihar scored twice and Tomas Poletin had the winning goal go in off his skate.

Canada and Finland will play for the bronze medal on Monday at 4:30 p.m. ET.

Canada vs. Czechia highlights

Medal games

Monday’s schedule at the world junior championships:

Bronze medal: Canada vs. Finland, 4:30 p.m. ET

Gold medal: Sweden vs. Czechia, 8:30 p.m. ET

Best players

Canada – Tij Iginla, Zayne Parekh, Sam O’Reilly

Czechia – Adam Jiricek, Petr Sikora, Tomas Galvas

Final score: Czechia 6, Canada 4

Czechia will advance to the gold medal game against Sweden. This is the third year in a row that the Czechs have beaten the Canadians in the playoffs. Canada will face Finland for the bronze medal.

Gavin McKenna out of game

He receives two minutes for abuse of officials, plus a misconduct.

Czechia scores empty-netter

Vojtech Cihar gets his second goal of the game. Canadian players are furious. Czechia 6, Canada 4

Canada penalized

Cole Reschny is called for goalie interference.

Czechia retakes lead

The puck goes in off Tomas Poletin’s skate with 1:14 left. It’s reviewed and the goal is upheld. Czechia 5, Canada 4.

Canada’s Porter Martone ties game

The captain scores off a rebound with 2:41 left. Canada 4, Czechia 4

Czechia power play

Gavin McKenna is called for cross-checking. It was reviewed for a possible five minutes, but was ruled to be only two minutes. But the penalty ends early when the Czechs are called for too many on the ice, so it will be 4-on-4. Then Michael Misa is penalized for putting his hand on the puck on a faceoff, so it’s 4-on-3. Now we’re back to 5-on-5.

Czechia retakes the lead

Vojtech Cihar enters the zone with speed, fights off a check and roofs a shot to give Czechia the lead with 10:11 left. Czechia 4, Canada 3

Cole Reschny ties game for Canada

Reschny makes a power move to the front of the net and ties the game at 3:59. Canada 3, Czechia 3

Third period underway

3-2 Czechia. Winner will face Sweden in the gold medal game.

End of second: Czechia 3, Canada 2

Czechia goes ahead early in the second period and dominates play. Canada tuns it around to tie the game, but a late turnover leads to a last-minute goal by Adam Benak and a Czech lead. Michal Hage gets two penalty shot attempts and has also hit the post three times in the game.

Czechia retakes lead

The Czechs take advantage of a Canada turnover and break into the zone. Max Curran makes a great pass to Adam Benak for the score with 42 seconds left in the second period. Czechia 3, Canada 2

Michael Hage awarded penalty shot

He’s slashed on a breakaway. Hage is tripped by the goalie on the shootout attempt, so he goes again. He tries the same move, but is stopped. Still 2-2.

Canada ties it up

Zayne Parekh scores. It’s the defenseman’s 11th point of the tournament. There’s still power play remaining. Canada 2, Czechia 2

Canada power play

Petr Sikora is called for slashing and Tomas Poletin is called for delay of game. Two-man advantage for 1:39:

Canada pressing

After being outplayed early in the period, Canada is started to press. Shot counter is not moving, however.

Czechia save

Michal Orsulak stops Tij Iginla in tight. Porter Martone tries to go for the rebound and is wrestled to the ice.

Brady Martin injury update

He won’t return to the game, TSN reports. Big loss for Canada.

Czechia takes the lead

The Czechs pin Canada in its own end and the puck eventually comes to Adam Titlbach, who gives Czechia its first lead of the game. Czechia 2, Canada 1

Second period underway

Czechia has a carryover power play, but it’s over. Canada’s Brady Martin is not on the bench, per TSN.

End of first: Canada 1, Czechia 1

Their first meeting at the tournament featured 12 goals. This is more of a defensive battle. But the action picked up late as Canada’s Tij Iginla and Czechia’s Max Curran swap goals. Canada’s Brady Martin is shown grimacing on the bench after a collision.

Czechia power play

Jett Luchaenko is called for cross-checking after he’s shoved into Czech goalie Michal Orsulak. Jack Ivankovic stops Adam Novotny twice and the power play will carry over into the second period.

Max Curran ties it for Czechia

Curran is left alone in front and he scores off a rebound of a Tomas Galvas shot. Canada 1, Czechia 1

Tij Iginla scores for Canada

The Canadians look dangerous on the power play. Michael Hage has a great chance. Later, Michael Misa feeds Tij Iginla for the opening goal at 15:14. Canada 1, Czechia 0

Canada power play

Tomas Poletin is called for goaltender interference. Canada has the best power play in the tournament.

Midway through first

Defensive battle so far. Czechia leads 3-2 in shots.

Canada vs. Czechia underway

Goalies are Canada’s Jack Ivankovic vs. Czechia’s Michal Orsulak.

Canada-Czechia lines

Canada vs. Czechia rivalry

Czechia ousted Canada the last two years in the quarterfinals. Canada beat Czechia in the 2023 gold-medal game.

When is Canada vs. Czechia?

The game is scheduled to start at 8:30 p.m. ET.

Next up

Canada and Czechia will play in the second semifinal to determine the other gold-medal game opponent.

Sweden vs. Finland highlights

Final score: Sweden 4, Finland 3 (SO)

Sweden is heading to the gold medal game for the second time in three years.

Sweden wins in eighth round of shootout

Blackhawks prospect Anton Frondell scores to send Sweden to the gold-medal game. They’ll play the Canada-Czechia winner.

Shootout round five

Jack Berglund scores to extend shootout.

Shootout round four

Victor Eklund and Jasper Kuhta stopped

Shootout round three

Ivar Stenberg and Emil Hemming stopped.

Shootout round two

Anton Frondell stopped. Matias Vanhanen scores. 1-0 Finland

Shootout round one

Sweden’s Viggo Bjorck stopped as is Finland’s Leo Tuuva.

Shootout delay

They’re scraping the ice again.

Team Sweden will shoot first

Five-round shootout, then sudden death rounds if tied.

We’re going to a shootout

Finland hits the crossbar

There’s 32 seconds left in the power play.

Finland power play

Viggo Bjorck is called for slashing. Finland won last year’s game on an overtime power play.

Sweden chance

Petteri Rimpinen stops Viggo Bjorck for another time on an overtime breakaway.

Overtime so far

There’s 4:32 left. Good chances on either side.

Overtime underway

It’s 10 minutes of 3-on-3 sudden death before a shootout, if needed.

End of third: Sweden 3, Finland 3

2 minutes left

Tied 3-3.

Finland ties it up

Joona Saarelainen scores on a rebound of an Arttu Valila shot with 5:59 left to tie the game.

Sweden power play

Sweden on power play because of earlier call on Leu Tuuva. Sweden gets three shots but Finland kills it off. Petteri Rimpinen robs Jack Berglund.

Finland power play

Ivar Stenberg is called for tripping. Finland 0-for-2 so far. Finland gets chances but power play ends when Leo Tuuva is called for slashing.

Third period underway

3-2 Sweden. Winner goes to the gold-medal game. Loser plays for bronze.

End of second: Sweden 3, Finland 2

Two more strange goals in that period. Finland ties it up on a Sweden own goal and Sweden goes ahead after Petteri Rimpinen gets his stick stuck in the mesh after making a save. Shots are 20-15 Finland.

Finland pressure

The Finns hit the crossbar and two Swedish players break their sticks as Finland applies pressure late in the period. But Swedish goalie Love Harenstam dives out to cover the puck.

Sweden retakes lead on bank shot

Petteri Rimpinen is out of position with his stick stuck in the mesh after he make a save on Eddie Genborg. Genborg then banks in the puck off the goalie. Another strange goal in this game. Ivar Stenberg gets an assist for his second point of the game. Sweden 3, Finland 2

Finland ties it up on own goal

It’s an own goal as the puck comes off the glass and Swedish defenseman Alfons Freij puts it in off his goaltender as he tries to clear. Finland’s Jasper Kuhta get credit for the goal. Sweden 2, Finland 2

Sweden takes lead

Draft-eligible Ivar Stenberg scores through a screen on a delayed penalty. Sweden 2, Finland 1

Second period underway

Score is tied 1-1.

End of first: Sweden 1, Finland 1

The start of the game was nearly disastrous for Finland. Goalie Petteri Rimpinen misplayed a puck for a Sweden goal at 36 seconds. Then Sweden went on a power play 16 seconds later. Finland killed that off and settled down. They got a tying goal with 3:34 left in the period. Finland-Sweden games tend to be tight, and that’s the case again. Finland leads in shots, 11-7.

Finland ties it up

Atte Joki takes a pass atop the right faceoff circle, gets into better position and beats a screened Love Harenstam for the tying goal. Sweden 1, Finland 1

Finland power play

Felix Carell is called for delay of game for putting the puck over the glass. Sweden kills it off. Finland gets two shots and lead 8-4 in shots for the game.

Finland power play

Casper Juustovaara is called for slashing. Sweden kills it off.

Sweden power play

Heikki Ruohonen is called for tripping at 52 seconds. Finland gets a big kill, allowing no shots.

Sweden takes early lead

Linus Eriksson flips a shot toward the net and it goes in at 36 seconds as Petteri Rimpinen appears to misplay it. Sweden 1, Finland 0

Lucas Pettersson update

Sweden’s Lucas Pettersson is missing the game because he’s ill.

Sweden vs. Finland game underway

It’s Sweden’s Love Harenstam vs. Finland’s Petteri Rimpinen in net.

What channel is Sweden vs. Finland and Canada vs. Czechia world juniors hockey semifinals today?

TV channel: NHL Network

Livestream: Fubo, which offers a free trial to new subscribers, or Sling TV.

Watch world junior championships on Fubo

What time are Sweden vs. Finland and Canada vs. Czechia world juniors hockey semifinals today?

Date: Sunday, Jan. 4

Time: 4:30 p.m. ET and 8:30 p.m. ET (3:30 and 7:30 local time)

The Sweden-Finland game is scheduled to start at 4:30 p.m. ET and Canada-Czechia will start at 8:30 p.m. ET at the Grand Casino Arena in Saint Paul, Minnesota, the home of the Minnesota Wild.

World juniors hockey semifinals: How to watch, stream

Time: 4:30 p.m. ET and 8:30 p.m. ET on Sunday, Jan. 4

Location: Grand Casino Arena (Saint Paul, Minnesota)

TV: NHL Network

Streaming: Fubo and certain levels of Sling TV carry NHL Network.

World junior championships semifinals today

Jan. 4

All times p.m. ET

Sweden 4, Finland 3 (OT)

Czechia 6, Canada 4

Sweden has powerful power play

Sweden’s power play is connecting at 45% in the tournament, second only to Canada (47%).

Sweden vs. Finland lineups

Sweden players to watch

Blackhawks No. 3 overall pick Anton Frondell has five goals and seven points. Forward Jack Berglund (Flyers) and defenseman Alfons Freij (Jets) also have seven points. Forward Ivar Stenberg is expected to be a top draft pick in June. He has two goals and five points at the tournament.

Finland players to watch

Forward Heikki Ruohonen (Flyers) has two goals and six points. So does defenseman Lasse Boelius (Ducks). Finnish goalie Petteri Rimpinen (Kings) has played every minute of the tournament.

Sweden vs. Finland rematch

Sweden and Finland played in the 2025 semifinal, and Finland skated off with a 4-3 overtime victory. Benjamin Rautiainen scored the winner from a bad angle on the power play. Konsta Helenius, a Buffalo Sabres first-round pick, had four assists in the game.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Keep Reading
By
6 Mins Read

College football transfer portal tracker: Today’s commitments

The college football transfer portal opened Friday, Jan. 2, and players are flying off the shelf. The portal runs through Jan. 16, with an extra five-day window (Jan. 20-24) for teams playing in the national championship.

We’ll keep you posted with daily live updates of portal commitments.

Transfers by conference: SEC | Big Ten | ACC | Big 12

HIT REFRESH FOR UPDATE.

Today’s transfer portal commitments

QB

  • Alonza Barnett III: James Madison to UCF
  • Rocco Becht: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Cutter Boley: Kentucky to Arizona State
  • Jaden Craig: Harvard to TCU
  • Drew Dickey: Vanderbilt to Arkansas State
  • Billy Edwards Jr.: Wisconsin to North Carolina
  • Josh Hoover: TCU to Indiana
  • Katin Houser: East Carolina to Illinois
  • Colton Joseph: Old Dominion to Wisconsin
  • Lincoln Kienholz: Ohio State to Louisville
  • Alex Manske: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Mason McKenzie: Saginaw Valley State to Boston College
  • Kenny Minchey: Notre Dame to Nebraska
  • Aaron Philo: Georgia Tech to Florida
  • Jaylen Raynor: Arkansas State to Iowa State
  • Brendan Sorsby: Cincinnati to Texas Tech
  • Marcelis Tate: South Florida to Tennessee State

RB

  • David Avit: Villanova to Arizona State
  • Landen Chambers: Central Arkansas to UCF
  • Bill Davis: Louisiana to Virginia Tech
  • Jalen Dupree: Colorado State to Kansas
  • Jerrick Gibson: Texas to Purdue
  • Carson Hansen: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Caleb Hawkins: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Makhi Hughes: Oregon to Houston
  • Jekai Middlebrook: Middle Tennessee to Virginia
  • Turbo Richard: Boston College to Indiana
  • Abu Sama: Iowa State to Wisconsin
  • JaQuali Smith: Sacramento State to Colorado

WR

  • Karon Brookins: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Tychaun Chapman: Southern Miss to Memphis
  • Miles Coleman: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Brett Eskildsen: Iowa State to Penn State
  • RJ Garcia II: Bowling Green to FAU
  • Jayden Gibson: Oklahoma to South Carolina
  • Jackson Harris: Hawaii to LSU
  • Cody Jackson: Tarleton State to Iowa State
  • Marquis Johnson: Missouri to Mississippi State
  • Jalen Jones: Alabama State to Texas Tech
  • Donte Lee: Liberty to Texas Tech
  • Terrence Lewis: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Nick Marsh: Michigan State to Indiana
  • Christian Neptune: South Florida to Auburn
  • Kory Pettigrew: South Florida to Auburn
  • Jahmari Powell-Wonson: Maryland to FAU
  • Shamar Rigby: Oklahoma State to Wisconsin
  • Danny Scudero: San Jose State to Colorado
  • Victor Snow: Buffalo to NC State
  • Prince Strachan: USC to West Virginia
  • Raiden Vines-Bright: Washington to Arizona State
  • Wyatt Young: North Texas to Oklahoma State

TE

  • Richie Anderson: Fresno State to Texas A&M
  • Gabe Burkle: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Jayvontay Conner: East Carolina to Vanderbilt
  • Hayden Hansen: Florida to Oklahoma
  • Jacob Harris: Bowling Green to Wisconsin
  • Nate Kurisky: Louisville to Duke
  • Ryan Schwendeman: Southern Illinois to Wisconsin
  • Michael Smith: South Carolina to Syracuse
  • Mason Williams: Ohio to Ohio State

OL

  • Xavier Bausley: West Virginia to Marshall
  • Trevor Buhr: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Malachi Breland: Memphis to Arkansas
  • Nicholas Cruji: Maine to Charlotte
  • Johnny Dickson: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Coen Echols: LSU to Texas A&M
  • Valen Erickson: NC State to Liberty
  • Shadre Hurst: Tulane to Houston
  • Toriyan Johnson: UConn to Colorado State
  • Austin Kawecki: Oklahoma State to Wisconsin
  • Maasai King: Akron to Iowa State
  • Kuol Kuol II: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Desmond Magiya: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Logan Moore: UAB to Baylor
  • Ben Murawski: UConn to Michigan State
  • Braydon Nelson: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Netinho Olivieri: Penn to Pitt
  • Sione Perkins: Iowa State to Northern Arizona
  • Gavin Proudfoot: Northern Iowa to Iowa State
  • Connor Stroh: Texas to Kansas
  • Drew Terrill: Miami (Ohio) to Houston
  • Andrew Threatt: Charleston Southern to North Carolina
  • Will Tompkins: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Bennett Warren: Tennessee to Minnesota
  • Brady Wayburn: UConn to UCF
  • Christian Young: Emory & Henry College to Southern Miss

DL

  • Demetrius Ballard: Buffalo to Boston College
  • Justus Boone: Arkansas to Wisconsin
  • Ahmad Breaux: LSU to Kentucky
  • Josh Burnham: Notre Dame to Indiana
  • Blake Burris: SMU to FAU
  • Alijah Carnell: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Esean Carter: Toledo to UConn
  • Christian Davis: Louisiana Tech to SMU
  • Malachi Davis: Toledo to Rutgers
  • Ian Geffrard: Arkansas to Texas
  • Nate Henrich: Gannon to San Diego State
  • Carter Janki: Penn to Illinois
  • Daniel Jennings: Penn State to Virginia Tech
  • Lamont Lester Jr.: Monmouth to Colorado
  • Jonathan Maldonado: Nevada to Ole Miss
  • Dylan Manuel: Appalachian State to Colorado
  • Andrew Marshall: Eastern Michigan to Minnesota
  • Ryan McCulloch: Cal to UCLA
  • Antonio O’Berry: Gardner Webb to Kentucky
  • Tobi Osunsanmi: Kansas State to Indiana
  • Chidera Otutu: UTSA to Cincinnati
  • Khamani Potts: Grand Valley State to Colorado State
  • Kevin Roberts: West Florida to James Madison
  • Wisdom Simms: North Carolina Central to Purdue
  • Eamon Smalls: UAB to Kansas
  • Jordan Walker: Rutgers to Georgia Tech
  • Landyn Watson: Kentucky to Kansas
  • Solomon Williams: Texas A&M to Cal

LB

  • Caleb Bacon: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Cael Brezina: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Nylan Brown: Kent State to Washington State
  • Deven Bryant: Washington to USC
  • Ray Coney: Tulsa to Texas A&M
  • Kooper Ebel: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Jon Jon Kamara: Kansas to Wisconsin
  • Isaiah Patterson: UNLV to West Virginia
  • Austin Romaine: Kansas State to Texas Tech
  • Montreze Smith: Austin Peay to Iowa State
  • Keaton Thomas: Baylor to Ole Miss
  • Tavion Wallace: Arkansas to Kentucky

DB

  • Khalil Barnes: Clemson to Georgia
  • Tawfiq Byard: Colorado to Texas A&M
  • MJ Cannon: Bowling Green to Cincinnati
  • Nehemiah Chandler: South Alabama to Florida State
  • Tyran Chappell: UConn to Michigan State
  • Caleb Chester: Texas to Arizona State
  • DJ Coleman: Baylor to Florida
  • Jay Crawford: Auburn to Ole Miss
  • Jameel Croft Jr.: Kansas to Charlotte
  • Keshawn Davila: Arkansas to Kansas State
  • Zahmir Dawud: Villanova to Rutgers
  • Sharif Denson: Florida to Ole Miss
  • Christian Ellis: Virginia Tech to Virginia
  • Caleb Flagg: Missouri to UCF
  • Dylan Flowers: Western Kentucky to Duke
  • Quinton Hammonds: North Texas to Oklahoma State
  • Christian Harrison: Cincinnati to Arkansas
  • Anthony Hawkins: Villanova to Iowa
  • A’Mon Lane-Ganus: Auburn to South Florida
  • Kyon Loud: Montana to Duke
  • Darius Malcolm Jr.: Wofford to Memphis
  • Nateen Mitchell: New Mexico State to Colorado
  • Qua Moss: Kansas State to Tennessee
  • Marcus Neal: Iowa State to Penn State
  • Anthony Rogers: Nicholls State to Tulane
  • Jiquan Sanks: Cincinnati to Indiana
  • Hasaan Sykes: Western Carolina to Kentucky
  • Jaylen Thomas: San Jose State to Washington State
  • Devin Vaught: Maine to Michigan State
  • DJ Waller Jr.: Kentucky to Louisville
  • Keyon Washington: Bowling Green to Iowa State
  • Jontez Williams: Iowa State to USC
  • Lavon Williams: East Texas A&M Commerce to Illinois
  • Preston Zachman: Wisconsin to Indiana

K

  • Braeden McAlister: Georgia State to Arkansas
  • Max Gilbert: Tennessee to Arkansas
  • Eli Ozick: North Dakota State to Iowa
  • Gianni Spetic: Memphis to Texas

P

  • Mac Chiumento: Florida State to Texas

LS

  • Hudson Powell: Miami (Ohio) to Auburn
  • Dalton Riggs: UCF to Ohio State

College football 2026 transfer portal dates: When does transfer portal open, close?

The portal period now runs from Jan. 2-16, with an extra five-day window (Jan. 20-24) for teams playing in the national championship. The spring portal window in April is no longer a part of the schedule, so January is the only open window for teams to add via the portal in 2026.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Keep Reading
By
6 Mins Read

Kings vs. Bucks: Giannis scores 37 in win, Kings suffer more injuries

SACRAMENTO, CA – The Sacramento Kings lost their fifth consecutive game as they saw the return of guard Zach LaVine but lost key pieces, forward Keegan Murray and guard Keon Ellis, on Sunday night against the Milwaukee Bucks at Golden 1 Center.

Kings guard Keon Ellis injured his left thumb in the first half and did not return. Later forward Keegan Murray left the game with a left ankle injury with 4:01 left in the third quarter after colliding with Bucks center Myles Turner on a drive to the basket and landing awkwardly. The Bucks went on to win, 115-98.

Kings head coach Doug Christie told reporters he didn’t have an update on his injured players, but was understandably deflated that they went down, especially after getting Murray back on the court from a previous injury.

‘I don’t know yet. It’s not even for me to speculate,’ Christie told reporters after the game. ‘Obviously, we’ll get everything. You guys will know as soon as we do.’

Short in his response, Christie added: ‘It’s hard man. … it’s just difficult.’

Russell Westbrook led the Kings with 21 points. and LaVine had 20 points in 35 minutes off the bench in his first game back since Dec. 18.

‘I told Doug, I think I’ll be available for today. The last couple of games they’ve been asking me if I’m thinking about it or not,’ LaVine told USA TODAY Sports. ‘He told me he had me coming off the bench today and I said ‘OK’. I haven’t done it in a while but it was fine.’

LaVine added that his ankle is fine and he’s more worried getting conditioned and back in basketball shape.

‘Tired,’ LaVine said. ‘I haven’t played full court in an NBA game in nine games. My ankle feels fine. That’s why I wanted to make sure I was 100% before I came back.’

Giannis Antetokounmpo had a game-high 37 points and 11 rebounds. Kevin Porter Jr. recorded a double-double with 25 points and 10 assists.

‘I thought our non-Giannis minutes in the first half were phenomenal and that actually opened up the game for us because it allowed us to sit Giannis a little longer,’ Bucks head coach Doc Rivers said to reporters after the game. ‘I thought that was key. And then I thought overall we just were playing the right way.’

Kings vs. Bucks highlights

Sacramento trailed after the first quarter, 28-26, despite getting eight points a piece from Keegan Murray and DeMar DeRozan.

Zach LaVine came off the bench in his first game since Dec. 18. He scored five points in five minutes of action in the first.

Bucks opened the second quarter with a 9-0 run in 1:40. The Bucks’ lead climbed to as many as 20 in the first half. Sacramento, as a team, scored 18 points in the second quarter.

The Bucks led 62-44 after 24 minutes.

Milwaukee continued to pour gasoline on the flame. As they opened the third quarter on a 11-4 in first four minutes of the period, their lead grew to 25.

Kings forward Keegan Murray went down with an injury in the third quarter with 4:01 left after colliding with Bucks center Myles Turner on a drive to the basket. Murray received help from the medical staff as he limped off the court to the locker room.

Sacramento cut the lead down to 16 at the end of the third quarter. Bucks hung on to a lead, 85-69.

Kings looked to mount a comeback in the fourth quarter, as they turned up their defensive intensity.

They opened the quarter on a 12-0 run.

They cut the deficit down to 10 following back to back three-pointers from Dennis Schroder and Zach LaVine to open the period. They trailed 85-75 with 11 minutes left.

It was cut to a single-digit game on a Westbrook block and slow-step layup on the other side. That was followed by Schroder, who fired a midrange to bring the deficit down to six with under 10 minutes in the game.

Westbrook then stole the ball from Antetokounmpo and led the breakaway to find LaVine for a double-pump two-hand slam to bring the Kings within four points.

Westbrook forced a back court violation on Bucks guard Ryan Rollins as Kings continued to take advantage of their newfound life.

Momentum was halted briefly when Schroder fouled Kevin Porter Jr. on a three-point attempt with 8:22 left in the game.

The Bucks managed to extend their lead back to 10, as Antetokounmpo continued to get whatever he wanted in the paint and Porter from the outside.

Milwaukee ran the score back up and would win the game, 115-98.

Recap: Kings keys

  • Ryan Rollins can score: Rollins is rolling this season. He averages a little more than 17 points per game and shoots 42% from deep. Someone will have to take on the challenge of slowing him down. Rollins was slowed down, compared his previous games. He scored 12 points.
  • Greek Freak presence: Giannis Antetokounmpo is going to dominate the paint, as he usually does. He leads the league with 20.1 points in the paint per game. Make it tough, play physical and force him to earn those easy buckets at the free throw line. Antetokounmpo, indeed, did dominate this game, scoring a game-high 37 points and 11 rebounds.
  • Get defensive stops: This team likes to score, but they will also allow other teams to score as Milwaukee allows 116 points per game. Offense shouldn’t be a question, can Sacramento get stops defensively? Kings looked good defensively for a stretch in the fourth quarter, but it was short-lived. Overall, Sacramento had 10 steals and seven blocks. Westbrook, alone, had four steals and three blocks.
  • Compete for 48 minutes: Going to repeat this point of emphasis because it’s usually one quarter where the Kings have a lapse or lose focus or just simply don’t compete for 12 minutes and it costs them the game. It happened again against Phoenix. They have to fix that to have a chance to win. The game was arguably lost in the second quarter when the Kings were outscored 34-18. They even fought back from a 26-point lead to bring the game within three.

Kings next five games

  • Jan. 6 vs. Dallas Mavericks
  • Jan. 9 at Golden State Warriors
  • Jan. 11 vs. Houston Rockets
  • Jan. 12 vs. Los Angeles Lakers
  • Jan. 14 vs. New York Knicks
This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Keep Reading
By
2 Mins Read

First overall pick of 2026 NFL draft set, top 18 selections slotted

The Las Vegas Raiders are No. 1 − and former owner Al Davis would doubtless be sick about it.

But the Silver and Black’s current Commitment to Excellence unfortunately extends only to summiting the apex of the 2026 NFL draft order, the Raiders clinching − for lack of a better term − the spot Jan. 4 when the New York Giants, who cruised past Las Vegas 34-10 in Week 17, defeated the Dallas Cowboys in their regular-season finale. The Giants’ victory locked the Raiders into the league’s worst record, even though they improved to 3-14 by beating the Kansas City Chiefs on Sunday afternoon. But Las Vegas’ .538 strength of schedule, the weakest among the four 3-14 clubs, kept it in the top spot.

2026 NFL Draft first-round order

  1. Las Vegas Raiders (3-14, .538 strength of schedule)
  2. New York Jets (3-14, .552)
  3. Arizona Cardinals (3-14, .571)
  4. Tennessee Titans (3-14, .574)
  5. New York Giants (4-13)
  6. Cleveland Browns (5-12, .486)
  7. Washington Commanders (5-12, .507)
  8. New Orleans Saints (6-11, .495)
  9. Kansas City Chiefs (6-11, .516)
  10. Cincinnati Bengals (6-11, .521)
  11. Miami Dolphins (7-10)
  12. Dallas Cowboys (7-9-1)
  13. Los Angeles Rams (from Atlanta Falcons (8-9, .495))
  14. Baltimore Ravens (8-9, .507)
  15. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (8-9, .529)
  16. Jets (from Indianapolis Colts (8-9, .538))
  17. Detroit Lions (9-8, .490)
  18. Minnesota Vikings (9-8, .514)

(Note: Spots 19 through 32 in Round 1 will be determined by when teams exit from the playoffs, wild-card round losers slotting 19 through 24.)

Who will the Raiders draft first in 2026?

That will likely be a topic of some debate over the next four months, but Heisman Trophy-winning quarterback Fernando Mendoza from Indiana University will likely be the prohibitive choice − whether the Raiders use the pick or trade it.

Have the Raiders picked No. 1 overall before?

Yes, the then-Oakland Raiders chose QB JaMarcus Russell No. 1 overall in 2007 in one of the worst draft decisions in NFL history. Who could they have taken instead? Calvin Johnson, Joe Thomas, Adrian Peterson, Patrick Willis, Marshawn Lynch and Darrelle Revis all came off the board in the first half of Round 1.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Keep Reading
By
7 Mins Read

Tracking the top 20 quarterbacks in the 2026 transfer portal

As evidenced by the 2025 College Football Playoff final four, quarterback play is extremely important to win a national championship.

All four finalists ― Indiana, Oregon, Ole Miss and Miami ― used the NCAA transfer portal to find their ‘franchise quarterback’ to guide them to the semifinal round of the CFP bracket. That’s why the position will be just as important this offseason for filling out a future CFP berth.

CFP semifinalists like Indiana and Miami need a QB for the 2026 season, while Oregon could be in the market, depending on Dante Moore’s NFL draft decision. Penn State, Florida and LSU are three teams with coaching changes in need of a new signal caller.

And of course, don’t discount another Trinidad Chambliss committing to a program as a potential backup and emerging as a superstar, as Chambliss has during Ole Miss’ run to the CFP semifinal.

Here’s a look at our tracker for the top quarterbacks in the portal this season, according to the 247 Sports Transfer Portal Rankings.

1. Sam Leavitt

  • Old team: Arizona State
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Leavitt is the No. 1 overall player in the 2026 transfer portal rankings. He threw for 1,628 yards, 10 touchdowns and three interceptions in 2025.

2. Brendan Sorsby

  • Old team: Cincinnati
  • New team: Texas Tech
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

The Cincinnati QB is the No. 2 overall player in the portal, as well as the No. 2 QB. Sorsby is expected to be one of the most impactful players in the portal this cycle. He has totaled 5,613 passing yards, 1,027 rushing yards and 63 total touchdowns in two seasons with the Bearcats. Sorsby will take the baton from Behren Morton under center for the Red Raiders.

3. Drew Mestemaker

  • Old team: North Texas
  • New team: Oklahoma State
  • Eligibility remaining: 3 years

Mestermaker opted to follow his North Texas football head, Eric Morris, to Oklahoma State. He led the Mean Green to a 12-2 record during the 2025 college football season and to the American Conference Championship game.

4. Dylan Raiola

  • Old team: Nebraska
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Raiola suffered a season-ending broken right fibula against USC in early November, but should be ready to contribute to his next team in 2025. The former 5-star QB was originally committed to Georgia before flipping to have an opportunity to play as a freshman with the Cornhuskers.

5. Josh Hoover

  • Old team: TCU
  • New team: Indiana
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

Hoover has been entrenched as the Horned Frogs’ starting QB since his redshirt freshman season, making 31 straight starts for TCU. He has 9,629 career passing yards and 71 passing touchdowns, which lead all returning QBs in 2026. However, he needs to cut down on his turnovers, with 33 career interceptions thrown.

6. Rocco Becht

  • Old team: Iowa State
  • New team: Penn State
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

Like Mestemaker, Becht followed his former head coach, Matt Campbell, to his new destination at Penn State. He has made 39 career starts and could be someone to plug in right away in the Big Ten and play well.

7. DJ Lagway

  • Old team: Florida
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Lagway seemed to be the player who would save Billy Napier and the Florida program. However, following an injury-plagued 2025 season, Lagway is in the portal following Napier’s firing and the hiring of Jon Sumrall.

8. Byrum Brown

  • Old team: USF
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

Brown could follow his head coach, Alex Golesh, from USF to Auburn. He has been the perfect fit in Golesh’s offense with an FBS-best 42 touchdowns during the regular season. With 32 career starts, Brown is one of the most experienced QBs in the portal this cycle.

9. Deuce Knight

  • Old team: Auburn
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 3 years

Despite showing flashes of his potential for Auburn, Knight is in the portal and will play for a new team in 2026, with Alex Golesh taking over as the head coach. Knight finished 17-of-25 passing for 259 yards with two touchdowns and added 13 rushes for 178 yards and four scores as a true freshman.

10. Kenny Minchey

  • Old team: Notre Dame
  • New team: Nebraska
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Minchey completed 20 of 26 passes for 196 yards and rushed for 84 yards and a touchdown as the backup to CJ Carr after losing the QB competition this season. The redshirt sophomore could likely step in as a starter at Nebraska, who needs to replace Dylan Raiola.

11. Aidan Chiles

  • Old team: Michigan State
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

Chiles has never lived up to the promise he showed as a freshman with Oregon State, but he did show flashes with Michigan State under Jonathan Smith. He is in a prove-it year in his final year of eligibility and could still prove to be a good addition.

12. Beau Pribula

  • Old team: Missouri
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

The 2025 season was a trying one for Pribula, but he showed off his talent and toughness. He led Missouri to a 5-0 start behind 1,941 and 17 total touchdowns, but suffered a dislocated left ankle. Pribula returned in less than a month from the injury and started the final two games for the Tigers.

13. Colton Joseph

  • Old team: Old Dominion
  • New team: Wisconsin
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

The Sun Belt Offensive Player of the Year committed to Wisconsin on Sunday, Jan. 4. He threw for 2,624 yards and 21 touchdowns, while adding 158 rushes for 1,007 yards and 13 touchdowns, for the Monarchs in 2025.

14. Aaron Philo

  • Old team: Georgia Tech
  • New team: Florida
  • Eligibility remaining: 3 years

In two seasons with the Yellow Jackets, Philo has made just eight career appearances, but has shown flashes as Haynes Kings’ backup. However, with offense coordinator Buster Faulkner leaving for the Gators, Philo will continue his career in Gainesville, Florida.

15. Austin Simmons

  • Old team: Ole Miss
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Simmons began the 2025 season as the starter for Ole Miss, but lost his spot not due to poor play, but because of the emergence of Trinidad Chambliss following an injury to Simmons. The left-hander is expected to stick with Ole Miss for its playoff run before heading to Missouri.

16. Ethan Grunkemeyer

  • Old team: Penn State
  • New team: TBD
  • Eligibility remaining: 3 years

The redshirt freshman stepped into a starting role following a season-ending injury to starter Drew Allar. He started the final seven games, which included four straight wins to end the season. Grunkemeyer finished his first year with 1,341 passing yards, nine total TDs and four interceptions.

17. Lincoln Kienholz

  • Old team: Ohio State
  • New team: Louisville
  • Eligibility remaining: 2 years

Kienholz competed with freshman Julian Sayin for the starting position for the Buckeyes this past season. However, with Sayin’s strong season, the path for Kienholz is closed. He committed to Louisville and playing for coach Jeff Brohm on Jan. 3.

18. Cutter Boley

  • Old team: Kentucky
  • New team: Arizona State
  • Eligibility remaining: 3 years

Cutter Boley committed to Arizona State on Jan. 3 and will be in line to replace Sam Leavitt. As a redshirt freshman in 2025, he threw for 2,160 passing yards with 15 touchdowns and 12 interceptions. Boley started the final 10 games for Kentucky this season.

19. Katin Houser

  • Old team: East Carolina
  • New team: Illinois
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

The former Michigan State QB threw for 3,300 yards with 28 total TDs and 10 turnovers and led ECU to an 8-4 record. With his performance with the Pirates, he will to return to the Big Ten for his final year of eligibility at Illinois, replacing Luke Altmyer.

20. Jaden Craig

  • Old team: Harvard
  • New team: TCU
  • Eligibility remaining: 1 year

The Harvard star threw for 2,869 yards, 25 touchdowns and seven interceptions in 2025. Over his career, he has been a 24-game starter with 6,074 career passing yards with 63 career total touchdowns and 12 interceptions. He could prove himself for the NFL with a strong performance in the Power 4 conferences. He’ll replace Josh Hoover, who entered the portal and committed to Indiana.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

Keep Reading
By
11 Mins Read

Lithium Market Forecast: Top Trends for Lithium in 2026

The lithium market heads into 2026 after one of its most punishing years in recent memory, shaped by deep oversupply, weaker-than-expected electric vehicle (EV) demand and sustained price pressure.

In 2025, lithium carbonate prices in North Asia sank to four year lows, forcing production cuts and project delays as the industry grappled with the consequences of years of aggressive supply growth.

The second half of the year saw a rebound as lithium carbonate began a slow ascent. By December 29, prices had risen 56 percent from their January start position of US$10,798.54 per metric ton to US$16,882.63.

While volatility and brief price rallies highlighted the market’s sensitivity to sentiment and policy signals, analysts increasingly see the sector’s first-half downturn as an inflection point. With high-cost supply under strain and inventories gradually tightening, expectations are building that 2026 could mark the start of a rebalancing phase, supported by long-term demand tied to electrification, energy storage and the broader energy transition.

Battery energy storage systems to drive lithium growth

Energy storage is emerging as the fastest-growing pillar of battery demand, with major implications for the lithium market heading into 2026. Indeed, according to Benchmark Mineral Intelligence’s Iola Hughes, growth in this segment is accelerating well ahead of the broader battery market.

“We’re expecting about 44 percent growth (in 2025),” she said. That’s compared with roughly 25 percent growth across total battery demand. As a result, energy storage is set to account for about a quarter of total global battery demand in 2025, a share that is rising rapidly. The shift is even more pronounced in the US, where Hughes expects storage to make up a significant “35 to 40 percent of battery demand in the next few years.”

That growth is being driven by falling costs and the growing role of lithium iron phosphate (LFP) chemistry, which Hughes described as the dominant technology in stationary storage.

“It very much is the story of LFP right now,” she said, pointing to recent innovation and lower costs, which have helped to make LFP “the best chemistry” for most storage applications.

Globally, deployment remains highly concentrated. China and the US account for roughly 87 percent of cumulative grid-scale storage installations, but new markets are emerging quickly.

Saudi Arabia, Hughes noted, has surged from effectively zero to the world’s third largest market in a matter of months, deploying around 11 gigawatt-hours in the first quarter alone. “That really goes to show just how early this market is in its story,” she said; it also indicates how quickly new sources of battery demand can materialize.

Cost declines sit at the core of the expansion. Fully integrated storage systems in China are now approaching, and in some cases falling below, US$100 per kilowatt-hour. Hughes said this has fundamentally changed the economics of storage, making deployments viable even as policy support tightens. “The prices are so much cheaper, the economics are a lot stronger, even in a normal, unsubsidized environment,” she said.

In the US, growth remains concentrated in a handful of states — led by California and Texas — but Hughes stressed how early stage the market still is. New Mexico, now the fifth largest storage market, is built on just a few projects.

At the same time, the scale of energy storage projects is increasing rapidly. Giga-scale installations, defined as projects larger than 1 gigawatt-hour, are moving from novelty to norm.

Hughes said nine such projects are expected to come online this year, accounting for about 20 percent of battery demand, with more than 20 in the pipeline for next year, representing close to 40 percent.

Policy remains a key variable. While investment tax credits for storage remain in place in the US, Hughes warned that tighter sourcing and eligibility rules are reshaping supply chains, particularly for LFP. The pipeline of announced LFP gigafactories has grown sharply this year — up more than 60 percent — led largely by Korean manufacturers.

“We’re in a much better position when it comes to sourcing of cells for energy storage than we were even three months ago,” she said, though challenges remain around production tax credits and heavy reliance on Chinese cathode supply.

Underlying the storage boom is a broader shift in electricity demand.

After more than a decade of stagnation, US power demand is rising again, driven by data centers, AI, electrification and reshoring of manufacturing. Hughes said estimates now point to electricity demand rising 20 to 30 percent by 2030, placing energy storage at the center of energy security planning. “Storage has become a central topic in the energy security conversation,” she said, adding that its role will only grow.

Looking ahead, Hughes said LFP is likely to dominate shorter-duration storage, while sodium-ion and other battery technologies compete in longer-duration segments.

For the lithium market, the message is clear: as storage scales up in size, geography and strategic importance, it is becoming one of the most powerful demand drivers shaping the sector’s outlook for 2026 and beyond.

Lower costs driving LFP adoption

Howard Klein, RK Equity co-founder and partner, argued that falling costs remain a central driver of LFP battery adoption, reflecting a familiar economic dynamic: as prices decline, demand accelerates.

While lithium is a key input, he suggested that ongoing manufacturing efficiencies and economies of scale are likely to continue pushing LFP battery costs lower over time, potentially offsetting upward pressure from higher lithium prices.

Klein emphasized that even if LFP costs rise modestly, battery storage will remain highly competitive as a source of grid power. Compared with conventional generation options such as gas or coal, storage already offers a compelling cost and performance proposition, he said, and does not rely solely on subsidies to remain economically viable.

Geopolitical instability on the rise

Critical minerals are increasingly at the center of US foreign policy, and that shift is set to reshape the lithium value chain through 2026, according to Klein. He noted that geopolitics now underpins many of Washington’s strategic priorities, from Eastern Europe to Africa and the Arctic.

“The entire foreign policy agenda is largely being driven by critical minerals,” Klein said, citing regions including Ukraine, Russia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Greenland and Canada.

China’s willingness to weaponize its dominance in key supply chains has sharpened that focus.

On that note, Klein pointed to Beijing’s renewed rare earths export restrictions in October, noting that these measures were applied globally, not just against the US.

“They showed that they wield a significant negotiating stick, and they’re willing to use it,” he said.

In Klein’s view, that move has triggered a forceful response from western governments. “I think they’ve overplayed their hand to some degree, because now you’ve had this very big reaction from the US.”

That reaction is translating into a renewed push to localize and reshore critical mineral supply chains — an effort that has gained rare bipartisan backing in Washington.

“Unlike so many other things in America, which are hyper-partisan, both sides agree we need to resolve this,” Klein said, adding that the policy momentum will continue to shape the lithium industry.

While rare earths remain the immediate pressure point, Klein said the policy lens is widening. The US recently added 10 minerals to its critical minerals list, which now stands at a total of 60. Lithium, he said, sits high on that agenda, not out of enthusiasm for the metal itself, but because of its role in batteries.

“It’s an understanding by the government that batteries and battery technology are very, very important, and the entire battery supply chain needs to be supported,” Klein said. That support extends beyond lithium to graphite, manganese, nickel, cobalt and battery components such as anodes and cathodes.

The approach is increasingly coordinated across western economies. Klein described it as “a G7 effort,” with the EU and Canada aligned alongside the US through a mix of bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

That coordination is already translating into capital flows. He pointed to US-backed progress at Thacker Pass, EU funding for Vulcan Energy Resources (ASX:VUL,OTC Pink:VULNF) and a 360 million euro grant for European Metals Holdings (LSE:EMH,ASX:EMH,OTCQB:EMHLF) as early examples. Canada, he added, is also ramping up support.

“Canada announced C$6 billion over 26 investments,” Klein said, adding that more announcements are likely by the time the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada convention rolls around in March.

Klein sees geopolitics, industrial policy and supply chain security converging into powerful lithium tailwinds. “This is a super hot topic,” he said, and one that is likely to drive increased lithium-related activity well into 2026.

Should the US build a strategic lithium reserve?

To dilute China’s grip on the sector, Klein is advocating for a strategic lithium reserve in the US as a more effective and market-neutral alternative to company-specific subsidies. He argues that the industry’s core challenge is not demand, but extreme price volatility caused by global oversupply and what he describes as non-market behavior, which has driven prices below sustainable levels and distorted investment signals across the sector.

“The problem in lithium is volatile prices — prices below the marginal cost, catastrophically low prices that put companies out of business,” he said, pointing to persistent oversupply as the primary distortion.

In Klein’s view, a reserve would act as a counterweight by creating steady, large-scale demand that stabilizes prices within a sustainable range. “The main focus is to stabilize price … not at a super high level, but at a level where companies can make an economic return,” he said. That stability, he added, is essential to incentivize investment in mines, processing and conversion facilities across the US, Canada and allied jurisdictions.

Unlike targeted government support, Klein said a reserve would allow the market to determine which projects succeed.

“I want the market to decide which projects and companies are the best, not necessarily the government,” he said, noting the diversity of competing lithium resources, from US clay and brine projects to Canadian hard-rock deposits.

A more predictable price environment with fewer large swings would lower the cost of capital and give private investors greater confidence to finance viable projects.

Klein stressed that a lithium reserve should not be confused with a stockpile.

“People use ‘stockpile’ and ‘reserve’ like they’re the same thing, and they’re not,” he said. While a stockpile focuses on availability for emergencies, a reserve is designed as a market-stabilizing mechanism that can buy and sell material to smooth volatility. Availability, he said, is a secondary benefit.

He sees the concept as most relevant for mid-sized, fast-growing markets like lithium, graphite and other battery materials that lack deep futures markets and long-term hedging tools.

“Those are the markets that could be amenable to a reserve,” he said, contrasting them with large, liquid commodities like copper or very small, niche minerals tied mainly to military use.

Looking longer term, Klein said a lithium reserve aligns closely with the growth of EVs, energy storage, data centers and grid electrification, as well as geopolitical efforts to diversify supply chains away from China.

“This is no longer just a renewables or EV thing — this is national security, clean energy and building an electro-state,” he said, arguing that reducing volatility would make it easier for automakers, utilities and manufacturers to commit capital without fear of being caught on the wrong side of wild price swings.

North American cooperation key for lithium

Gerardo Del Real, publisher at Digest Publishing, also highlighted the impact of geopolitics on the lithium value chain, emphasizing the need for North American coordination to reduce reliance on dominant producers like China.

“I think this is the path towards that. It has to happen,” he said, noting that collaboration between the US, Canada and potentially Mexico could strengthen regional supply security and reduce vulnerability to global disruptions.

Del Real framed the issue in broader energy terms, pointing to the strategic value of domestic resources: “If we are serious as a country and as a region in being somewhat independent from China and from the Russians … we have a luxury of resources in the US, in Canada … there could be a very powerful path forward.”

On market dynamics, he suggested investors are focused on timing and catalysts, with policy shifts, demand surprises or supply disruptions likely to drive sentiment in 2026.

He also warned that the market may be underestimating the importance of coordinated regional supply initiatives as a factor shaping pricing and project economics.

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Keep Reading
By