Author

admin

Browsing

The oil and gas market was punctuated with volatility in 2025.

Oil prices softened as supply outpaced demand and inventories built. Brent and West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude slipped in late 2025, with Brent dipping below US$60 per barrel and WTI hovering at US$55.

Production increases from non-OPEC producers — including record US output — and higher OPEC+ quotas have contributed to a notable supply overhang, pressuring crude toward four year lows.

Starting the year above US$70, both Brent and WTI prices have now seen steep declines of more than 20 percent amid signs of weaker demand in major economies like China and elevated global stocks.

Meanwhile, the natural gas market saw price shifts driven by weather and storage dynamics.

Prices started the year at US$3.64 per million British thermal units and slipped to a seasonal low of US$2.74 in August. Values peaked at US$5.31 on December 5, and have since retreated to the US$3.94 level.

The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) raised its outlook for late 2025 and early 2026 gas prices after an early cold snap bolstered heating demand, even as forecasts have moderated Henry Hub projections for 2025 to 2026.

Oil market battles persistent headwinds

2025 saw oil prices fluctuate between highs of US$81.86 (Brent) and US$78.99 (WTI) and lows of US$59.41 and US$55.56, respectively, as the energy market served as a barometer of global political and trade tensions.

“Throughout the year, prices have continued the downtrend they began in April (2024) as OPEC+ continued to hike output and China’s economy continued to struggle under the weight of a flailing property sector, downbeat consumer confidence, overindebted local governments and flagging external demand,” he added.

While the oil market isn’t new to volatility, this year proved different as US President Donald Trump’s on-again, off-again tariffs infused global uncertainty into the energy market.

“We can see that Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ tariffs pushed prices down to a level from which they’ve not recovered from, barring a spike in June as a result of the 12 day Iran-Israel war,” said Cunningham.

“Since then, Brent crude oil prices have continued to fall as OPEC+ caught the market off guard with its aggressive output hikes, which were designed to win back market share from non-cartel producers.’

Demand growth, underinvestment reshape oil outlook

Meanwhile, OPEC is approaching full production capacity, with Saudi Arabia being the main exception.

“Even though people are talking about lots of supply, demand is still growing,” Schachter said, noting that global oil demand rose roughly 1.3 million barrels per day in 2025 and is expected to increase by about 1.2 million in 2026.

New supply additions are limited, he explained, mentioning Guyana’s offshore discoveries by ExxonMobil (NYSE:XOM), some output from Brazil and minor contributions from Canada.

“Most basins are tired, and not enough money is being spent to bring on production,” Schachter said, predicting that global inventory drawdowns in 2026 will support higher prices.

Despite lack of investment at the exploration level, FocusEconomics panelists are forecasting a rise in both oil and gas supply in 2026 fueled by output growth at existing operations.

Cunningham pointed to organizations like the EIA and International Energy Agency (IEA), which “hiked their forecasts in recent months in response to OPEC+ increasing output unexpectedly fast and the recent surge in demand for US LNG.”

“The real question is not if oil and gas production will increase, but by how much,” said Cunningham.

A ramp up could be curtailed by geopolitical disruptions, he went on to note.

“Recent frictions between members of the OPEC+ cartel will persist, with Russia likely to favor lower production levels given US sanctions and countries like Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates eager to push production higher given their excess capacity and desire to win back market share from non-OPEC+ producers,” he said.

“Moreover, countries like Kazakhstan and Iraq continue to overshoot their quotas, and in late 2023 Angola left the cartel due to disputes over its allowed production level.”

Transport and petrochemicals driving oil demand

Global oil demand is expected to rise in 2026, driven primarily by transportation fuels and petrochemical feedstocks.

Gasoline is projected to lead the increase, supported by recovering air travel and road mobility, while diesel and other products also contribute. Non-OECD regions, particularly China and India, will account for most of the growth, with expanding petrochemical capacity in major economies boosting crude-derived feedstock demand.

Overall, transport and industrial activity remain the key engines behind the expected rise in oil consumption.

“Our panelists see world oil production rising 1.1 percent in 2026 as non-OPEC+ countries such as Guyana and the US hike output,” said FocusEconomics’ Cunningham.

LNG expansion fuels gas growth

Similar to the trajectory for oil, natural gas demand is expected to rise in 2026 as global consumption rebounds and LNG exports expand sharply. “The IEA (is) estimating growth at around 2 percent with consumption at an all-time high on higher demand in the industrial and electricity sectors,” said Cunningham.

Rising LNG supply — with new export capacity coming online in the US, Canada and Qatar — is projected to support stronger import growth, particularly in Asia, where demand is expected to rebound after a 2025 slowdown.

“Asia is hungry for LNG; the IEA estimates the region’s natural gas demand will rise over 4 percent in 2026, with LNG imports up by 10 percent,” the expert said. Increased use of natural gas in power generation and industrial sectors will also contribute to growth, helping push global gas demand toward a new peak next year.

“Of course, these forecasts could change quickly if the world economy or the oil and gas sector is subject to further shocks, which is why we recommend regularly checking the latest forecasts that are available,” Cunningham added.

Further ahead, Schachter argued that rising global power needs will underpin long-term demand for natural gas, particularly as alternatives struggle to scale. Aging power grids are another constraint. Much of the world’s electricity infrastructure has not been meaningfully upgraded, and expanding capacity will require major investment in transmission — driving demand for copper, steel and aluminum alongside new generation.

Against that backdrop, Schachter sees LNG as central to meeting near- and medium-term power needs.

“The demand for LNG is the story,” he said, adding that natural gas is increasingly viewed not as a temporary transition fuel, but as “the most efficient, from a climate and environmental point of view.”

He also highlighted Canada’s advantage as producers invest heavily in emissions-reduction technologies, including methane mitigation. That positioning could make Canadian LNG more attractive to import-dependent nations such as Japan and South Korea.

While new supply from Qatar and the US will add capacity, Schachter cautioned that LNG development is rarely linear, pointing to Canada’s decades-long path to its first operating export terminal. Despite inevitable delays and short-term imbalances, he said the long-term outlook remains clear: “The industry’s fundamentals are very, very positive.”

Cunningham also pointed to increased output from the US and Qatar as key areas to watch in 2026.

“The big Qatari and US LNG projects will help natural gas prices converge globally — our Consensus Forecast is for the percentage difference between US gas prices (which tend to be lower due to huge domestic production) and those in Asia and Europe to ease to the lowest level since 2020, the year the pandemic sent gas demand plummeting,” said Cunningham, adding, “In short, record US LNG shipments will send up prices at home and lower them abroad.”

Cunningham went on to explain that unlike oil, in the natural gas market there tends to be more price divergence between regions as natural gas is harder to transport over large distances. Oil can be poured into a barrel and shipped, whereas natural gas first needs to be liquified if it’s to be sent overseas. Greater LNG capacity will help bridge this gap.

Oil and gas price forecast for 2026

Schachter expects WTI to average over US$70 in 2026, with Brent around US$73 to US$74.

He anticipates some volatility early in the new year, saying that in Q1 he expects trading to be “still sloppy between US$56 and US$66,” before prices rise in Q2 to US$62 to US$72. From there, he sees prices reaching US$68 to US$78 in the year’s third quarter as inventories tighten and market fundamentals assert themselves.

“People think we’re going back to US$80 today. US$58 oil — it ain’t going to US$80. But when the industry is in rational supply and demand, prices climb, especially when inventories draw down quickly,” Schachter said, recalling the 2008 peak in oil prices near US$147 during extreme supply shortages.

Looking at the year ahead, FocusEconomics expects the trends of 2025 to continue.

“Average Brent crude oil prices will ease further to a post-pandemic low, while US natural gas prices will increase to the highest average level since 2014 barring 2022’s Russia-Ukraine-war-driven spike,” said Cunningham.

“OPEC+ is set to continue raising output — after a pause in Q1 2026 — and the global economy should slow as the boost from export front-loading ahead of US tariff wanes.”

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

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

No. 3 seed Texas A&M swept No. 1 seed Pitt, 29-27, 25-21, 25-20, in the 2025 NCAA volleyball Final Four on Thursday at T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri. It was the first time Pitt has been swept all year.  The Aggies will make their first national championship appearance on Sunday (3:30 p.m., ESPN). 

Texas A&M head coach Jamie Morrison, who was named the 2025 AVCA Coach of the Year earlier Thursday, said his team has a ‘bunch of grit and a bunch of belief, and that’s in one another. That’s in our entire group. We believe in it. We believe in each other and we’re going for everything we have.’

Pitt and reigning player of the year Olivia Babcock has now fallen just short of the championship five years in a row.

Meanwhile, Texas A&M’s stellar postseason run continues by knocking out another No. 1 seed with a 16-kill performance by Kyndal Stowers. The Aggies also upset No. 1 overall seed Nebraska in a thrilling five-set match in the Elite Eight. Texas A&M will face the winner of No. 1 Kentucky and No. 3 Wisconsin.

NCAA VOLLEYBALL FINAL FOUR: Schedule, scores, highlights

Pitt ‘pissed’ after Final Four loss to Texas A&M

Pitt volleyball made it to the Final Four for the fifth consecutive year, but the Panthers are on the losing side once again. Panthers head coach Dan Fisher said he’s ‘pissed’ after losing in the national semifinal for the fifth year straight.“I don’t have great perspective on that right now,’ he said. ‘I’m proud of being consistently good, consistently in the hunt, but I’m pretty pissed off right now.”

NCAA women’s volleyball score: Texas A&M 2, Pitt 0

3rd set final: Texas A&M 25, Pitt 20

Texas A&M took a 17-13 lead in the third set, tying their largest lead. Pitt responded with a 5-1 run to tie it up at 18-all. But the Aggies won seven of the nine points to take the third set and sweep Pitt.

Texas A&M’s Kyndal Stowers had 16 kills on .433 hitting, while Logan Lednicky had 14 kills on .323 hitting.

Olivia Babcock had 22 kills on .463 hitting in the loss.

2nd set final: Texas A&M 25, Pitt 21

It may be Texas A&M’s first semifinal appearance in program history, but the Aggies have looked far from inexperienced. They took the second set over Pitt, 25-21, and are one set from the national championship.

Texas A&M trailed by four points, but the Aggies won 14 of the next 20 points to take the set. Kyndal Stowers (11 kills on .450) and Logan Lednicky (9 kills on .208) have combined for 20 kills.

Pitt must win the next set to keep their playoff hopes alive. Olivia Babcock has a game-high 14 kills on .379 hitting.

2nd set: Pitt 15, Texas A&M 15

Pitt went on a 8-0 run to take a 15-11 run. Texas A&M responded with a 4-0 run to tie it up at 15-all.

1st set final: Texas A&M 29, Pitt 27

Texas A&M is picking up where they left off. The No. 3 Aggies took the tightly-contested first set against Pitt, which included seven lead changes and 16 ties. No team had led by more than three points in the first set.

The Aggies had a 24-22 lead. A kill from Texas A&M’s Logan Lednicky was initially ruled in to give the Aggies the first set 25-23, but Pitt head coach Dan Fisher used a challenge and the call was reversed to keep Pitt in the set and tie it at 24-all. The Panthers fought off four set points and even earned a set point of their own, but Texas A&M was able to cash in on their fifth set point.

Texas A&M’s Kyndal Stowers is up to nine kills hitting .727 with no errors.

Pitt’s Olivia Babcock has seven kills hitting .353. Blaire Bayless added six kills hitting .545.

What is Kyndal Stowers wearing on her neck?

The sophomore outside hitter was forced to medically retire her freshman season with the Baylor Bears after suffering four concussions in a matter of months. After taking a season off, she eventually entered the transfer portal, joining head coach Jamie Morrison and the Aggies in College Station, Texas.

Stowers was happy to have a chance at playing volleyball again, but she knew the concerns about her concussions would surface. That’s when she decided to bring in reinforcement, as part of a reenvisioned approach to her health and recovery. While practicing and in games, Stowers wears a Q-Collar.

Pittsburgh vs. Texas A&M underway

The first national semifinal matchup between Pittsburgh and Texas A&M is underway at the T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri.

When is Pittsburgh vs. Texas A&M volleyball?

No. 1 Pitt (30-4) faces No. 3 Texas A&M (27-4) on Thursday, Dec. 18 at 6:30 p.m. ET at the T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri.

Pittsburgh vs. Texas A&M volleyball: Channel, streaming

  • Date: Thursday, Dec. 18
  • Time: 6:30 p.m ET (5:30 p.m. CT)
  • Location: T-Mobile Center (Kansas City, Missouri)
  • Channel: ESPN
  • Stream: ESPN, Fubo

NCAA volleyball Final Four TV schedule

Both national semifinal matchups will be held on Thursday, Dec. 18:

  • Pittsburgh vs. Texas A&M volleyball: 6:30 p.m ET (5:30 p.m. CT) | ESPN
  • Kentucky vs. Wisconsin volleyball: 9:00 p.m. ET (8:00 p.m. CT) | ESPN

Pittsburgh Panthers starting lineup

Head coach: Dan Fisher

  • 3 Emery Dupes | L/DS 5-6 – Redshirt Senior
  • 5 Olivia Babcock | RS 6-4 – Junior
  • 8 Blaire Bayless | OH 6-2 – Junior
  • 10 Marina Pezelj | OH 6-1 – Freshman
  • 13 Mallorie Meyer | L/DS 5-7 – Sophomore
  • 17 Brook Mosher | S 6-0 – Redshirt Senior
  • 20 Abbey Emch | MB 6-4 – Freshman
  • 21 Bre Kelley | MB 6-4 – Redshirt Senior

Texas A&M Aggies starting lineup

Head coach: Jamie Morrison

  • 37 Kyndal Stowers | OH 5-11 – Sophomore
  • 1 Ifenna Cos-Okpalla | MB 6-2 – Senior
  • 2 Addi Applegate | L/DS 5-5 – Freshman
  • 9 Logan Lednicky | OPP 6-3 – Senior
  • 12 Ava Underwood | L/DS 5-7 – Senior
  • 16 Maddie Waak | S 5-10 – Senior

Olivia Babcock stats

The 6-foot-4 right side hitter already won 2025 ACC player of the year for the second straight season after setting career highs in kills per set (5.11) and digs per set (2.11) this season. She set a new program record with 45 kills vs. North Carolina on Nov. 2.

Texas A&M’s Kyndal Stowers shares personal triumph after 4 concussions

KANSAS CITY, MO ― On any given day, Texas A&M outside hitter Kyndal Stowers brings three different versions of herself to the court.

One version is very relaxed. The goal is simple: get out on the court, win and leave. Another version of Stowers is more stealthy, unsuspecting. She wins, but the opponents never see it coming. Then, there’s the version that boldly claims victory and lets the opponent know all about it. Every version of Stowers has been seemingly influenced by her journey back to the volleyball court.

NCAA volleyball player of the year finalists

The 2025 AVCA Player of the Year shortlist was narrowed to four finalists on Monday: Pitt junior right side hitter Olivia Babcock, Wisconsin senior outside hitter Mimi Colyer, Kentucky senior outside hitter Eva Hudson and Nebraska junior setter Bergen Reilly.

The winner will be announced on Friday, Dec. 19, ahead of the national championship game on Sunday, Dec. 21 (ABC). Babcock, the reigning 2024 Player of the Year, could become the fifth player to win the award in back-to-back seasons and first since Stanford’s Kathryn Plummer in 2017-2018.

Pitt volleyball in Final Four: Can Panthers finally get over hump?

KANSAS CITY, MO ― Upon arriving at last year’s NCAA volleyball Final Four in Louisville, Kentucky, Pittsburgh Panthers head coach Dan Fisher received several commemorative Louisville Slugger bats.

Texas A&M’s Jamie Morrison wins coach of the year

Morrison, who is in his third season with the program, led the Aggies to a 27-4 regular-season record and a second-place finish in the SEC with a 14-1 conference record. Under his leadership, four Texas A&M players (Ifenna Cos-Okpalla, Logan Lednicky, Maddie Waak, Kyndal Stowers) earned AVCA All-American honors this season. Meghan Hall

NCAA volleyball transfer portal 2026

The 2025 NCAA women’s college volleyball tournament is down to the Final Four with Kentucky, Pittsburgh, Wisconsin and Texas A&M advancing to the semifinals, but it’s never too early to look ahead to next season.

LOVB pro volleyball to add expansion franchise in San Francisco

On Thursday, the women’s professional indoor volleyball league announced it’s expanding to the Bay Area with the LOVB San Francisco franchise, bringing the total number of teams in the league to nine by 2027.

The second season will begin on Jan. 7, 2026, but the field of teams will expand from six to nine in 2027 during the league’s third season, with the addition of LOVB Los Angeles, LOVB Minnesota and LOVB San Francisco.

Who won NCAA volleyball championship 2024?

In 2024, Penn State hoisted their first NCAA national championship since 2014 after defeating No. 1 Louisville 25-23, 32-34, 25-20, 25-17 on Dec. 22, 2024 in Louisville, Kentucky. Penn State coach Katie Schumacher-Cawley became the first woman head coach to win a Div. I volleyball championship in NCAA history. The Nittany Lions weren’t able to defend their title and were ousted in the second round of the 2025 NCAA tournament.

NCAA volleyball champions by year

  • 2024: Penn State
  • 2023: Texas
  • 2022: Texas
  • 2021: Wisconsin
  • 2020: Kentucky
  • 2019: Stanford
  • 2018: Stanford
  • 2017: Nebraska
  • 2016: Stanford
  • 2015: Nebraska
  • 2014: Penn State
  • 2013: Penn State
  • 2012: Texas
  • 2011: UCLA
  • 2010: Penn State
  • 2009: Penn State
  • 2008: Penn State
  • 2007: Penn State
  • 2006: Nebraska
  • 2005: Washington
  • 2004: Stanford
  • 2003: Southern California
  • 2002: Southern California
  • 2001: Stanford
  • 2000: Nebraska
  • 1999: Penn State
  • 1998: Long Beach State
  • 1997: Stanford
  • 1996: Stanford
  • 1995: Nebraska
  • 1994: Stanford
  • 1993: Long Beach State
  • 1992: Stanford
  • 1991: UCLA
  • 1990: UCLA
  • 1989: Long Beach State
  • 1988: Texas
  • 1987: Hawaii
  • 1986: Pacific
  • 1985: Pacific
  • 1984: UCLA
  • 1983: Hawaii
  • 1982: Hawaii
  • 1981: Southern California

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fastDownload for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

The stock car racing world’s been rocked by the news that former NASCAR driver Greg Biffle and his family were among those killed in a plane crash in North Carolina on Thursday, Dec. 18.

Biffle, his wife Cristina Biffle, their son Ryder and Greg’s daughter Emma were among the seven people who died in the crash involving a Cessna C550 jet at the end of a runway at Statesville Regional Airport at 10:20 a.m. local time.

‘We are devastated by the loss of our loved ones. This tragedy has left all of our families heartbroken beyond words,’ the families said in a statement.

Biffle spent nearly two decades racing in multiple NASCAR series. The 19-time Cup Series winner was a champion in NASCAR’s third- and second-tier series before making the jump to the top level in 2003.

The former Roush Racing driver was one of the more well-liked drivers in the paddock. He earned Most Popular Driver Honors in 1997 in a regional series, 2000 in the now-Craftsman Truck Series and 2002 in the now-Cup Series.

NASCAR drivers and those who worked with Biffle were among the many to pay their respects to him on social media:

NASCAR legends, drivers honor Greg Biffle

Biffle competed with many champions on the track during his 16 years in the Cup Series and even more in the lower levels. Four-time Cup Series champion Jeff Gordon said what happened was ‘devastating.’

‘I had such tremendous respect for Greg as a driver, and we shared countless tough battles on the track,’ Gordon wrote on X. ‘Like so many others, I was inspired by his tireless relief work during Hurricane Helene. My heart goes out to the Biffle family and everyone hurting.’

Former Cup Series driver Clint Bowyer, known by newer fans for his work as a broadcaster, debuted at the top level the year Biffle challenged Tony Stewart for the championship.

‘Absolutely crushed about the loss of Greg Biffle and his beautiful family,’ Bowyer wrote on X. ‘An unbelievable talent behind the controls of literally anything. Checked all the boxes…Great guy, helped people in need, and most importantly was a great family man.’

Two-time Cup Series champion Kyle Busch spent his first decade in the top level of the sport racing Biffle and wrote about Biffle, Biffle’s family and Biffle’s impact on communities.

‘Such a tragic and heartbreaking day,’ Busch wrote on X. ‘Greg and Cristina were truly special friends to us, we loved them as well as Emma and Ryder dearly. Greg’s compassion and humanitarian spirit—especially in times of crisis—touched so many lives and inspired everyone who knew him.

‘The memories we shared, both on and off the racetrack, will stay in our hearts forever. They meant so much to us, and they will never be forgotten.’

Denny Hamlin’s decorated Cup Series career began shortly after Biffle’s rookie season. The three-time Daytona 500 winner echoed Busch by discussing Biffle’s impact off-track in a post to X.

‘Today the motorsports world lost one of its fiercest competitors and kindest souls,’ Hamlin wrote. ‘Greg Biffle was a champion on the track and a humanitarian off it, whose impact reached far beyond racing.

‘We also mourn the loss of his wife Cristina and children Emma & Ryder, along with Craig Wadsworth, Dennis Dutton, and his son Jack. My heart is with all their families and loved ones.’

Longtime NASCAR team owner Jack Roush gave Biffle his break and helped Biffle realize his NASCAR dreams when he signed the Vancouver, Washington, native to his team in NASCAR’s third tier. Biffle would go on to win all 19 of his Cup Series races under Roush or Roush Fenway Racing.

“The entire Charlotte sports community has suffered a tremendous loss,” Roush said in a statement. ‘The tragic accident involving Greg Biffle and his family today is incredibly heartbreaking. I have lost a dear friend and partner in our NASCAR program. His contributions to our race team over the years are immeasurable. My condolences are with all those who loved and knew Greg and his family.’

Brad Keselowski, 2012 Cup Series champion and RFK Racing team co-owner with Roush, shared his thoughts about Biffle.

“I am heartbroken by the news involving the Biffle family,” Keselowski said in a statement. “I had the privilege of racing alongside Greg for many years, and like so many in our sport, I gained deep respect for him not only as a champion on the racetrack, but as a competitor who helped define an era of NASCAR.

‘His impact on Roush Fenway Keselowski Racing runs deep, and his accomplishments helped lay a foundation we continue to build upon today. My thoughts, and that of the entire organization, are with the Biffle family and everyone close to them as they navigate this tremendously difficult time.’

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

No. 1 seed Kentucky women’s volleyball is back in the national championship game.

After suffering their worst deficit since 2018 in the first set, Kentucky bounced back to defeat Wisconsin in five sets, 12-25, 25-22, 21-25, 26-24, 15-13, in the 2025 NCAA volleyball national semifinals on Thursday at T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri.

Kentucky will face Texas A&M in the championship, an all-SEC title game for the first time in tournament history. The Wildcats won the title in 2021. The Aggies are in their first Final Four.

Kentucky senior outside hitter Eva Hudson, a finalist for the 2025 AVCA Player of the Year award, finished with 29 kills on .455 hitting, none better than her final kill to win the fifth set and punch the Wildcats’ ticket to the championship game.

‘I just knew that I had to swing away. I wasn’t going to go out, not swinging,’ Hudson said of her game-winning shot. ‘I knew my teammates were behind me to cover me, so I was just going to give it my all.’

Kentucky last won the program’s only NCAA national championship trophy in 2020. Catch up with USA TODAY Sports updates and highlights of the Final Four matchup:

NCAA volleyball tournament score: Wisconsin 3, Kentucky 2

5th set final: Kentucky 15, Wisconsin 13

Kentucky’s defensive pressure had Wisconsin frazzled for the first time in the fifth set. The Wildcats went on a 8-1 run in the fifth set to take an 8-2 lead. Wisconsin responded with a 8-4 run to come within two points, 13-10. Kentucky went on to take the set and match on an Eva Hudson kill.

Wisconsin’s Mimi Colyer had a double-double with 32 kills and 12 digs in the loss. Carter Booth recorded a career-high 21 kills and six blocks.

4th set final: Kentucky 26, Wisconsin 24

With their backs against the wall, Kentucky won the fourth set 26-24 to force a decisive fifth set. The Wildcats were the first to the red zone, but Wisconsin fought off three set points to tie it up 24-all. Kentucky’s defense came through at the net and took the fourth set on back-to-back blocks.

Kentucky’s Eva Hudson recorded nine of her 23 kills in the fourth set. Brooklyn Deleye added 11 kills on an inefficient .136 hitting, while Asia Thigpen and Lizzie Carr each added eight kills.

Wisconsin’s Carter Booth has already set a new career-high with 18 kills, while Mimi Coyler is up to 29 kills.

3rd set final: Wisconsin 25, Kentucky 21

Wisconsin is back on top after winning the first set, 25-21. The Badgers ended the set on a 3-0 run.

The Badgers hit .386 in the third set, compared to .333 for Kentucky. Mimi Coyler leads Wisconsin with 22 kills on .395 hitting, while Carter Booth has tied her career-high with 14 kills and three blocks.

Kentucky’s Eva Hudson has 14 kills on .344 hitting, while Brooklyn Deleye added nine kills on .194 hitting.

2nd set: Kentucky 25, Wisconsin 22

Wisconsin dominated the first set, but Kentucky made some adjustments and came alive in the second set.

Kentucky jumped to a 7-4 lead over Wisconsin in the second, but the gritty Badgers surged mid-set to retake the lead, 20-18. Kentucky went on a 6-0 run to earn a set point, and despite Wisconsin fighting off two set points, Eva Hudson cashed in on the third set point to even it a set apiece.

‘We just got some breaks and we executed the serving,’ Kentucky head coach Craig Skinner said, adding that his team needs to serve tougher to get Wisconsin off the net. ‘The serve has got to pick up and our transition game has got to score some points.’

Wisconsin’s Carter Booth recorded 12 kills hitting .786 and Mimi Colyer added 10 kills on .318 hitting.

Kentucky’s Hudson is up to nine kills hitting .389.

1st set final: Wisconsin 25, Kentucky 12

The first set belonged to Wisconsin’s Carter Booth. The senior middle blocker recorded seven kills and two blocks hitting 1.000 in the Badgers’ 25-12 first set win. Mimi Colyer added seven kills.

Wisconsin hit .682 in the first set and held Kentucky to .056 hitting.

1st set: Wisconsin 10, Kentucky 3

Wisconsin came out red hot and jumped to a 10-3 lead after Carter Booth (5) and Mimi Colyer (3) combined for seven kills to start the first set. The Badgers are hitting 1.000 to start. 

Carter Booth height

Wisconsin senior middle blocker Carter Booth is listed at 6-foot-7.

When is Kentucky vs. Wisconsin volleyball?

The second semifinal matchup between No. 1 Kentucky (29-2)and Wisconsin (28-4) will take place 30 minutes after the conclusion of the first semifinal between No. 1 Pitt and No. 3 Texas A&M on Thursday, Dec. 18 at the T-Mobile Center in Kansas City, Missouri. 

Kentucky vs. Wisconsin volleyball: Channel, streaming

  • Date: Thursday, Dec. 18 
  • Time: 9:00 p.m. ET (8:00 p.m. CT)
  • Location: T-Mobile Center (Kansas City, Missouri)
  • Channel: ESPN
  • Stream: The ESPN App, Fubo

Kentucky Wildcats starting lineup

Head coach: Craig Skinner

  • 6 Kassie O’Brien | S 6-1 – Freshman
  • 7 Eva Hudson | OH 6-1 – Senior
  • 10 Kennedy Washington | MB 6-0 – Sophomore
  • 11 Molly Berezowitz | DS 5-5 – Junior
  • 12 Molly Tuozzo | L 5-7 – Junior
  • 15 Lizzie Carr | MB 6-6 – Redshirt Junior
  • 17 Brooklyn DeLeye | OH 6-2 – Junior

Kentucky women’s volleyball roster

Eva Hudson stats

The 6-1 senior outside hitter was named the SEC Player of the Year after hitting .317 with 4.54 kills per set and 504 total kills on the year. She leads Kentucky’s offense, which is hitting .295 this year.

Brooklyn DeLeye stats 

The 6-2 junior outside hitter is averaging 4.69 kills per set and hitting .289 with a team-high 521 kills this year. DeLeye is responsible for more than 564.5 points this year.

Kassie O’Brien wins AVCA Freshman of the Year

Kentucky setter Kassie O’Brien was named the 2025 AVCA Freshman of the Year, the first Wildcat to win the award, after averaging 11.02 assists per set this season.

Wisconsin Badgers starting lineup

Head coach: Kelly Sheffield

  • 1 Una Vajagic | OH 6-0 – Redshirt Sophomore
  • 7 Kristen Simon | L 5-8 – Freshman
  • 15 Mimi Colyer | OH 6-3 – Senior
  • 17 Alicia Andrew | MB 6-3 – Redshirt Senior
  • 24 Charlie Fuerbringer | S 5-11 – Sophomore
  • 32 Grace Egan | RS 6-1 – Redshirt Sophomore
  • 52 Carter Booth | MB 6-7 – Senior

Mimi Colyer stats

The 6-3 senior outside hitter had 20 or more kills in nine matches this season, including 23 kills vs. No. 1 Texas in the Elite Eight and 27 kills vs. No. 2 Stanford in the Round of 16. She averages 5.39 kills per set.

Wisconsin volleyball arrives at T-Mobile Center

Kentucky volleyball arrives at T-Mobile Center

NCAA volleyball player of the year finalists

The 2025 AVCA Player of the Year shortlist was narrowed to four finalists on Monday: Pitt junior right side hitter Olivia Babcock, Wisconsin senior outside hitter Mimi Colyer, Kentucky senior outside hitter Eva Hudson and Nebraska junior setter Bergen Reilly.

NCAA volleyball transfer portal 2026

The 2025 NCAA women’s college volleyball tournament is down to the Final Four with Kentucky, Pittsburgh, Wisconsin and Texas A&Madvancing to the semifinals, but it’s never too early to look ahead to next season.

NCAA volleyball past champions

  • 2024: Penn State
  • 2023: Texas
  • 2022: Texas
  • 2021: Wisconsin
  • 2020: Kentucky
  • 2019: Stanford
  • 2018: Stanford
  • 2017: Nebraska
  • 2016: Stanford
  • 2015: Nebraska
  • 2014: Penn State
  • 2013: Penn State
  • 2012: Texas
  • 2011: UCLA
  • 2010: Penn State
  • 2009: Penn State
  • 2008: Penn State
  • 2007: Penn State
  • 2006: Nebraska
  • 2005: Washington
  • 2004: Stanford
  • 2003: Southern California
  • 2002: Southern California
  • 2001: Stanford
  • 2000: Nebraska
  • 1999: Penn State
  • 1998: Long Beach State
  • 1997: Stanford
  • 1996: Stanford
  • 1995: Nebraska
  • 1994: Stanford
  • 1993: Long Beach State
  • 1992: Stanford
  • 1991: UCLA
  • 1990: UCLA
  • 1989: Long Beach State
  • 1988: Texas
  • 1987: Hawaii
  • 1986: Pacific
  • 1985: Pacific
  • 1984: UCLA
  • 1983: Hawaii
  • 1982: Hawaii
  • 1981: Southern California

The USA TODAY app gets you to the heart of the news — fastDownload for award-winning coverage, crosswords, audio storytelling, the eNewspaper and more.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

  • The winner of the Rams-Seahawks game will become the NFC’s projected No. 1 playoff seed.
  • The Philadelphia Eagles can clinch the NFC East title with a victory over the Washington Commanders.
  • Multiple teams, including the Bills, Jaguars, Chargers, and Patriots, will attempt to clinch playoff berths on Sunday.

Did you have Rams-Seahawks (Part 2) circled as the potential NFL game of the year when the schedule came out seven months ago? It’s certainly a nice win for the Prime Video crew that will stream the NFC West rematch one month after the Rams held on for a 21-19 win in Los Angeles, a game Seattle nearly won despite QB Sam Darnold’s four interceptions. The winner of Thursday night’s showdown of 11-3 squads will wind up as the NFC’s projected No. 1 playoff seed and NFC West leader while the loser will be relegated into the conference’s fifth spot … at least for now.

But make no mistake, the remainder of Week 16 will also feature consequential matchups.

Saturday, the Philadelphia Eagles can secure the NFC East title and eliminate the Dallas Cowboys by defeating the Washington Commanders. And first place in the NFC North will also be on the line Saturday night as the Packers and Bears meet for the second time in three weeks, this time in Chicago. One of those teams will lock up a playoff berth over the weekend if the Detroit Lions lose to the Pittsburgh Steelers on Sunday.

The NFC South will take center stage Dec. 21 as the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and Carolina Panthers meet in the first of two matchups over the next three weeks that should determine the division’s winner and lone playoff participant. The Buffalo Bills, Jacksonville Jaguars, LA Chargers and New England Patriots, who play the Baltimore Ravens on ‘Sunday Night Football,’ will all attempt to clinch playoff berths Sunday.

Monday night, the San Francisco 49ers could also punch their playoff ticket, though the focus of their nationally televised game is certain to be on Indianapolis Colts QB Philip Rivers’ first game at Lucas Oil Stadium in five years.

Got all of that, folks? Enjoy this pre-Holiday smorgasbord as USA TODAY Sports’ panel of NFL experts shares its outlook for the Week 16 rundown:

(Odds provided by BetMGM)

Week 16 picks, predictions, odds

  • Rams at Seahawks
  • Eagles at Commanders
  • Packers at Bears
  • Chiefs at Titans
  • Vikings at Giants
  • Buccaneers at Panthers
  • Jets at Saints
  • Chargers at Cowboys
  • Bills at Browns
  • Bengals at Dolphins
  • Falcons at Cardinals
  • Jaguars at Broncos
  • Steelers at Lions
  • Raiders at Texans
  • Patriots at Ravens
  • 49ers at Colts
This post appeared first on USA TODAY

With the Seattle Seahawks trailing the Los Angeles Rams by 16 points early in the fourth quarter, it felt like they needed a miracle to come back. The crazy two-point conversion they got to tie the game 7 minutes later wasn’t quite a miracle, but it was the next best thing.

The Seahawks were trailing by 16 points early in the fourth quarter of the Week 16 ‘Thursday Night Football’ game. They managed to score a touchdown on a punt return by wide receiver Rashid Shaheed and converted a two-point try to cut the lead down to one score. On their following possession, Seattle scored another touchdown, but things got wild on the ensuing two-point conversion attempt that ended up tying the game.

After his 26-yard touchdown pass to AJ Barner, Seahawks quarterback Sam Darnold attempted a quick screen pass to running back Zach Charbonnet on the two-point try. Rams defensive end Jared Verse was ready for it and leapt in between Darnold and Charbonnet to break up the pass. The tipped ball fell through Rams safety Kam Curl’s arms and dribbled into the end zone, where Charbonnet slowly walked over to pick it up.

The initial ruling on the field was that the pass fell incomplete. But upon further review, Darnold’s throw toward Charbonnet traveled backwards. Rather than an incompletion on a pass attempt, the loose ball was considered a fumble on a lateral attempt.

Since the ball ended up in the end zone and was recovered by Charbonnet, the ruling of an incomplete pass and failed two-point try was overturned to a successful conversion. It tied the game for Seattle with six and a half minutes remaining in the contest and reinvigorated the Seahawks’ division title hopes.

This post appeared first on USA TODAY

IRIS Metals Limited (ASX: IR1, “IRIS” or “the Company”) is pleased to announce it has executed a binding Heads of Agreement (HOA) with Finley Mining Inc for the exclusive right to farm-in to the Finley Basin Tungsten Project (Tungsten Project) located in Granite County, Montana, USA. This strategic farm-in opportunity further expands IRIS’ exposure to critical minerals beyond lithium, positioning the Company in a key tungsten district with historical production potential and untapped high-grade tungsten potential in a jurisdiction primed for revival under U.S. critical minerals policies.

HIGHLIGHTS

  • IRIS Metals has signed a binding Heads of Agreement with Finley Mining Inc and its shareholders, granting IRIS an exclusive right to farm-in to the high-grade Finley Basin Tungsten Project, located in Granite County, Montana, USA, subject to the execution of full form farm-in agreements to be negotiated in good faith on the agreed key terms within 40 business days (unless extended).
  • Due to the transaction materialising during a proposed capital raising program, the Company decided not to raise capital at this point in time, having regard to the strategic merits of the Tungsten acquisition.
  • Limited drilling undertaken by Union Carbide in the late 1970s–early 1980s resulted in a historical, non-JORC compliant tungsten reserve, 850,000 tons at an average grade of 0.68% WO₃1, which is considered high-grade relative to many global tungsten deposits.
  • The farm-in provides IRIS with exposure to tungsten, a critical mineral with strategic importance for defense, energy, and industrial applications, complementing IRIS’ existing critical minerals portfolio.
  • The farm-in structure allows IRIS to earn up to a 100% interest in the project through staged exploration expenditure of up to USD$2,000,000 over 4 years and delivery of a JORC- compliant Inferred Resource.
  • Exploration activities to commence at the Finley Basin Project in early 2026, focusing on resource definition, expansion, and development studies.
  • The transaction aligns with IRIS’ strategy to expand its critical minerals footprint in the USA, leveraging incentives for domestically sourced materials.
IRIS Metals Executive Chairman Peter Marks commented:

‘This binding agreement marks an exciting step for IRIS as we grow and diversify our critical minerals portfolio into tungsten, a vital component for the defense and technology industries. The Finley Basin Project offers significant upside with its prospective geology and location in a mining-friendly jurisdiction. Combined with our existing South Dakota portfolio, this positions IRIS to capitalise on significantly growing demand for US-sourced critical minerals.’

Montana Portfolio Expansion and Development

IRIS is actively evaluating additional critical mineral opportunities to complement its core South Dakota holdings. This farm-in to the Finley Basin Tungsten Project diversifies IRIS’ assets into tungsten, a critical mineral essential for military energetics, alloys, electronics, and renewable energy technologies, with U.S. demand surging amid defense initiatives and clean energy goals, yet vulnerable to geopolitical supply disruptions.

The expansion of IRIS’ mineral portfolio to tungsten was measured in approach with a number of projects reviewed and compared. The Company selected the Finley Basin Project due to its high-grade characteristics when compared other tungsten occurrences in the US2, historical exploration results, favourable jurisdiction, potential for expansion of known mineralisation, local milling capabilities, and reasonable proximity to the Company’s South Dakota operations.

IRIS’ primary focus remains on advancing its South Dakota lithium and rubidium projects toward near- term development under its “Hub & Spoke” strategy, which emphasises centralized processing across multiple sites.

Recent expansions, including the September 2025 acquisition of the Ingersoll Project from Rapid Critical Metals have significantly grown IRIS’ Black Hills footprint and private land holdings. IRIS is rapidly expanding mineral resources and progressing studies to support a multi-mine production model, with economic analysis targeted for 2026.

This strategic diversification importantly aligns with broader U.S. incentives for domestically sourced critical minerals and supports resilient supply chains under frameworks such as the Australia-U.S. Climate, Critical Minerals and Clean Energy Transformation Compact.

Click here for the full ASX Release

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • Restart of mining operations at San Agustin

  • Mining the reserve will produce 45,000 ounces at an AISC of $1,990/GEO providing a margin of over $2,300/oz at current spot gold prices

  • Oxide targets drilling program underway with 37 holes completed and submitted for analysis

Heliostar Metals Ltd. (TSXV: HSTR,OTC:HSTXF) (OTCQX: HSTXF) (FSE: RGG1) (‘Heliostar’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce that mining, crushing and conveying and stacking of ore onto the leach pad at San Agustin has recommenced.

Heliostar CEO, Charles Funk, commented, ‘Restarting mining at San Agustin is a significant milestone for Heliostar. It delivers on our guidance of a Q4, 2025 restart issued at the beginning of the year and sets the Company up for a large increase in consolidated gold production in 2026. Mining the current reserve will produce 45,000 ounces of gold expected to generate US$40M in cash flow at a US$3,000 gold price. Further, the Company is in the middle of a 10,000-15,000 metre drill program focused on finding potential extensions of the orebody that may support an increase in mine life at San Agustin.’

‘Investing in Heliostar at the beginning of the year required trust that the many undefined opportunities recognized by our team within our portfolio could be progressed. We move toward the end of the year having crystalized many of these opportunities. We have certainty in our production profile at San Agustin and La Colorada going into 2026 and look forward to providing formal guidance in January. We have shown the value of our growth opportunities with studies on our flagship Ana Paula and Cerro del Gallo projects. With more drilling completed in 2025 than the entire previous history of Heliostar, we aim to continue to build on our 8.2M gold and gold-equivalent ounce M&I resource base1,2. We plan to deliver continued production growth, and grow the value of Heliostar on a per share basis. We are only just getting started!’

Restart Update

The Company announced it had received the final approvals from the government to restart mining at San Agustin on July 22, 2025. Since that time, Heliostar has rapidly advanced work to restart mining activities at the operation. This included purchase and transfer of the surface access rights to Heliostar, adjusting the location of a power line tower and establishing surface access roads to the Corner area.

Over the past several months, the Company has relocated the vegetation and topsoil at the Corner area and recommissioned the 30,000 tonne per day crushing circuit while residual heap leach operations have continued uninterrupted. This has allowed Heliostar to restart open pit mining with two ore blasts and two waste blasts completed to date. The mining contractor has successfully mobilized 90% of the mobile equipment fleet to site which will allow the operation to achieve production targets. Crushing activities continue to ramp up to full capacity with stacking of new oxide ore on the leach pad underway.

Restart Photos

Figure 1: Production drill rig drilling blast hole patten in Corner Area at San Agustin.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_003full.jpg

Figure 2:  First blast of the Corner Area at San Agustin.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_004full.jpg

Figure 3: First ore being loaded to be delivered to the crusher at San Agustin.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_005full.jpg

Figure 4: First new ore being conveyed and stacked on the San Agustin leach pad.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_006full.jpg

Technical Report Summary

On January 14, 2025, the Company filed an amended and restated technical report titled ‘San Agustin Operations, Durango State, Mexico, NI 43-101 Technical Report’ prepared by Mr. Todd Wakefield, RM SME, Mine Technical Services, Mr. David Thomas, P.Geo., Mine Technical Services, Mr. Jeffrey Choquette, P.E., Hard Rock Consulting, Mr. Carl Defilippi, RM SME, Kappes Cassiday and Associates and Ms. Dawn Garcia, CPG, Stantec with an effective date of November 30, 2024 (the ‘Technical Report’).

The life-of-mine (LOM) plan set out in the Technical Report indicates that a probable mineral reserve of 68,000 ounces of gold can be exploited based on 1.2 years of mine life at a site level all-in sustaining cost (AISC) of US$1,990/oz Au. The initial capital cost in the Technical Report is estimated at US$4.2M.

The Technical Report demonstrates a post-tax NPV5% of US$35.3M, a post-tax IRR of 548% and a payback period of 0.2 years for the upside case at a $3,000/oz gold price.

The mineral reserve estimate included in the Technical Report is based on operation of the existing crusher and conveyor system having a nameplate throughput capacity of about 30,000 tonnes/day and the continued operation of the heap leach and carbon-in-column (CIC) process circuit processing ore from the expanded open pit. The mineral reserve estimate included in the Technical Report is presented below. The expected operating performance and operating cost forecasts were compiled with the benefit of benchmarking historical performance at San Agustin and the input of seasoned professionals knowledgeable of the conventional technologies being used at San Agustin, the expected consumption quantities of key supplies, and commercial pricing for goods and services in Mexico.

Figure 5: View of Corner Area looking to southeast showing the current reserve model and planned pitshell.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_007full.jpg

Oxide Growth Targets

With mining now started at San Agustin mine, the Company is working to extend the mine life. To date, 37 drill holes totalling 3,300m from the ongoing 10,000-15,000m drill program have been completed with assays pending. This drill program is focused on defining additional gold-bearing oxide gold material at the margins of the current pit and at the edge of the Corner Area that can extend the life of the operation. Drilling at the Corner SW, MKT and Phase 3 SW areas (shown below in Figure 6) has been completed with the drill currently active at the Corner SW area.

Higher-grade oxide results from the priority Corner SW target area drilled by a previous operator include:

  • Hole 14-SAGRC-196 grading 3.52 grams per tonne (g/t) Gold over 18.3 metres from 32.0 metres downhole
  • Hole 14-SAGRC-177 grading 0.34 g/t Gold over 15.24 metres from 27.4 metres downhole

The targets are the extensions of mineralized corridors defined by grade control drilling and through a comprehensive re-logging and multi-element re-assaying program undertaken by Heliostar geologists in H1, 2025. The increase in gold price has also increased the potential of certain lower grade areas that were not previously a priority at San Agustin. The base case economics in the January 2025 Technical Report were shown at a $2,100/oz gold price within resource pit shells calculated at $2,150/oz.

Figure 6: Plan map of San Agustin showing oxide gold growth targets with drilling and blasthole data shown. Areas highlighted in yellow show drilling progress.

To view an enhanced version of this graphic, please visit:
https://images.newsfilecorp.com/files/7729/278432_964ab61f64952905_008full.jpg

Statement of Qualified Person

Stewart Harris, P.Geo., a Qualified Person, as such term is defined by National Instrument 43-101 – Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects, has reviewed the scientific and technical information that forms the basis for this news release and has approved the disclosure herein. Mr. Harris is employed as Exploration Manager of the Company.

Footnotes

  1. La Colorada, San Agustin, Ana Paula and San Antonio are gold-only measured and indicated resource contained ounces.
  2. Cerro del Gallo are measured and indicated resource contained gold-equivalent ounces. The gold equivalent grades were calculated as AuEq = Au Grade + (((Cu Price in US$/lb * 22.0462 * Cu Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Cu Grade) + (((Ag Price in US$/g * Ag Recovery and Payable) / (Au Price in US$/g * Au Recovery and Payable)) * Ag Grade). Metal prices used are US$2,500/oz Au, US$30.50/oz Ag, and US$4.60/lb Cu. In addition, a gold recovery of 74%, a silver recovery of 60% and a copper recovery of 17% were used for Oxide material, a gold recovery of 68%, a silver recovery of 73% and a copper recovery of 62% were used for Mixed Oxide material, a gold recovery of 61%, a silver recovery of 58% and a copper recovery of 73% were used for Mixed Sulfide material and a gold recovery of 53%, a silver recovery of 35% and a copper recovery of 59% were used for Sulfide material. The average overall payables from the smelter and refineries were estimated at 98.8% for gold, 90.1% for silver and 88.2% for copper.

About Heliostar Metals Ltd.

Heliostar is a gold mining company with production from operating mines in Mexico. This includes the La Colorada Mine in Sonora and the San Agustin Mine in Durango. The Company also has a strong portfolio of development projects in Mexico and the USA. These include the Ana Paula project in Guerrero, the Cerro del Gallo project in Guanajuato, the San Antonio project in Baja Sur and the Unga project in Alaska, USA.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT:

Charles Funk
President and Chief Executive Officer
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: charles.funk@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045
Rob Grey
Investor Relations Manager
Heliostar Metals Limited
Email: rob.grey@heliostarmetals.com
Phone: +1 844-753-0045

 

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This news release includes certain ‘Forward-Looking Statements’ within the meaning of the United States Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and ‘forward-looking information’ under applicable Canadian securities laws. When used in this news release, the words ‘anticipate’, ‘believe’, ‘estimate’, ‘expect’, ‘target’, ‘plan’, ‘forecast’, ‘may’, ‘would’, ‘could’, ‘schedule’ and similar words or expressions, identify forward-looking statements or information. These forward-looking statements or information relate to, among other things, show the full extent of the deposit, upgrade and expand the resource base, growing our annual production profile in the near term and bringing additional production online.

Forward-looking statements and forward-looking information relating to the terms and completion of the Facility, any future mineral production, liquidity, and future exploration plans are based on management’s reasonable assumptions, estimates, expectations, analyses and opinions, which are based on management’s experience and perception of trends, current conditions and expected developments, and other factors that management believes are relevant and reasonable in the circumstances, but which may prove to be incorrect. Assumptions have been made regarding, among other things, the receipt of necessary approvals, price of metals; no escalation in the severity of public health crises or ongoing military conflicts; costs of exploration and development; the estimated costs of development of exploration projects; and the Company’s ability to operate in a safe and effective manner and its ability to obtain financing on reasonable terms.

These statements reflect the Company’s respective current views with respect to future events and are necessarily based upon a number of other assumptions and estimates that, while considered reasonable by management, are inherently subject to significant business, economic, competitive, political, and social uncertainties and contingencies. Many factors, both known and unknown, could cause actual results, performance, or achievements to be materially different from the results, performance or achievements that are or may be expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements or forward-looking information and the Company has made assumptions and estimates based on or related to many of these factors. Such factors include, without limitation: precious metals price volatility; risks associated with the conduct of the Company’s mining activities in foreign jurisdictions; regulatory, consent or permitting delays; risks relating to reliance on the Company’s management team and outside contractors; risks regarding exploration and mining activities; the Company’s inability to obtain insurance to cover all risks, on a commercially reasonable basis or at all; currency fluctuations; risks regarding the failure to generate sufficient cash flow from operations; risks relating to project financing and equity issuances; risks and unknowns inherent in all mining projects, including the inaccuracy of reserves and resources, metallurgical recoveries and capital and operating costs of such projects; contests over title to properties, particularly title to undeveloped properties; laws and regulations governing the environment, health and safety; the ability of the communities in which the Company operates to manage and cope with the implications of public health crises; the economic and financial implications of public health crises, ongoing military conflicts and general economic factors to the Company; operating or technical difficulties in connection with mining or development activities; employee relations, labour unrest or unavailability; the Company’s interactions with surrounding communities; the Company’s ability to successfully integrate acquired assets; the speculative nature of exploration and development, including the risks of diminishing quantities or grades of reserves; stock market volatility; conflicts of interest among certain directors and officers; lack of liquidity for shareholders of the Company; litigation risk; and the factors identified under the caption ‘Risk Factors’ in the Company’s public disclosure documents. Readers are cautioned against attributing undue certainty to forward-looking statements or forward-looking information. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be anticipated, estimated or intended. The Company does not intend, and does not assume any obligation, to update these forward-looking statements or forward-looking information to reflect changes in assumptions or changes in circumstances or any other events affecting such statements or information, other than as required by applicable law.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/278432

News Provided by Newsfile via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Uranium prices stayed fairly steady in 2025, but experts agree its long-term outlook is compelling,

Demand picked up from reactor restarts, new nuclear construction projects and growing interest in small modular reactors. Meanwhile, supply constraints continued as miners faced issues ramping up.

1. Trump Admin Pushes for Uranium Stockpile Boost to Secure Nuclear Power Future

Publish date: September 16, 2025

In September, the Trump administration zeroed in on its plan to reduce uranium reliance on Russia.

A report by Bloomberg outlined that Russia still accounts for approximately a quarter of the fuel used in America’s 94 nuclear reactors, which generate roughly 20 percent of the nation’s electricity.

Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said that the Department of Energy was working to reduce that dependence by rebuilding domestic uranium and enrichment supply chains.

The concept of a federal uranium reserve dates back to 2020, when the first Trump administration sought US$150 million to begin direct purchases from US producers, though Congress approved only half the amount.

Supply concerns sharpened after Russia briefly restricted uranium exports to the US in late 2024, underscoring Washington’s exposure to geopolitical risks.

A law signed in May 2024 requires US utilities to phase out Russian uranium by 2028, with future stockpile levels expected to rise in line with new reactor construction, including small modular reactors.

“We’re moving to a place — and we’re not there yet — to no longer use Russian enriched uranium,” Wright said, adding that the US needs significantly more domestic uranium and enrichment capacity.

2. China Achieves World’s First Thorium-to-Uranium Conversion

Publish date: November 6, 2025

China marked a milestone in 2025 by converting thorium into uranium inside a working molten salt reactor.

The experimental thorium molten salt reactor, developed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Shanghai Institute of Applied Physics in the Gobi Desert, is the first in the world to demonstrate stable thorium-based fission.

The reactor has been operating since reaching first criticality in October 2023 and has now produced data confirming the conversion of thorium-232 into uranium-233, a fissile material capable of sustaining a nuclear chain reaction.

Unlike conventional reactors that use solid uranium fuel rods, the system relies on liquid fuel dissolved in molten fluoride salt, allowing continuous refueling and stable heat generation without shutting down operations.

3. Uranium Energy’s Sweetwater Project Fast Tracked Under Trump Initiative

Publish date: August 6, 2025

In August, Uranium Energy’s (NYSEAMERICAN:UEC) Sweetwater uranium complex in Wyoming was designated for expedited permitting under the Trump administration’s FAST-41 initiative. The initiative is part of a broader strategy to revitalize the US nuclear fuel supply chain and reduce reliance on imports from geopolitical rivals.

The Sweetwater complex, located in Wyoming’s Great Divide Basin, is anchored by a fully licensed conventional uranium mill with a capacity of 3,000 metric tons per day and annual output of 4.1 million pounds.

The site previously included several permitted mines — Sweetwater (Red Desert), Big Eagle and Jackpot (Green Mountain) — and will now be evaluated for in-situ recovery mining, a lower-impact extraction technique.

The new permitting push will allow the company to modify existing approvals to incorporate in-situ recovery capabilities both within and beyond the current mine boundary, including on adjacent federal lands.

Sweetwater is the second uranium project to receive fast-track treatment under the policy, following Anfield Energy’s (TSXV:AEC,NASDAQ:AEC) Velvet-Wood project in Utah, which received the status in May.

4. Denison Mines Moves Closer to Federal Approval for Phoenix ISR Uranium Project

Publish date: February 28, 2025

In February, Denison Mines (TSX:DML,NYSEAMERICAN:DNN) announced that the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) had scheduled public hearings for its Wheeler River uranium project in Saskatchewan.

The hearings were scheduled for October 8 and December 8 to 12, and according to the company would represent the final stage in the federal environmental assessment process. Denison holds an effective 95 percent interest in Wheeler River, the largest undeveloped uranium project in the Eastern Athabasca Basin. If approved, the company expects to begin site preparation and construction for its Phoenix in-situ recovery uranium project in early 2026.

In its Q3 report, released on November 6, Denison said the first part of the hearing was complete, and that it was expecting a decision from the CNSC in early 2026 after part two of the hearing.

5. Western Australia Reviews Uranium Mining Ban as Nuclear Energy Investment Grows

Publish date: October 2, 2025

Possibly the biggest uranium news in Australia in 2025 was Western Australia’s move to consider lifting its ban on new uranium licenses. In October, ahead of an energy-focused trade mission to China and Japan, Premier Roger Cook signaled the policy might be under review as part of broader strategic development considerations.

China, Western Australia’s largest trading partner, accounts for more than half of the state’s exports.

While the state’s three existing uranium mines continue to operate under previously approved permits, no new developments have been allowed since the ban was put in place in 2017. Cook emphasized that Western Australia intends to respect legal mining leases, while exploring future opportunities.

He also stressed that any change to the uranium policy would likely depend on a “significant shift” in global markets, while the state continues to monitor existing permit holders and potential future projects.

Securities Disclosure: I, Gabrielle de la Cruz, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

Strengthening the Technical Team as Goldfields Advances Toward Pre-Feasibility

 Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV: FOR,OTC:FTBYF) (FWB: 5QN) (OTCQB: FTBYF) (‘Fortune Bay’ or the ‘Company’) is pleased to announce the appointment of Ronald (Ron) Halas, P.Eng., as Senior Mining Advisor for its Goldfields Gold Project in Saskatchewan, and to provide an update on recent exploration and development activities at Goldfields.

Highlights:

  • Senior Mining Advisor AppointmentRon Halas, P.Eng. brings over 35 years of global gold mining experience, including most recently as Chief Operating Officer of Lumina Gold Corp., where he led feasibility-level advancement of the Cangrejos gold-copper project prior to its acquisition by CMOC Group in 2025.
  • Permitting and Environmental Progress – Permitting activities are advancing, with a community engagement tour completed in November 2025. Results from environmental baseline studies are expected in January 2026, supporting planned regulatory engagement in Q1 2026.

Dale Verran, Chief Executive Officer of Fortune Bay, commented ‘At Goldfields, we are advancing toward a Pre-Feasibility Study while progressing permitting and stakeholder engagement activities. Ron’s appointment comes at an important time for the project. He brings deep, hands-on experience across the lifecycle of gold mining projects, from feasibility studies through mine construction and operations. His practical, execution-focused perspective significantly strengthens our technical team as this work continues.’

Ron Halas, Senior Mining Advisor, added ‘Goldfields is an excellent project with strong fundamentals, and I am pleased to be assisting Fortune Bay at a pivotal stage in its advancement. With project development and permitting activities gaining momentum, this is an opportune time to apply my experience in support of Fortune Bay’s disciplined approach to project development. I look forward to working closely with the team to help unlock the project’s potential.’

Appointment of Senior Mining Advisor

Fortune Bay has appointed Ronald (Ron) Halas, P.Eng., as Senior Mining Advisor for the Goldfields Gold Project. Mr. Halas will work with Fortune Bay on a consulting basis, providing direct input into project development planning and permitting activities as the project advances toward a PFS.

Mr. Halas brings more than 35 years of global mining and project development experience, spanning open pit and underground gold mining, feasibility studies, mine construction, permitting, and operations.

Most recently, Mr. Halas served as Chief Operating Officer of Lumina Gold Corp., where he led technical and operational activities supporting the advancement of the Cangrejos gold-copper project in Ecuador through feasibility-level studies. Lumina Gold Corp. was subsequently acquired by CMOC Group in 2025, following the completion of key technical milestones.

Prior to Lumina Gold Corp., Mr. Halas held senior executive and operational leadership roles with Global Atomic Corporation (Chief Operating Officer), Kinross Gold Corporation, IAMGOLD Corporation, Placer Dome, INCO (now Vale), and PT Freeport Indonesia, among others. His experience includes leadership roles at large-scale open pit and underground mining operations and the delivery of multiple feasibility studies across the Americas, Africa, and Asia. He has also served as a board member and technical advisor to several publicly listed mining companies.

Mr. Halas holds a Bachelor of Mining Engineering from McGill University and a Graduate Diploma in Business Administration from Simon Fraser University, and is a registered Professional Engineer (P.Eng.).

Goldfields Project Update

Exploration Drilling

  • Sample batches are being consigned to SRC Geoanalytical Laboratories in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, for gold analysis. First-batch assay results are expected in late-January, with additional results to follow as further batches are processed.
  • Drilling in January will continue exploration step-outs 200 to 350 metres beyond the current mineral resource extents, targeting extensions of higher-grade structural trends at Box.

Goldfields Development & Permitting

  • Metallurgical sample processing for Box is currently underway at SGS Canada – Lakefield, Ontario, focused on refining parameters for gravity-recoverable and flotation-recoverable gold. Results are expected in mid-January and will support decision-making around final project scope for initiation of a PFS.
  • A community tour of Indigenous communities and municipalities was completed in November 2025 to support early engagement regarding the proposed open-pit mine development at Goldfields, in accordance with the Updated PEA mine plan. This tour represents a key step in advancing project development consultation in line with the Company’s commitments to early, transparent, and respectful engagement with Indigenous Nations and local stakeholders.

Qualified Person & Technical Disclosure

The technical and scientific information in this news release has been reviewed and approved by Gareth Garlick P.Geo., Vice-President Technical Services of the Company, who is a Qualified Person as defined by NI 43-101. Mr. Garlick is an employee of Fortune Bay and is not independent of the Company under NI 43‑101.

About Fortune Bay

Fortune Bay Corp. (TSXV:FOR,OTC:FTBYF; FWB:5QN; OTCQB:FTBYF) is a Canadian mineral exploration and development company with assets in Canada and Mexico. The Company’s primary focus is advancing the Goldfields Gold Project in Saskatchewan, Canada. Fortune Bay also holds the Poma Rosa Gold-Copper Project in Chiapas, Mexico, as well as an optioned uranium project portfolio in the Athabasca Basin of Saskatchewan. Fortune Bay continues to evaluate and advance its portfolio in a disciplined manner while maintaining a strong technical foundation and prudent capital management. For more information, please visit www.fortunebaycorp.com or contact info@fortunebaycorp.com.

On behalf of Fortune Bay Corp.

‘Dale Verran’
Chief Executive Officer
902-334-1919

Cautionary Statement

Information set forth in this news release contains forward-looking statements that are based on assumptions as of the date of this news release. These statements reflect management’s current estimates, beliefs, intentions, and expectations. They are not guarantees of future performance. Words such as ‘expects’, ‘aims’, ‘anticipates’, ‘targets’, ‘goals’, ‘projects’, ‘intends’, ‘plans’, ‘believes’, ‘seeks’, ‘estimates’, ‘continues’, ‘may’, variations of such words, and similar expressions and references to future periods, are intended to identify such forward-looking statements, and include, but are not limited to, statements with respect to: the results of the Updated PEA, including future Project opportunities, future operating and capital costs, closure costs, AISC, the projected NPV, IRR, timelines, permit timelines, and the ability to obtain the requisite permits, economics and associated returns of the Project, the technical viability of the Project, the market and future price of and demand for gold, the environmental impact of the Project, and the ongoing ability to work cooperatively with stakeholders, including Indigenous Nations, local Municipalities and local levels of government. Since forward-looking statements are based on assumptions and address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Although these statements are based on information currently available to the Company, the Company provides no assurance that actual results will meet management’s expectations. Risks, uncertainties and other factors involved with forward- looking information could cause actual events, results, performance, prospects and opportunities to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Forward looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, the Company’s objectives, goals or future plans, statements, exploration results, potential mineralization, the estimation of mineral resources, exploration and mine development plans, timing of the commencement of operations and estimates of market conditions. Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking information include, but are not limited to failure to identify mineral resources, failure to convert estimated mineral resources to reserves, the inability to complete a feasibility study which recommends a production decision, the preliminary nature of metallurgical test results, delays in obtaining or failures to obtain required governmental, environmental or other project approvals, political risks, inability to fulfill the duty to accommodate Indigenous Nations and local Municipalities, uncertainties relating to the availability and costs of financing needed in the future, changes in equity markets, inflation, changes in exchange rates, fluctuations in commodity prices, delays in the development of projects, capital and operating costs varying significantly from estimates and the other risks involved in the mineral exploration and development industry, and those risks set out in the Company’s public documents filed on SEDAR. Although the Company believes that the assumptions and factors used in preparing the forward-looking information in this news release are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on such information, which only applies as of the date of this news release, and no assurance can be given that such events will occur in the disclosed time frames or at all. The Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking information, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, other than as required by law. For more information on Fortune Bay, readers should refer to Fortune Bay’s website at www.fortunebaycorp.com.

Neither TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in policies of TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

SOURCE Fortune Bay Corp.

View original content to download multimedia: http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/December2025/18/c1857.html

News Provided by Canada Newswire via QuoteMedia

This post appeared first on investingnews.com