Latest News
-
The weekly copper price is up on the back of mine supply concerns and China demand
Copper prices were on track to gain a weekly % of?1.5% this Friday. This was due to concerns about mine supply disruptions and signs of active demand from?China, the top consumer. By 0948 GMT, the benchmark three-month price of copper at the London Metal Exchange had risen by 1.2% to $14,473.50 per metric tonne. Yangshan Copper Premium This week, the price of copper in China reached its highest level in four years, after the country returned from its week-long vacation. The Shanghai Futures Exchange monitors copper inventories in warehouses. The end-of-week stock level was 58,744 tonnes, an increase of 20,000 tons over the previous week. Exchange data revealed that copper stocks at the LME registered warehouses fell to a six-week-low of 233.025 tons, after daily outflows totaling 4,700?tons. This was mainly due to warehouses in Taiwan and Hong Kong. Since 2025, copper prices have been supported by the constant transfers of metal to Comex warehouses, especially in the last six months. This is due to uncertainty about potential US import tariffs for refined copper. Comex inventories are at a record high of 711 609 tons. Cash copper contracts ended Thursday with a $97 per ton premium over the three-month contract. Morgan Stanley stated in a report that "any slowdown in US stocks could make the markets feel looser. But China's demand has been resilient, and supply is experiencing significant disruptions." The union representing Antofagasta’s?Centinela mine in Chile has said that the strike will?begin affecting output in November. Antofagasta initially downplayed its impact, but this situation has increased the risk of disruptions at other mines. Aluminium and lead, among other LME metals, rose by 1.1% each to $3,085 a ton and $1,880 per ton. Zinc rose 1.7% to $3.781.50. Tin increased 2.1% to $52,305. Nickel climbed 1.2%, to $15,730.
-
AI-related companies drive the majority of third-quarter US earnings increases
US companies will likely deliver a third-quarter earnings surge, and AI-related players, like the stock market rally, are driving most of these gains. Investors are excited about the hyper-growth of AI companies, but they are also concerned about the future of the share price and how long this trend will continue. According to Tajinder dhillon, LSEG’s head of earnings research and equity, analysts expect S&P500 earnings to increase by 31% in the third quarter. Two-thirds will come from the tech sector, including AI giants Alphabet and Amazon.com, as well as Meta Platforms. The S&P 500 reached a new record this week, ahead of earnings season. This is expected to begin unofficially next?week when banks such as JPMorgan Chase or Goldman Sachs report their results. "It is all AI, and to a lesser degree, energy and material, but this is because of geopolitics,"?Sameer samana, the head of global equity and real assets at Wells Fargo Investment Institute. It wouldn't be surprising if 70-80% growth could be attributed tech and AI. The US oil price has risen by roughly 30% during the third quarter due to the ongoing US-Israeli conflict with Iran. Samana pointed out that the?earnings estimates for the third-quarter are among the lowest. Strategists are unsure if the third-quarter growth in earnings can match the explosive growth seen in the second quarter. Most companies beat analyst's estimates and this is likely to continue in the third quarter. LSEG data shows that the S&P 500's earnings grew by 54% in the second quarter, the highest growth since 2021. LSEG data showed that excluding mark-to-market gains from Alphabet and Amazon.com for AI-related investments the growth rate was still about 35%. This is the highest level since 2021. Anthony Saglimbene is the chief market strategist of Ameriprise Financial. He said that investors should be concerned because we're approaching "peak earnings growth" in this cycle. "A lot is this AI trade built on continuing capex spending. Every quarter, as they continue to do so, the hurdle rates and scrutiny get higher." Dhillon, based upon LSEG data, said that earnings for US semiconductor firms, which are among the largest beneficiaries of the AI boom will?have risen by about 136% compared to about 158% during the second quarter. Nick Raich is the CEO of Earnings Scout. Three months ago, we were going 150 miles per hour. Raich stated that the latest reports, including those from Micron Technology, were strong and suggested other companies continue to "reap the benefits." Micron, a chipmaker, forecasted quarterly revenue that was above expectations and said customers had boosted their commitments to its long-term supply agreements up to $32 billion. This week, Google signed a huge power deal with Constellation Energy. Investors will also be paying close attention to the impact of higher interest rates on corporate profits during this earnings season. The US bond yields are rising due to concerns over inflation, high oil prices, and debt problems elsewhere. Samana warned that heavy borrowers such as utilities are at risk.
-
Campaign group warns that the new Congress in Brazil poses a threat to environmental legislation
According to a report by the climate advocacy group Observatorio Do?Clima that found almost 70% of elected legislators have no or little interest in environmental issues, Brazil's new Congress will likely pose a greater obstacle to legislation protecting the environment after elections this month. The study examined bills, legislative initiatives, speeches, and public statements made by newly elected and reelected legislators. It concluded that 64 out of 81 senators have demonstrated a "very low" commitment to environmental issues. In the lower chamber, 345 out of 511 legislators were placed in the same category. According to the study, the Liberal Party, which is home to Flavio Bolsonaro (a right-wing senator) who will be facing President Luiz Inacio Lula in a presidential runoff later this month has the lowest environmental credentials of all major parties. Bolsonaro defeated Lula in a first round despite pollsters' predictions, but he didn't get enough votes to prevent a second ballot. The environmental commitment of all 28 senators and lower house members who were elected by the party on Sunday was rated as very low. The study also found that other right-leaning political parties, such as?Novo and Republicanos, Progressistas, and Uniao Brasil showed low support for environmental issues. Observatorio do Clima stated that environmental advocates may face a more 'challenging' political landscape if Bolsonaro, whose previous?comments about climate change caused concern, is elected President. I contacted the parties named but did not receive a response. The group said that proposals to weaken environmental protections, such as measures to reduce protected lands, allow mining on Indigenous land, and ease licensing requirements for environmental matters, could gain "traction" under the new Congress. Suely Araujo is the public policy coordinator for the group. She said, "This image shows four years of hard work by those who are focused on climate and environment issues."
-
Trump's comment that Iran can 'take out Los Angeles' was misinterpreted
US President Donald Trump said on Thursday that comments he made about Iran being able to "take out" California cities were misinterpreted. He was referring instead to the need for people to tolerate higher gasoline prices. Trump made these remarks on Monday at a Nebraska political rally, where he talked about the economic sacrifices of Americans during World War II. "Remember that the 'war' is artificial, it costs a lot, but it's worth it," he said. "It is a small price to pay in order to keep the world and our country safe. They could take out an entire city. Let's?take Los Angeles out, let's?take San Diego out. It's a small price to pay and it will be over very soon." California's Democratic Leaders and some Republican colleagues quickly condemned the remarks. Trump stated in a Truth Social posting on Thursday that "a temporary increase in Gasoline prices is a small price to be paid for Iran not having a nuclear weapon." "If you want to see a huge price, can you imagine what would happen if they bombed San Diego and/or Los Angeles?" He continued by saying he loved both cities. Trump has dismissed concerns about cost of living stemming the Iran conflict in the past.
-
US to rescind methane policy against oil and gas industry
The US Environmental Protection Agency announced on Wednesday that it would be scrapping the Biden-era regulation aimed at curbing large leaks of'methane' from oil and gas operations. The move is part a broader effort by the Trump administration to reduce regulations, which it claims burden US businesses in its quest to increase fossil fuel production. "Americans should be able to afford heating their homes during the winter and filling up their cars to drive to work." The people who produce the energy cannot?do this when they are burdened by unnecessary burdens," EPA Administator Lee Zeldin stated in a press release after announcing the decision at a meeting with representatives of the oil and gas industries in New Mexico. The "super emitter program" of the EPA requires that companies react when third parties use remote sensing to report suspected methane leaks. After taking office in 2017, the Trump administration?delayed implementing this policy until next. EPA claimed that its proposal to rescind this?rule could save $45 billion a yearly. The oil and gas industry, which is a major source of methane, is responsible for the second largest?cause?of climate change?after carbon dioxide. Environmental groups have criticized the move. In a statement, Mahyar Sorour of Sierra Club's Beyond Fossil Fuels said: "This giveaway is foolish and shortsighted. It reveals to whom the Trump administration works - its political donors."
-
US seizes $3 Million in fuel shipments from Cuba as crackdown continue
The US announced on Wednesday that it had seized 90 separate shipments of biodiesel bound to Cuba, worth nearly $3 million. This is the second time this week US authorities have announced the seizure "illegal" fuel en route to Cuba. The Trump administration is continuing to choke off Cuba's energy industry, only allowing small amounts of fuel to be shipped to the private sector on the island in an effort to undercut the Cuban government. Jose Figueroa, Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Miami, told Miami reporters on Wednesday that the seized cargo was destined for Enetec, an Enetec-based state-owned fuel firm sanctioned earlier this year by the US. The authorities said that they intercepted fuel shipments at Port Everglades in south Florida and Houston before they left the US. Homeland Security reported that more than 600,000 gallons were seized. Figueroa stated that "an effort of this magnitude to undermine US sanction is not an accident." These actions are aimed at shipments that could benefit the Cuban government through a state controlled entity. Anyone who attempts to undermine US laws to fund, facilitate or profit from such an effort should be put on notice. Cuba's government didn't?comment immediately on the fuel seizure. Cuba's communist-run government has called the Trump administration's blockade of fuel on Cuba "economic war" and "illegal". The blockade has exacerbated the ongoing problems of blackouts, shortages of water and inflation on the island, pushing it towards a humanitarian catastrophe. US President Donald Trump stated openly that his goal is to overthrow Cuba's government with the?blockade & sanctions. Last week, the US Coast Guard announced that they had intercepted in September a large container vessel carrying fuel bound for Cuba. The Coast Guard said that the ship was attempting to evade authorities, and had large amounts of fuel hidden within its ballast tanks. In either case, the US has not disclosed the identities of the exporters.
-
Russia claims that Ukraine has struck two nuclear facilities at Zaporizhzhia
The head of Russia's state nuclear corporation said that despite the fact that Ukrainian drones had attacked two facilities at Zaporizhzhia, a Russian-held nuclear power plant in southeast Ukraine, there was no danger to nuclear safety. Alexei Likhachev said that a driver who was delivering food to plant workers had been killed by the drone attack. Likhachev said that a laboratory and a plant for the processing of radioactive waste were targeted. Ukraine has yet to comment on the incident. The plant's management announced on?Saturday that Ukrainian shelling in recent weeks has damaged the external power supply equipment. Electricity is currently provided by emergency diesel generators. The plant does not produce electricity, but it needs two external links for power to cool nuclear fuel. In the first few weeks of the war, which began with Moscow's invasion of its smaller neighbor in February 2022, Russia captured the?plant - Europe's biggest with six reactors. Since then, Moscow and Kyiv accuse each other regularly of military actions that compromise nuclear safety. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the UN's nuclear watchdog has repeatedly taken action to ensure a ceasefire surrounding the plant so that repairs could be made to the lines connecting the facility to the main grid. UN monitors are at the Zaporizhzhia and three other plants in Ukraine. Maria Zakharova of the Russian Foreign Ministry wrote on her ministry's website that the West was enabling Ukrainian aggressions by not publicly condemning them. Zakharova wrote that "Kyiv has intensified its shelling of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant because Western countries have not responded appropriately to these actions, effectively facilitating new assaults." "Such an attitude toward strikes by the Ukrainian military shows the true 'value' of statements made by representatives of these nations about nuclear and physical safety at international forums."
-
The top cases in the US Supreme Court docket
US Supreme Court will hear a number of important cases in its new term, which begins Monday. These include issues like President Donald Trump's Immigration Policies, the ban on assault-style rifles, the financial responsibility of Big Oil for climate change and Republican-backed voting restriction. This is a list of some of the cases that are being argued in the current term. The term runs until the end of June. Big Oil Climate Suit ExxonMobil, Suncor Energy and Boulder officials argued on October 5, attempting to "thwart" a lawsuit filed by Boulder officials. The Justices grappled with the complex question of whether local governments should be allowed to hold oil companies responsible for harms caused by climate change. After Colorado's highest court allowed Boulder to sue them for violating state laws and seeking unspecified damages, the companies filed an appeal. Trump's administration supported the companies. The justices expressed concerns over unduly restricting the power of states to pursue litigation related to climate change, and the potential for chaos if local government across the nation were allowed to sue these corporations. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June. TRUMP'S MANDATORY DETENTION OF IMMIGRANTS The court will determine the legality Trump's policy, which subjects millions of illegal immigrants living in the US to mandatory detention while deportation proceedings are underway. Trump's policy of mass deportation includes this policy. The Supreme Court heard the Trump administration appeal of a lower-court ruling that ruled against the policy, in a case concerning a Brazilian citizen. The US administration has abandoned its long-standing interpretation of federal laws that allowed immigrants living in the US to be released under bond until their cases were heard in immigration court. Dates for the arguments have not been set yet. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June. DEPORTATIONS TO A THIRD COUNTRY BY TRUMP In December, the justices will hear arguments over the Trump administration’s policy to deport migrants to "third countries", or other nations than their home country. They won't give them the opportunity to demonstrate the harms that they might face. On September 29, the court allowed the Trump administration to continue its policy, suspending a federal judge’s ruling that deporting migrants to third-country countries was illegal. Human rights groups claim that more than 25,000 migrants were deported under this policy to 29 different countries. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June. Ban on assault-style rifles On December 2, the justices will hear arguments in a challenge against state prohibitions of 'assault style rifles. This case involves a weapon type that is often associated with mass killings. The lower courts in Cook County Illinois and Connecticut upheld the bans on powerful semiautomatic weapons such as AR-15s. Lower courts rejected arguments that these measures violated the US Constitution's Second Amendment rights to "keep and bear arms." Gun rights groups, as well as other opponents, have argued that Supreme Court precedents regarding the Second Amendment protect firearms in "common usage." The end of June is the expected date for a ruling. Voting Rights On December 8, the justices will hear arguments in a Republican led bid to reinstate voter restrictions in Arizona. This would require proof of citizenship for all voter registrants, and purge voter lists in Arizona from alleged non-US citizen voters. Republicans appealed a lower court's decision to stop certain provisions of Arizona law for violating federal voting registration laws. The Trump administration has supported key aspects of the appeal. The Arizona measure, according to critics, adds additional mandates for voting which unfairly targets Latinos and Native American voters. These groups tend to support Democratic candidates. The ruling is expected to be made by the end of June. LGBT RIGHTS On November 3, the justices will hear arguments in an appeal by the Archdiocese of Denver, and other Catholic entities, to be exempted of a Colorado program that funds preschools' nondiscrimination requirements. A lower court ruled that Colorado's program didn't violate the First Amendment rights of the Catholic plaintiffs. State funds are provided for preschools. The Catholic plaintiffs objected that the state required schools receiving funding through the program to give all children an "equal chance" to enroll in pre-school, regardless of certain characteristics. This included the sexual orientation of students and their families. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June. EPIC GAMES SUE AGAINST Apple Apple will try to avoid being found in contempt by the justices in its legal battle with Epic Games, the maker of "Fortnite". The iPhone maker had been found to be in violation of an order from a court ordering sweeping changes in its lucrative App Store as part the antitrust litigation. Apple appealed the ruling of a lower court that upheld a federal judge's decision in Oakland, California finding Apple in contempt for Epic's lawsuit against App Store fees. Dates for the arguments have not yet been announced. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June. PEPSICO TRADEMARK CASE The court will hear arguments regarding a claim by Rise Brewing, a maker of canned coffees, to hold PepsiCo responsible for an alleged trademark violation involving Pepsi’s morning energy beverage "Mtn Dew Rise." Rise Brewing appealed the ruling of a lower court that rejected the company's claim the name "Mtn Dew Rise," infringes on its trademarks, and confuses customers with its coffee brand. No date has been set for the arguments. The ruling is expected to be made by the end June.
As military buildups eclipse talks, the US and Iran are heading towards a conflict.
Officials on both sides, as well as diplomats in the Gulf and Europe, say that Iran and the United States have moved rapidly toward a military conflict. They are losing hope for a diplomatic resolution to the standoff they've had over Tehran’s nuclear program.
Sources say that Iran's Gulf neighbours, including Israel, now see a conflict as more likely than a peaceful settlement. Washington is building one of the largest military deployments it has made in the region since the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
Source familiar with the plans said that Israel believes Washington and Tehran are in a deadlock and has begun preparing for a possible joint military operation with the United States. However, no decision has yet been made on whether or not to conduct such an action.
This would be the U.S.'s second attack on Iran in less than one year. The first was an airstrike by the U.S., Israel and other countries against Iranian military and nuclear installations last June.
Officials in the region say that oil-producing Gulf nations are preparing themselves for a possible conflict, which they fear will spiral out of control and cause destabilisation of the Middle East.
Two Israeli officials said they believed the gaps between Washington, D.C. and Tehran were unbridgeable. They also stated that there was a high likelihood of a military escalation in the near future.
Regional officials claim that Tehran is making a grave mistake by refusing to make concessions. They also say that President Donald Trump is trapped by his military build-up and cannot reduce it without losing face.
Alan Eyre is a former U.S. Diplomat and Iran Specialist. He said that "both sides are sticking with their guns" and that "nothing meaningful will emerge unless the U.S.
"What Trump cannot do is assemble this much military and then return with a "so-so" deal and withdraw the military. He said: "I think he believes he will lose face." "If he attacks it will get ugly very quickly."
TALKS HAVE STALLED
Iran-U.S. talks stalled after two rounds on key issues from uranium to missiles and sanctions relief.
Sources familiar with the talks say that when Omani mediators handed an envelope containing proposals from the U.S. on missiles, Iranian Foreign Ministry Abbas Araqchi did not even open it. He returned it.
Araqchi, who spoke at the Geneva talks on Tuesday, said that the two sides had agreed upon "guiding principles" but the White House stated there was still distance.
A U.S. official stated that Iran would submit a written proposal within the next few days. Araqchi, on Friday, said he expected a draft of a counterproposal to be ready in a matter of days.
Trump, who sent aircraft carriers and warships to the Middle East on Thursday, warned Iran that it must reach a deal over its nuclear program, or else "really bad" things will happen.
He seemed to have set a 10- to 15-day deadline, which prompted a response from Tehran that it would retaliate if the U.S. bases were attacked. Oil prices have increased due to the rising tensions.
Officials in the United States say that Trump is still undecided about whether he will use military force, although he admitted on Friday that he might order a limited attack to try and force Iran to a deal.
He told reporters, "I suppose I can say that I am considering it."
It is not clear when an attack could occur. The U.S. secretary of state Marco Rubio will meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss Iran on February 28, 2019. Senior U.S. officials said that it would take until mid-March for all U.S. troops to be in place.
What's the endgame?
European and regional officials are of the opinion that the size of the U.S. military deployment in the region will allow Washington to strike Iran while simultaneously defending its allies, Israel and military bases.
The U.S. core demand is unchanged: No uranium enrichment in Iran. Iran says that it will not discuss ballistic missiles and insists on maintaining its nuclear capability. It denies that it is planning to build nuclear weapons.
Defence analyst David Des Roches says that if talks fail, U.S. activities in the Gulf already signal how any strike would start: Blind Iran's Air Defence?and then attack the Revolutionary Guards Navy. This is the force behind decades of tanker attacks, and threats to shut down the Strait of Hormuz - the route used by a fifth of the world's oil.
Some Arab and European officials say they don't know what Trump's ultimate goal is. And?European governments ask the U.S. for specifics on what it wants to achieve with its strikes - whether to reduce Iran's missile and nuclear capabilities, to prevent escalation, or to pursue a more ambitious goal such as "regime changes".
Some European and regional officials are unsure whether military action will be able to change the course of Iran's ruling regime, which is led by Ayatollah Ayatollah Khamenei. The powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps protects the Supreme Leader.
Some claim that because there is no apparent alternative political force in Iran, and the leadership's resilience is largely intact it would be dangerous to assume that strikes could lead to "regime changes".
They say that military action is easier to start than control and harder to turn into a strategy.
ARE CONCESSIONS LIKELY TO OCCUR?
Few signs of compromise have been seen. Ali Larijani - a close advisor to Khamenei - told Al Jazeera TV Iran is willing to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency extensive monitoring to prove that it does not seek 'nuclear weapons. Tehran informed IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi about its decision.
Sources familiar with the talks say that Iran's support for regional militias was not raised in formal talks. However, Tehran has no objections to U.S. concerns regarding proxies.
Three regional officials reported that Iranian negotiators made it clear that Khamenei is the sovereign right to enrichment and missile production. David Makovsky, of The Washington Institute, said that each side is betting on the limits of the other.
He said that Washington believed overwhelming force would force Tehran to yield. Tehran, on the other hand, believes Trump is not interested in a sustained campaign, and Israel, the gap between the two countries, was too large to close. This, he added, made confrontation inevitable. Steve Holland reported from Washington and Rami Ayyub in Jerusalem, Samia Nakhoul wrote the article, and Timothy Heritage edited it.
(source: Reuters)