Vale reports Q1 pro forma EBITDA $3.21B vs $3.5B last year
Stay Ahead of the Market:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Beijing Braces for US Trade Deals That Aim to Shut Out China
(Bloomberg) -- The trade truce between Washington and Beijing may be holding for now, but China is increasingly wary about what's happening elsewhere: US efforts to forge deals that could isolate Chinese firms from global supply chains. Struggling Downtowns Are Looking to Lure New Crowds New York Port Authority Shut Down Due to Multi-Bus Accident California Exempts Building Projects From Environmental Law What Gothenburg Got Out of Congestion Pricing Ahead of a July 9 deadline, US officials are deep in talks with major trading partners in Asia and Europe, pushing for new agreements that would include restrictions on Chinese content, or secure commitments to counter what Washington sees as China's unfair trade practices. India, one of the closest to a deal, has been negotiating over 'rules of origin.' Washington wants at least 60% of a product's value added locally to qualify as 'Made in India' and benefit from the deal, Bloomberg previously reported. India has pushed to bring that down to around 35%, according to the report. Vietnam and others are under similar pressure to adopt tiered tariff systems, with higher levies for goods that include a large share of Chinese components, according to people briefed on the discussions, who asked not to be identified discussing private information. Exports from Vietnam to the US that contain the highest proportion of foreign components would be charged at the top end of a range, around 20% or above, Bloomberg News reported. The approach mirrors provisions in an existing US trade agreement with Mexico and Canada. 'Asia's dilemma when it comes to Trump's trade war is all about dependence on US final demand while relying heavily on China's value added in domestic production,' Alicia Garcia Herrero, Asia-Pacific chief economist at Natixis SA, said in a recent report, adding that Vietnam, Cambodia and Taiwan were among the most exposed. China, a larger trade partner than the US for most Asian economies, has warned of consequences if its interests are threatened, and Foreign Minister Wang Yi is likely to raise that again on his visit to Europe this week for talks in Brussels, Germany and France. 'China firmly opposes any party reaching a deal at the expense of Chinese interests in exchange for so-called tariff reductions,' the Ministry of Commerce said in a statement Saturday, repeating earlier warnings. 'If this happens, China will never accept it and will resolutely counter it to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests.' Trump's 90-day pause on what he called 'reciprocal' tariffs on dozens of America's trading partners ends on July 9. Unless those countries reach trade deals with the US, they could potentially face much higher tariffs. Some governments are making moves to stay on the right side of Washington. Vietnam, Thailand and South Korea have all put in place measures to stop goods from being rerouted through their countries to the US since Trump's tariffs were unveiled in April. South Korean customs announced a crackdown on transshipments, citing a rise in the practice. Taiwan's President Lai Ching-te also flagged the issue and followed up with new rules requiring all US-bound exports to carry a legal declaration they were made on the island. Export Controls Another concern for Beijing is whether the US could convince others to impose or tighten export controls on high-tech equipment, which would further hamper Chinese efforts to buy the tools it needs to produce advanced semiconductors. Taiwan in June added Huawei Technologies Co. and Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp. to its so-called entity list, barring Taiwanese firms from doing business with them without government approval. The pressure isn't limited to Asia. Europe, too, finds itself in a delicate position. The EU is China's largest export destination for electric vehicles, and investment from Chinese firms into the bloc plus the UK hit 10 billion euros ($12 billion) last year, according to recent research from Rhodium Group. Yet trade tensions are rising. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen recently accused Beijing of 'weaponizing' rare earths and magnets and warned of the risks posed by Chinese overcapacity. Beijing is particularly concerned that the EU might sign up to provisions similar to those in the UK's deal with the US, which included commitments around supply chain security, export controls, and ownership rules in sectors like steel, aluminum and pharmaceuticals. While the language did not name China, Beijing criticized the agreement in a rare public statement, interpreting it as a direct challenge, the Financial Times reported. 'China is clearly worried that the EU will accept the same wording as the UK did on export controls,' said Joerg Wuttke, a partner at the Albright Stonebridge Group in Washington and former president of the EU Chamber of Commerce in China. 'They are pushing the EU not to do this, and the US is pushing the EU to do it.' Brussels and Washington are aiming to reach some form of an agreement before July 9, when Washington is set to impose a 50% tariff on nearly all EU products. With European exports to the US worth more than double the amount to China, the bloc sees Washington as the more important partner, giving the US leverage in the talks. China's weekend statement is 'obviously aimed entirely at Brussels,' said Hosuk Lee-Makiyama, director of the European Centre for International Political Economy in Brussels, who was recently in Beijing for meetings ahead of an EU-China summit this month. 'China is concerned what the EU might agree with the US.' The long-term risk for Beijing is that these efforts coalesce into a broader shift — not just a US-led campaign to curb Chinese exports, but a reshaping of global trade around 'trusted' supply chains, with China increasingly on the outside. In a visit to Southeast Asia earlier this year, President Xi Jinping urged the region to stand together as an 'Asian family,' warning against trade fragmentation. Beijing has often responded to actions it opposes with targeted trade measures. When the EU imposed tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles last year, China launched anti-dumping probes into European brandy, dairy and pork. It halted Japanese seafood imports in 2023 after Group of Seven meetings in Japan were seen as critical of China. A spat with Australia in 2020 led to trade restrictions on billions of dollars' worth of goods, including lobsters, wine and barley. 'If some agreements explicitly list China as a target and show that some countries are cooperating or collaborating with the US to 'contain China,' then China will definitely respond,' said Tu Xinquan, dean of the China Institute for WTO Studies at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing and a former adviser to the Chinese Commerce Ministry. --With assistance from Soo-Hyang Choi and Shawn Donnan. (Updates with details of Vietnam-US negotiations in fourth paragraph. A previous version of the story was corrected to fix the scale of the vertical axis of the first chart.) SNAP Cuts in Big Tax Bill Will Hit a Lot of Trump Voters Too How to Steal a House America's Top Consumer-Sentiment Economist Is Worried China's Homegrown Jewelry Superstar Pistachios Are Everywhere Right Now, Not Just in Dubai Chocolate ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. 登入存取你的投資組合
Business Wire
2 hours ago
- Business Wire
Terra CO2 Announces Additional Series B Funding to Scale Sustainable Cement Production
GOLDEN, Colo.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Terra CO2 (Terra), a leading US-based low-carbon building materials company, today announced their series B funding, securing US$124.5M in new equity capital. In addition to the Series B co-leads Breakthrough Energy Ventures, Eagle Materials, GenZero, and Just Climate, the round included major investment from Barclays Climate Ventures. Additional strategic investors to join the round include Prologis, the global logistics leader, Cemex, an international leader in construction materials, and Siemens Financial Services, the financing arm of global technology company Siemens. In addition to the equity raise, Silicon Valley Bank, a division of First Citizens Bank, and Stifel Bank co-led the provision of a credit facility furnishing Terra additional financial flexibility. 'Terra's mandate is to deliver cementitious material solutions that the market would purchase solely based on cost and performance, even if there was no carbon benefit," says Terra CEO Bill Yearsley. Share As government funding and subsidies for climate initiatives decrease in the US, it's imperative that these solutions provide cost competitive advantages that can work within existing industries and infrastructures. Terra's SCM provides a commercial deployment ready solution that is not dependent on subsidies, providing both investors and partners with the certainty they need. With the new capital, Terra will be rapidly moving forward with its first 240,000 TPY commercial advanced-processing facility in the Dallas-Fort Worth market. The funding will also support expanding Terra's offices and industrial facilities, significantly growing the team, developing more shovel ready commercial projects, and further advancing new generations of cementitious products. 'Terra's mandate is to deliver cementitious material solutions that the market would purchase solely based on cost and performance, even if there was no carbon benefit. The fact that Terra's cementitious materials also offer significant carbon mitigation is an additional advantage for the built environment,' says Terra CEO Bill Yearsley. 'Terra's technology offers a combination of commercial readiness and cost competitiveness. Its ability to support the decarbonization of a heavy industry such as cement aligns with our commitment to support scalable, near-term solutions in hard-to-abate sectors,' says Steven Poulter, Head of Barclays Climate Ventures. Terra's patented Supplementary Cementitious Materials (SCMs) process produces a high-performing, low-cost alternative to Portland Cement and depleted traditional resources such as fly ash. And unlike other low-carbon SCMs, Terra's OPUS products utilize inexpensive, abundant, and local feedstocks from existing aggregate mines, and work within existing industry infrastructure. This approach enables immediate deployment at scale, delivering cementitious materials that perform equal to or better than historical SCM while significantly reducing carbon emissions. Terra's second product, OPUS Zero, is currently in active concrete trials and would serve as a full Portland cement replacement. About Terra CO2 (Terra) Terra enables our partners to unlock low-carbon cement from source to deployment. As the critical component in creating concrete, the foundation of modern infrastructure, cement is responsible for 8% of the world's CO 2 emissions. The CO 2 and NO x emissions associated with cement make finding an alternative to current solutions a climate imperative. Unique to Terra is their capability to work across a diverse range of silicate rock mineralogy, not constrained by feedstock availability. Terra's technology allows the company to create sustainable construction materials with the most abundant and accessible raw materials on earth from already approved and open mines. Terra's first product, OPUS SCM (Supplementary Cementitious Material), is ready for commercial deployment, capable of replacing up to 50% OPC (Original Portland Cement) and addressing the industry's carbon emissions and dwindling feedstock challenges. Terra's OPUS ZERO™, a potential 100% replacement of OPC, is in full concrete trials. Both leverage Terra's "drop-in" reactor solution, which seamlessly integrates with existing infrastructure and sets the foundation for the transition to real zero cement. Validated by third parties, Terra's materials perform equal to or better than traditional cementitious products.
Vox
2 hours ago
- Vox
The One Big Beautiful Bill is one big disaster for AI
is a senior correspondent and head writer for Vox's Future Perfect section and has worked at Vox since 2014. He is particularly interested in global health and pandemic prevention, anti-poverty efforts, economic policy and theory, and conflicts about the right way to do philanthropy. President Donald Trump, from left, Larry Ellison, co-founder and executive chairman of Oracle Corp., Masayoshi Son, chief executive officer of SoftBank Group Corp., and Sam Altman, chief executive officer of OpenAI Inc., in the Roosevelt Room of the White House in Washington, DC, on January 21. Aaron Schwartz/Sipa/Bloomberg via Getty Images To hear many smart AI observers tell it, the day of Wednesday, June 25, 2025, represented the moment when Congress started to take the possibility of advanced AI seriously. The occasion was a hearing of Congress's 'we're worried about China' committee (or, more formally, the Select Committee on the Strategic Competition Between the United States and the Chinese Communist Party) focused on the US-China AI competition. Members of both parties used the event to express concern that was surprisingly strident and detailed about the near-term risks posed by artificial general intelligence (AGI) or even artificial superintelligence (ASI). This story was first featured in the Future Perfect newsletter. Sign up here to explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week. Rep. Jill Tokuda (D-HI) expressed fear of 'loss of control by any nation-state' that 'could give rise to an independent AGI or ASI actor' threatening all nations. Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) predicted, 'AI systems will soon have the capability to conduct their own research and development,' and asked about the risks that might pose. Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-SD) declared, 'Anybody who doesn't feel urgency around this issue is not paying attention.' Shakeel Hashim of Transformer, one of the best reporters working on AI today, summarized the hearing this way: 'Washington seems to finally be waking up to the potential arrival of AGI — and the many risks that could accompany it.' Peter Wildeford of the Institute for AI Policy and Strategy headlined his post on the hearing, 'Congress Has Started Taking AGI More Seriously.' Yet even as that hearing was unfolding, the Senate was frantically putting the finishing touches on the One Big Beautiful Bill, the gargantuan deficit-exploding legislation to cut taxes, boost military and border spending, and cut to the bone various social programs. As part of their effort, culminating in Senate passage on Tuesday, Republican senators managed to worsen some of the safety net cuts in the House version of the bill and tried (unsuccessfully, thank goodness) to add a new tax on clean energy that could make building the energy-hungry data centers AI requires substantially more expensive. The negotiations were a reminder that, even as some parts of Congress have finally started to appear to take AI seriously, others are on autopilot and taking a series of actions that will make the US less competitive on, and less prepared for, the future of AI. Recapping the beautiful bill As I wrote a month ago, the One Big Beautiful Bill, in general, is not the work of policymakers who take the possibility of powerful AI seriously. The House-passed provision stripping broadband funding from states that regulate AI suggested its authors do not think AI will be a sufficiently important technology that will need to be regulated the way telephones, electrical transmission, the internet, and other major technological breakthroughs have always been by state and local governments. Luckily, the Senate voted to strip this provision from its version of the bill on Monday night, but that hardly means the rest of the bill is harmless. The bill's cuts to, and imposition of new work requirements upon, safety net programs, such as Medicaid and SNAP (aka food stamps), suggest the authors do not take the risk of automation-caused job loss at all seriously. If huge numbers of Americans are about to be displaced from their jobs due to technological advancements, the last thing we ought to do is condition more support programs on work. Yet that is exactly what the bill does, and the Senate version is in many ways worse than the House one. While the Medicaid work requirements in the House bill only apply to adults without children, the Senate bill extends them to parents with children 14 and over. It cuts Medicaid funding to states by changes to policies called 'provider taxes.' Its food stamp work requirements are slightly less stringent than the House's, but both bills open the door to states opting out of the food stamps program entirely if they so choose. How does this connect to a future with far more powerful AI? Imagine you lose your job as an Uber driver because of the increased popularity of Waymo and other self-driving services. You suddenly have no income. If, like most Americans, you live in a state that expanded Medicaid as part of Obamacare, you will be eligible for free health coverage as well as food stamps to help with grocery costs while you get back on your feet. But this bill changes that. Your state might not offer you food stamps at all, and if it does, both them and your health coverage could lapse if you don't swiftly get a new job, which will be that much harder in a world where AI eats up more and more labor. This is not what a smart policy for people displaced by advances in AI looks like. The Trump energy drought But perhaps the most important AI-related changes to the Senate bill are found on the energy side. The House bill's cuts to sources like nuclear and geothermal, which can produce the constant stream of power needed for fueling data centers and AI model training, were so severe that even Energy Secretary Chris Wright asked for them to be tapered back. The Senate version indeed tapered those back a bit by allowing credits for projects that start construction before 2034, a few years later than the House deadlines. But it makes up for that by repealing wind and solar credits faster. In the House bill, wind and solar companies had to be operational by the end of 2028; in the Senate version, by the end of 2027. In its initial form, the Senate bill would have taken another hatchet to wind and solar by actively taxing them, proposing a provision to tax wind and solar farms coming online after 2027 if they use components from China. The thing is that essentially every wind and solar farm uses components from China, given how dominant that country is in supply chains for these sources, and that will not change any time soon. The energy tax was struck from the final version of the Senate bill. But its repeal of wind and solar credits remains a threat to AI as an industry. For one thing, the bill makes everyone's electricity, including that for AI training, more expensive. The Rhodium Group modeled an earlier, less severe version of the bill and found it would increase energy costs for industry by 4 percent to 6 percent annually. Most of this comes in the form of increased spending on fossil fuels. Because the economic case for new wind and solar production is so much worse, natural gas and coal will have to be a bigger part of the energy mix, and because they can be more expensive than renewables, that pushes up costs. Wind and solar are intermittent sources (it's not always windy, it's not always sunny), which is not ideal for projects that need constant power, such as data centers. But with the addition of batteries, wind and solar can provide more constant wattage, and sure enough, data center users like Google have bet on wind/solar-plus-batteries as an energy source for their facilities. More to the point, AI is moving very quickly and the buildout of these data centers and their power sources has to happen fast. Nuclear can provide clean baseload electricity, but the two most recent nuclear plants in the US took a decade to come online. Enhanced geothermal, the kind that can be installed anywhere and not just in seismically active places like Iceland, is still years away from deployment at scale, despite big recent strides. Solar/wind plus batteries is a technology that can be deployed fast. The Solar Energy Industries Association (hardly a disinterested actor, but I think it's right on this) found that while solar and wind plants take on average less than two years from conception to coming online (as do battery plants), natural gas can take twice as long and coal three times. Small wonder that in 2024, 93 percent of new power capacity in the US last year came from solar, batteries, or wind. It's just about the only electricity source you can get up quickly. If you can't get fast clean energy anymore, because Trump's policies have made it uneconomical, then AI firms are going to have to rely on slow-to-build, dirtier energy. There is a huge shortage of natural gas turbines in the US right now, with waiting times doubling in the past year. That shortage will get worse if the tax bill shifts demand currently aiming for wind and solar toward natural gas. That will, in turn, slow the data center buildout. No one wins It might be tempting, if you're skeptical of AI's benefits or worried about its risks, to think that this is a positive. They're slowing down progress, and progress in this field could be dangerous. I fear this is failing to think an extra step ahead. The most likely result isn't that no data centers get built, but that they get built in countries that do subsidize solar, wind, and batteries. It would be very good news indeed for China, for one thing, whose AI firms would gain a great opportunity to match US labs, which they're not too far behind as it is. It would also be very good news for the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, which are putting huge amounts of oil money behind data center projects for AI firms, projects that inevitably will be subject to the pressures of these dictatorships. The bill would not increase AI safety. It would simply cede leadership in the race to China, and/or force the US to rely on dirty energy and worsen climate impacts to keep up. If you put a bill before Congress stating that it is the policy of the United States to fall behind China in AI development and to put American firms like Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic at a disadvantage to Chinese companies like DeepSeek, Tencent, and Huawei, it would get no votes. But this is effectively what the One Big Beautiful Bill is offering. What Congress seems ready to pass is less an industrial policy than an industrial suicide note. It is truly beyond me that any members of the House or Senate, let alone majorities, are signing it.
