Disseminated on behalf of Sierra Madre Gold & Silver Ltd.
Mexico has long been one of the world’s top silver producers. For centuries, its mining regions—Zacatecas, Durango, and the Sierra Madre belt—have supplied much of the world’s silver. But after decades of underinvestment and falling output from older mines, the country’s silver production has started to slow.
That is now changing. Modern mining companies are reinvigorating Mexico’s silver belt. They bring in new capital, use better technology, and follow stricter environmental standards. Among these companies, Sierra Madre Gold & Silver Ltd. (TSXV: SM | OTCQX: SMDRF) stands out. The plan to restart and expand the La Guitarra Mine in the Temascaltepec district is a big step forward for Mexico’s precious metals industry.
The Comeback of La Guitarra
The La Guitarra Mine has a long history of production, dating back to colonial times. It produced gold and silver for different owners. Most recently, it was owned by First Majestic Silver. Now, it has restarted commercial production as of January 1, 2025, after a period of care and maintenance.
Sierra Madre acquired the mine in 2023 with a clear strategy: bring it back into production and expand its capacity. The mine has a processing plant that handles 500 tonnes a day. It also has a permitted underground operation. Nearby, there are roads, power, and water infrastructure.
With a strong technical team and fresh funding of C$19.5 million, Sierra Madre is preparing for an expansion. The company aims to boost production to 1,500 tonnes per day by 2027. This will increase up to three times and help keep costs low through smart mine design and local partnerships.
Why Mexico’s Silver Revival Matters
Mexico continues to hold the world’s largest silver reserves. It accounted for about 23-25% of global silver output in 2024, producing about 5,800–6,300 tonnes of silver that year. Rising industrial demand is fueling a new focus on production growth.
Silver is no longer just a jewelry or investment metal; it’s essential for clean energy. Each solar panel uses about 20 grams of silver, and electric vehicles (EVs) require up to 50 grams. As the solar and EV industries expand, analysts project that global silver demand will exceed 1.2 billion ounces per year by 2030.
This shift opens new chances for producers in stable, mining-friendly places like Mexico. Mexico is attracting new exploration and investment. Its skilled workforce, supportive rules, and modern infrastructure help. This reaffirms Mexico’s role as the world’s silver leader.
Sierra Madre is part of that national revival. Its work at La Guitarra, and exploration at Tepic shows how new companies are turning dormant assets into growth engines for the next decade.
A Project with Built-In Advantages
La Guitarra offers more than history—it has the right foundations that allow for a fast restart. The processing plant, tailings facility, and underground access are ready. This setup saved years of development time.
The mine is also in a favorable location. Situated in Mexico State, it is close to highways and power lines and only a few hours from Mexico City. This proximity reduces logistics costs and makes it easier to hire skilled workers.
Sierra Madre’s leadership team combines local mining experience with strong capital markets knowledge. This balance allows the company to move efficiently from project restart to expansion. La Guitarra is one of Mexico’s top silver-gold mines. It has high-grade veins, clear exploration targets, and permits.
Strengthening Mexico’s Mining Economy
The completed La Guitarra restart is part of a broader trend of economic renewal in Mexico’s mining regions. The country’s mining sector directly employs more than 400,000 people and supports over 2.5 million indirect jobs. The sector’s importance extends beyond jobs. Mining represents nearly 2.5% of Mexico’s GDP and generates billions in export revenue.
New projects like Sierra Madre’s La Guitarra are helping sustain rural economies by creating stable, long-term employment. The La Guitarra project has created hundreds of jobs when it restarted. Sierra Madre has also invested in training and local infrastructure for the community.
Silver prices are stabilizing around US$48–49 per ounce in late October 2025, having reached an all-time high of $54.24 per ounce on October 16, followed by a swift correction that saw prices dip to the mid-$46 range before rebounding.
Notably, in just 10 weeks from July 31 to the peak, silver surged by nearly 48%, climbing from $36.71 to $54.24 per ounce – a rapid and exceptional rally. This sustained period of around the $50 mark through October is good news for mid-tier producers like Sierra Madre.
They can boost value for shareholders and help local economies, capitalizing on strong price levels and renewed market optimism driven by silver’s resilience after the correction.
Operating with Responsibility
Sierra Madre is also part of a new generation of miners that prioritize environmental and social responsibility. The company is updating its waste and water systems to meet modern standards. They want to use less water and reclaim tailings more efficiently.
Environmental protection is crucial in silver-gold mining areas, where it’s key to balance economic chances with sustainability. Sierra Madre focuses on open communication with the community, clear permitting, and strong ESG practices. This approach meets the needs of local stakeholders and global investors.
The company’s management stressed that modernization at La Guitarra is both about increasing production and doing it responsibly. This commitment to responsible mining strengthens Sierra Madre’s credibility as it seeks to attract long-term partners and institutional investors.
Why La Guitarra Leads the Silver Belt Revival
What makes La Guitarra central to Mexico’s silver revival is its combination of history, infrastructure, and timing. The mine already had everything needed to move quickly back into production, supported by rising demand and favorable silver prices.
Few projects in Mexico are as close to immediate output growth as La Guitarra. The company’s 2025–2027 plan provides a clear growth path: expand capacity, restart exploration, and use cash flow to advance its other assets. This positions Sierra Madre as one of the few junior companies capable of near-term revenue growth in a tightening silver market.
Meanwhile, exploration at the nearby Tepic project could add more resources to support long-term growth. Together, these assets form a strong portfolio with both production and discovery potential.
Looking Ahead
Mexico’s silver belt is reawakening, and Sierra Madre Gold & Silver is at the heart of that revival. The La Guitarra Mine represents more than a completed restart with an expansion and exploration planned—it’s a symbol of how modern technology and responsible operations can breathe new life into historic mining regions.
As global demand for silver continues to rise across industries, from solar panels to electric vehicles, companies like Sierra Madre will play a vital role in meeting that need.
With production restarted, expansion underway, and exploration advancing, Sierra Madre is well positioned to help lead Mexico’s next era of silver success—one built on heritage, innovation, and sustainable growth.
- MUST READ: Silver Prices Surge to 14-Year High in 2025: What’s Sparking this Sustainable Metal Boom?
DISCLAIMER
New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com (“We” or “Us”) are not securities dealers or brokers, investment advisers, or financial advisers, and you should not rely on the information herein as investment advice. Sierra Madre Gold and Silver Ltd. (“Company”) made a one-time payment of $25,000 to provide marketing services for a term of one month. None of the owners, members, directors, or employees of New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com currently hold, or have any beneficial ownership in, any shares, stocks, or options of the companies mentioned.
This article is informational only and is solely for use by prospective investors in determining whether to seek additional information. It does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Examples that we provide of share price increases pertaining to a particular issuer from one referenced date to another represent arbitrarily chosen time periods and are no indication whatsoever of future stock prices for that issuer, and are of no predictive value.
Our stock profiles are intended to highlight certain companies for your further investigation; they are not stock recommendations or an offer or sale of the referenced securities. The securities issued by the companies we profile should be considered high-risk; if you do invest despite these warnings, you may lose your entire investment. Please do your own research before investing, including reviewing the companies’ SEDAR+ and SEC filings, press releases, and risk disclosures.
It is our policy that the information contained in this profile was provided by the company, extracted from SEDAR+ and SEC filings, company websites, and other publicly available sources. We believe the sources and information are accurate and reliable but we cannot guarantee them.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT AND FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Certain statements contained in this news release may constitute “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information generally can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “plan,” and similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events. Forward-looking information is based on current expectations of management; however, it is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.
These factors include, without limitation, statements relating to the Company’s exploration and development plans, the potential of its mineral projects, financing activities, regulatory approvals, market conditions, and future objectives. Forward-looking information involves numerous risks and uncertainties and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking information. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, market volatility, the state of financial markets for the Company’s securities, fluctuations in commodity prices, operational challenges, and changes in business plans.
Forward-looking information is based on several key expectations and assumptions, including, without limitation, that the Company will continue with its stated business objectives and will be able to raise additional capital as required. Although management of 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 as anticipated, estimated, or intended.
There can be no assurance that such forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Additional information about risks and uncertainties is contained in the Company’s management’s discussion and analysis and annual information form for the year ended December 31, 2024, copies of which are available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
The forward-looking information contained herein is expressly qualified in its entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking information reflects management’s current beliefs and is based on information currently available to the Company. The forward-looking information is made as of the date of this news release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update or revise such information to reflect new events or circumstances except as may be required by applicable law.
For more information on the Company, investors should review the Company’s continuous disclosure filings available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
The post Reviving Mexico’s Silver Belt: How Sierra Madre’s La Guitarra Mine Is Leading the Comeback appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Nature-based carbon investments deserve consideration when they address a specific business dependency and produce outcomes you can measure. Imagine Moonbucks, a global coffee roaster planning next season’s espresso blend. It is considering natural Grade 4 coffee from Jimma, in southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia. Its sourcing decisions affect the roasting schedule and the cash tied up in coffee purchases. Moonbucks needs to understand which measures could protect that supply, what they would cost and how it would judge the results.
1. Define the sourcing problem before choosing a project
Moonbucks needs a dependable component for its espresso blend. Its procurement team wants continuity of volume and an agreed cup profile. Replacing a shipment at short notice could require new sample approval and changes to the blend, and given the schedules for cultivation, processing, and freight delivery, is practically impossible. Moonbucks needs to get this right, and its initial concern is inconsistent deliveries. It commissions an assessment of the supplying farms and post-harvest chain. The questions cover land condition, harvest availability and whether drying or storage problems are affecting saleable lots.
This distinction changes the investment brief. A tree-planting proposal cannot be assumed to fix drying problems. Better storage cannot restore eroded land. The team must establish which problem exists before selecting the response.
CCC’s guide to finding nature-based solutions in your supply chain explains where to look. Here, the next task is to turn a broad concern into a testable proposal.
2. Develop nature-based carbon investments around the actual supply chain
The assessment would trace Moonbucks’ purchases back through the exporter and supplying producer groups. Which farms supply the contracted lots? Who controls land-management decisions? How long does the buyer expect to maintain the purchasing relationship?
Furthermore, Jimma natural Grade 4 cannot be treated as interchangeable with every Ethiopian coffee. Moonbucks would need to test any substitute against its own blend and quality requirements.
Suppose Moonbucks’ assessment identifies an opportunity to maintain shade trees and restore vegetation along exposed streambanks. The IPCC describes agroforestry as a way to store carbon in vegetation and soil, with potential benefits for erosion control and water quality.1 Moonbucks would need local advice on species, growing conditions and maintenance before deciding how these measures fit its sourcing plan.
The proposal now has a defined sourcing connection and a candidate intervention. The next steps are to test its effect on production, assess carbon eligibility and build the financial case.
3. Compare the proposal with other ways to protect supply
WBCSD’s Nature-based Solutions Blueprint recommends comparing nature-based options with other responses across their benefits and costs.2 For Moonbucks, that means evaluating the landscape proposal alongside drying improvements, storage controls and alternative sourcing arrangements.
The product’s natural-process designation matters. Moonbucks should examine the drying and dry-milling chain alongside land conditions. Its team would check storage practices, contamination risks and incoming-lot quality to see whether problems arise before or after the coffee leaves the farms.
The revised proposal might combine land stewardship with separate post-harvest controls. Each component needs its own purpose and budget. A sustainability label should not obscure which activity is expected to solve which problem.
The project develops as the evidence improves. Its scope should follow the diagnosis rather than preserve the first idea unchanged.
4. Establish what the carbon outcome could count toward
Moonbucks’ sustainability team now tests the proposed carbon case separately from the sourcing case. Is the objective a measurable change in Moonbucks’ value-chain emissions, verified credits for separate voluntary use, or distinct outcomes under carefully defined arrangements?
Scope 3 covers value-chain emissions. A purchasing relationship alone does not prove that a farm intervention can be included in Moonbucks’ inventory. The team needs an applicable accounting method, defensible boundaries and evidence supporting attribution.
SBTi’s FLAG Guidance (forest, land and agriculture), version 1.2, says purchased credits used as offsets cannot meet near-term FLAG or energy and industry targets. Eligible land-based removals are subject to accounting requirements.3 Moonbucks needs to test its proposal against those rules before including an outcome in its targets.
For Moonbucks’ Jimma proposal, maintaining existing trees and establishing new vegetation could involve different carbon questions. Specialists must examine the baseline and additionality, meaning what changes because the project proceeds. They must also assess measurement and the risk that stored carbon is lost. CCC’s MRV and additionality article introduces those tests.
Until that work is complete, Moonbucks should not budget an assumed Scope 3 reduction or credit-sale receipt. Direct emissions reductions remain the priority.
5. Build a financial case that survives weaker assumptions
Moonbucks’ finance team would now build a multi-year budget. UNEP’s State of Finance for Nature 2023 compares current finance with the investment needed to meet climate, biodiversity and land-restoration goals.4 The company would cost its proposed activities, farmer participation and ongoing monitoring. Verification, where required, is a separate expense. Maintenance and responsibility for replacing failed plantings must remain visible after the initial establishment budget ends.
Operational benefits need equally careful treatment. If fewer rejected lots reduce emergency purchasing, count that saving once. Do not add “supply resilience” as another financial benefit when it represents the same avoided cost.
Moonbucks should compare a base case with slower benefits, higher implementation costs and no carbon revenue. It should also distinguish production outcomes from quality and shipment outcomes. A single good harvest would not prove that the landscape intervention caused better delivery performance.
A project can remain worth funding even when its carbon case needs more work. That decision must rest on the operational evidence and the company’s objectives, without unsupported environmental claims.
6. Fund a pilot with a clear expansion decision
Moonbucks’ first approval would fund a bounded pilot, rather than commit the entire sourcing program. Before spending, Moonbucks would agree on participating farms, responsibilities and the evidence needed at review.
Its scorecard could track farmer participation, implementation costs and plant survival, alongside accepted coffee volumes and lot-quality results. Carbon measurements would follow the selected method. Farm-level traceability must connect the intervention to the actual sourcing relationship.
Suppose Moonbucks’ review later finds that storage changes explain most quality improvements, while the land measures need longer observation. Those findings would shape the next decision: expand the proven component, adjust the landscape work or pause further spending. They would not justify crediting all improvements to tree planting.
This gives nature-based carbon investments a practical place in a multi-year strategy. Funding increases as the evidence supports it, and the project can change direction before a larger commitment.
Discuss a sourcing opportunity with CCC
Carbon Credit Capital’s nature-based supply-chain investment service uses its Dual-Value Model to examine supply-chain economics alongside potential sustainability outcomes.
Schedule a consultation to discuss your sourcing exposure and the questions to resolve before allocating capital.
Sources
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses, section 7.4.3.3 (Agroforestry).
- World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Nature-based Solutions Blueprint, 5 June 2024.
- Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Forest, Land and Agriculture Science-Based Target-Setting Guidance, version 1.2, March 2026, section 3.1.4, pp. 37–38.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), State of Finance for Nature 2023, 2023.
A plastic credit funds the collection of plastic waste in places where no formal system exists to collect it. Each credit represents a measured, independently audited quantity of plastic taken out of the environment or returned to use, tracked on a public registry.
EU carbon credit claims changed on 27 September 2026, the day the Directive (EU) 2024/825 began to apply across the European Union. The change is narrow. It changes how a company can talk about the credits it buys. A product can no longer be called neutral on the strength of compensation alone; however, every specific, evidenced statement about what a company measured, reduced, and funded stays fully available.
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
