Logo
Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome to ShareScene - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Australia's Sharemarket Community - New Here? Click To Register >

180 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > »    
 
  
Reply to this topic

Uranium, Discussion
The End of Nuclear Power?
You cannot see the results of the poll until you have voted. Please login and cast your vote to see the results of this poll.
Total Votes: 137
Guests cannot vote 
mcart117
post Posted: Nov 19 2015, 01:29 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 418
Thanks: 88


I pondered over whether to post this in the coal thread or uranium, and decided to go glass half full and post here.

QUOTE
Britain aims to close its coal-fired power plants by 2025 under newly unveiled plans, becoming the first major economy to put a date on shutting coal plants to curb carbon emissions. Instead, the country will look to nuclear and natural gas-fired power plants to complement intermittent renewable energy, Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Amber Rudd said.

"It cannot be satisfactory for an advanced economy like the UK to be relying on polluting, carbon-intensive 50-year-old coal-fired power stations," she said in a speech to the Institution of Civil Engineers overnight.

Around a third of Britain's electricity came from coal-fired plants last year but many of the 12 still operating are old and due to close over the next decade under tightening European Union environmental standards.

Rudd said the government would begin a consultation next spring setting out proposals to close by 2025 all coal-fired power stations which are "unabated" - plants not equipped to capture and store their carbon emissions - and restrict their usage from 2023.


Source: http://www.smh.com.au/business/markets-liv...l#ixzz3ru7tiOos




Said 'Thanks' for this post: wolverine  
 
mcart117
post Posted: Sep 23 2015, 12:30 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 418
Thanks: 88


A drop in the ocean perhaps, but a step in the right direction, me thinks:

QUOTE
Chancellor George Osborne has announced that the UK will guarantee a £2bn deal under which China will invest in the Hinkley Point nuclear power station.

Mr Osborne, who is in China, said the deal would pave the way for a final investment decision on the delayed project by French energy company EDF.

He said it would also enable greater collaboration between Britain and China on the construction of nuclear plants.

Reports suggest one such reactor could be built at Bradwell-on-Sea in Essex.

Energy Secretary Amber Rudd told the Financial Times she wanted Beijing to take the lead in developing new nuclear plants in Britain.

Source: BBC

 
abner29
post Posted: Sep 16 2015, 12:55 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 1,183
Thanks: 1735


Growth of Nuclear power: Article:
Global nuclear power capacity may grow more than 45% in next 20 yrs 11TH SEPTEMBER 2015 BY: HENRY LAZENBY CREAMER MEDIA DEPUTY EDITOR– Global nuclear power generation capacity is expected to grow by more than 45% over the next 20 years; however, a new pipeline of uranium mines will be needed after 2025 to supply the growing demand trend, a new report by the World Nuclear Association (WNA) has suggested. Global nuclear generation capacity was set to grow from today's 379 GW of electrical output (GWe) to 552 GWe by 2035, according to the reference scenario of the association’s biannual Nuclear Fuel Report, published on Thursday. "Nuclear electricity output is set to increase over the next five years at a faster rate than we have seen for more than two decades. We must build on that positive momentum,” WNA director-general Agneta Rising stated. The report also provided two other projections. A lower scenario saw nuclear capacity stagnating to 2030, before dropping off with several reactor shutdowns before 2035. The more bullish upper scenario saw capacity rising to 429 GWe in 2020 and 720 GWe in 2035. Nuclear power currently contributed about 11% of the world's electricity supply and was projected by the International Energy Agency to grow steadily in the next 20 years. According to the report, nuclear was seen as a critical element “in any credible strategy” to combat carbon emissions, while also contributing to security of energy supply. The 40-year-old association held that the outlook for nuclear power around the world was improving until the Fukushima accident in Japan, in March 2011. Despite the setback that Fukushima represented, many countries were putting more emphasis on satisfying environmental and security of supply objectives in their energy strategies, which should favour increased nuclear power. The prospects for new reactor builds continued to be strong in China, India and Korea as well as in several countries in the European Union and the Middle East. The report also found that the known global resources of uranium were more than adequate to satisfy reactor requirements to well beyond 2035. However, world uranium output had stopped rising, falling to 56 250 t of uranium in 2014. The currently depressed uranium prices had curtailed exploration activities and the opening of new mines, and, in some cases, resulted in mines being placed on care and maintenance. Based on the report’s methodology, output would rise over the next ten years in both the reference and upper scenarios. DWINDLING SUPPLIES Meanwhile, secondary supplies of uranium were gradually playing a diminishing role in the world market, but would continue to be important up to 2035. Underfeeding of enrichment plants was expected to add significant quantities of uranium to the market up to 2025. The report noted that by combining all primary and secondary sources suggested, the uranium market should be sufficiently supplied up to 2025, provided that all mines currently under development and also most of the planned and prospective mines entered service as planned. Beyond 2025, however, further uranium output would be required if the reference and upper scenarios for demand were to be satisfied. However, WNA cautioned in the report that in both established and potential markets, nuclear power faced an increased competitive challenge from other modes of generation, especially in deregulated markets, while continuing to face regulatory and political hurdles. Electricity demand growth was low in most of the countries where nuclear power was well-established, but remained strong in many developing countries and it was in these countries that the great majority of nuclear capacity growth was to be expected. Current fuel fabrication capacities were more than enough to cover expected demand for both first cores and reloads, but new investments would be required in the early 2030s if the upper scenario was to be realised. The report concluded that rapid uranium demand growth in various countries, above all in China, coupled with a limited contribution of secondary supplies, would result in the need for additional mined uranium within the period of the scenarios. Some mine development was proceeding despite the current depressed condition of the uranium mining industry. In both the reference and upper scenarios, new mine supplies would be needed soon after 2025 and would require the development of ‘supply pipeline’ projects. Additional conversion and enrichment capacity was also likely to be needed in these scenarios. EDITED BY: TRACY HANCOCK CREAMER MEDIA DEPUTY EDITOR ONLINE

It is our preference that if you wish to share this article with others you should please use the following link:

http://www.miningweekly.com/article/global...-yrs-2015-09-11

 
frodo
post Posted: Jun 12 2015, 03:50 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 3,028
Thanks: 89


In Reply To: arty's post @ Jun 12 2015, 11:46 AM

Arty also ERA said that their lease due to expire around 2020 so maybe it wont get renewed who knows.

I was going to add PDN to watch as its so cheap but need to do a little more rsearch on it first.

 
arty
post Posted: Jun 12 2015, 11:46 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 12,795
Thanks: 3230


In Reply To: abner29's post @ Jun 5 2015, 11:10 PM

ERA announced today it won't proceed with Ranger 3:
http://www.asx.com.au/asx/statistics/displ...;idsId=01632637

RIO's reply sounds even more "terminal":
QUOTE
Energy Resources of Australia Ltd - Ranger 3 Deeps Project Update
11 June 2015
Rio Tinto acknowledges Energy Resources of Australia Ltd’s (ERA) release to the Australian Securities Exchange on 11 June 2015, in which it announced it has decided it would not proceed with the Final Feasibility Study of the Ranger 3 Deeps project in the current operating environment.
Rio Tinto agrees with the decision not to progress the study. After careful consideration, Rio Tinto has determined that it does not support any further study or the future development of Ranger 3 Deeps due to the project’s economic challenges.
Rio Tinto recognises the importance of ongoing rehabilitation work at the Ranger mine site, which is surrounded by the World Heritage-listed Kakadu National Park. Rio Tinto is engaged with ERA on a conditional credit facility to assist ERA to fund its rehabilitation program, should additional funding be required beyond ERA’s existing cash reserves and the future earnings from processing ore stockpiles.
Rio Tinto is assessing a potential non-cash impairment charge of approximately US$300 million* (post tax) relating to its shareholding in ERA.

However, demand for reactor fuel is unlikely to drop to zero any time soon, which should offer increased sales opportunities for other U-miners.
Looking at PDN's chart, it seems I'm not alone with that opinion.

Disclosure: I hold PDN and TOE



--------------------
I trade daily, but I am not a licensed adviser. Whether you find my ideas reasonable or not: The only person responsible for your actions is YOU.
I follow two rules: (1) There are no sacred truths. All assumptions must be critically examined. Arguments from authority are worthless. (2) Whatever is inconsistent with observed facts must be discarded or revised. We must understand the Market as it is and not confuse how it is with how we wish it to be. (inspired by Carl Sagan)

Said 'Thanks' for this post: early birds  abner29  
 
abner29
post Posted: Jun 5 2015, 11:10 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 1,183
Thanks: 1735


Looming 15% uranium market supply gap could spur price revival – Cameco 4th June 2015 By: Henry Lazenby Creamer Media Deputy Editor: North America EMAIL THIS ARTICLE © Reuse this Photo by Cameco TORONTO (miningweekly.com) – An emerging 15% supply gap could signal a prolonged upturn in the uranium price through to 2024, Canadian uranium major Cameco said on Thursday. A decline in secondary sources of yellowcake was forcing the market to increasingly rely on primary suppliers, which, when coupled with unprecedented growth in the nuclear reactor industry, foretold improved market conditions over the medium and long term, investor relations director Rachelle Girard told the Cantor Fitzgerald Annual Global Uranium Conference, in New York. NYSE- and TSX-listed Cameco expected the market to expand at 4% a year to about 230-million pounds of uranium oxide a year by 2024, a far cry from today’s output of about 140-million pounds, excluding projects under development. The company was the world’s largest publicly traded uranium producer and owned and operated the largest uranium mines in the prolific Athabasca basin of Saskatchewan, from which the company produced about 16% of the global supply. Worldwide, about 63 new nuclear reactors were under construction, but the world’s insatiable need for electricity could see a further 81 more nuclear reactors come on line in the future. The global uranium market had been stumped by Japan's March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster, which prompted all nuclear reactors to be shut down in Japan. The natural-disaster induced crisis had created significant global uranium market backlash and public opinions about the safety of using nuclear-derived power took a beating. This had eroded demand and caused a global supply glut, as the Japanese nuclear fleet remained largely offline. Girard said Cameco was currently looking to lock-in future contracts, but noted that the market was not currently entertaining new contracts, as high inventories and the soft demand were affording buyers the opportunity to wait and see whether prices would fall further. Contracts provided the company with revenue protection from current market uncertainty. The volatile uranium price had traded in a ten-year band of just under $140/lb in 2007 and a $30/lb low last year. Cameco saw $40/lb as a floor for the uranium price and noted that a price of at least $70/lb would be required to incentivise it to invest in new development projects. MARKET OPTIMISM Girard said Japanese reactor restarts could kickstart uranium demand growth and start clearing the excess market supply. However, the low-price environment was keeping investment low in new uranium development projects, which could see the primary uranium producers finding it difficult to keep up with demand, once the market started to rebound. “The world needs four more Cigar Lakes to keep up with future demand,” Girard stressed. China would account for 57 new nuclear reactors by 2024, while Indian nuclear-sector growth was poised to take off with 16 new reactors expected to be built by then. Cameco’s recent C$350-million deal to supply more than seven-million pounds of uranium concentrate to India had opened the door to a significant previously inaccessible market, Girard noted. Other developing regions such as the Middle East, Southern Africa and South America were also expected to increasingly draw on the demand side. And when the inevitable global market improvement started gaining sustained traction, Cameco would be waiting in the wings, able to quickly ramp-up output to about 30% of the global output by 2024. “Cameco has the pounds in the ground when the market calls for it,” Girard said. The company’s inventory comprised 429-million pounds of proven and probable uranium reserves and extensive mineral resources. Cameco expected to produce between 25.3-million pounds and 26.3-million pounds of uranium oxide this year. The company’s crown jewel – McArthur River – was the world's biggest high-grade uranium mine with an average ore grade of 14.87% uranium oxide. Grades were 100 times the world average, which meant the operation could produce more than 18-million pounds of uranium a year by mining ore at a rate of only 150 t/d to 200 t/d. Recently completed and future expansions could also see the Key Lake mill, 80 km south-west by road, where McArthur’s ore was blended for processing with low-grade ore in stockpile, ramp up to 25-million pounds of uranium a year. The company had also, just last month, declared commercial production at the world’s second-largest high-grade uranium mine, Cigar Lake. The eight-million-pound-a-year operation was considered to be among the world’s most technologically challenging deposits to mine and required the underground ore to be artificially frozen to improve underground mine stability, prevent water inflow and improve radiation protection. Cameco expected Cigar Lake to ramp up to its full production rate of 18-million pounds by 2018. The company's TSX-listed stock had traded in a 52-week range between C$16.73 and C$23.26 apiece, and on Thursday changed hands at C$19.23. Edited by: Tracy Hancock



 


arty
post Posted: Feb 20 2015, 12:38 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 12,795
Thanks: 3230


In case members haven't noticed: Kcast from Kitco has added Base Metals to its menu.
Charts on offer include Al, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn and Uranium.

Attached Image






--------------------
I trade daily, but I am not a licensed adviser. Whether you find my ideas reasonable or not: The only person responsible for your actions is YOU.
I follow two rules: (1) There are no sacred truths. All assumptions must be critically examined. Arguments from authority are worthless. (2) Whatever is inconsistent with observed facts must be discarded or revised. We must understand the Market as it is and not confuse how it is with how we wish it to be. (inspired by Carl Sagan)

Said 'Thanks' for this post: abner29  
 
abner29
post Posted: Dec 19 2014, 08:09 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 1,183
Thanks: 1735


** Japan Okays Two More Nuclear Reactors (http://resourceinvestingnews.us2.list-mana...mp;e=32d982a067

 
abner29
post Posted: Nov 26 2014, 12:47 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 1,183
Thanks: 1735


<h1 itemprop="name headline">Restarting The Atomic Age? Lockheed Martin Announces Break-Through In Nuclear Fusion</h1> Monday November 24, 2014 15:08



In post-war USA, “Skunk Works” was Lockheed Martin’s near-autonomous research and development group that gave the country products like the “U-2” spy plane or the “SR-71 Blackbird”, pushing technology to limits no one else had dared to explore before.

A “Skunk Works” team headed by Thomas McGuire, MIT graduate and aeronautical engineer at a division humbly named “Revolutionary Technology Programs” recently presented their new “Compact Fusion Reactor” (CFR), a device which Lockheed claims will be small enough to fit on an eighteen-wheeler and be capable of providing enough power for a city of a hundred thousand people.

Nuclear fusion is, in a way, the opposite of nuclear fission, the process used in nuclear power plants around the world today. Nuclear fusion has been a long-time dream of scientists, oft attempted but never accomplished, the challenge being to obtain more energy from the reaction constantly than is afforded to run it. It’s, as Lockheed points out, what the sun has been doing for us for a very long time.

In recent years we did, however, see promising results by many different research organizations around the world working different angles to find a solution. The different processes typically use deuterium which can be obtained from water, and tritium which is obtained from lithium meaning that resources are abundant. These developments are relevant to technology metals in several of ways:

  • A process presented by the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory earlier this year uses gold as containment vessel;
  • Magnets used for plasma confinement, although secret in their individual composition, are likely to contain significant amounts of magnetic rare earth elements such as neodymium.
  • Related technologies like low energy nuclear reaction and transmutation utilize precious metals, or claim to produce technology metals as reaction byproducts.

In simple words, this is how nuclear fusion works: two hydrogen isotopes, in this case deuterium and tritium, are released into a container under vacuum. When a sufficient amount of energy is added, the gas breaks up into ions and electrons, creating “plasma.” This plasma is incredibly hot; too hot for the containment vessel to withst and. Therefore, very strong magnets are used to prevent it from touching the container walls. This, in theory, causes the ions to collide and fuse together. The process then frees up neutrons that carry the released energy through the magnetic field to the reactor wall, where heat exchangers make it usable to power a turbine generator.

To be clear, what the Lockheed team achieved so far is to contain the plasma within the magnetic field. They did not accomplish an “ignition” of the reaction which is the self-sustaining reaction required to make a practical energy source. This latter part is considered the much bigger challenge according to those who have failed. McGuire is optimistic, though: “We would like to get to a prototype in five generations. If we can meet our plan of doing a design-build-test generation every year, that will put us at about five years…,” he said in an interview. If all goes well, the technology may be ready for production in about 10-15 years.

Lockheed estimates that less than 25kg of fuel would be required to run the device for an entire year. What is more, the units produce only very small amounts of radioactivity contained in steel elements of the shell, radioactivity that will reach safe levels after approximately 100 years, compared to the much longer decay periods of radioactive waste material from conventional nuclear power reactors.

Has the energy crisis been solved? Of course it is too soon to tell – despite the demonstrative optimism the Skunk Works team has a long way to go. One thing is clear: if they win, technology metals win.

Bodo Albrecht,
tminsider@eniqma.com




 
abner29
post Posted: Nov 25 2014, 06:48 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 1,183
Thanks: 1735



China to Need 1,000 Nuclear Reactors as Part of Climate Pledge?
Sunday November 23, 2014, 9:45pm PST China could need about 1,000 nuclear reactors, 500,000 wind turbines or 50,000 solar farms as it gears up to fight climate change. Currently, 23 nuclear reactors are built in the country, with a further 26 under construction.





 
 


180 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > » 

Back To Top Of Page
Reply to this topic


You agree through the use of ShareScene.com, that you understand and accept the TERMS OF USE.


TERMS OF USE  -  CONTACT ADMIN  -  ADVERTISING