Nuclear power and changes

cut and paste- not investment advice- I am good at losing money as well![biggrin][biggrin][biggrin]
( Warning 2 -I am very biased - I have shares in all companies mentioned!!!!)

I grew up in Central vic playing on large mullock heaps - Gold mining talings- Often large quarts stones/rocks which were a lot of fun with a sheet of iron for sliding down! Riding horse and bikes through the bush around historical open mine shafts was not done fast in the dark! Link for some of them

Right now most of my childhood play ground is being refined for the remaining gold the historical mining technology was unable to extract. They are not in the link and all very well fenced off now.

The "Paducah tails enrichment project " is very similar as what was considered waste by old tech will be used by SLX/Cameco- GLE

To be equivalent to a ‘Tier 1’ uranium project ranking in the top 10 projects today by annual production
"The DoE owns some 100,000 tonnes of such tails," That means it is highly likely other enrichment sites with 100,000 tonnes+++ have a issue we can help fix while shareholders benefit! Several other current and historical enrichment sites I mean.

This is recycling and fixing historical waste stored. SLX/GLE is not like historical process- It uses historical and fixes waste as well as preventing more waste being generated currently still by ineffective old technology.

How much money in uranium remain in Namibia historic waste tailings? A Nuclear Risk site which seems pretty good says "Depending on the ore grade, about two to five tons of raw ore need to be processed in order to produce a single kilogram of refined uranium oxide. The rest is deposited near the mines as waste rock or tailings and still contains about 80 % of the ore’s original radioactivity. " ". "
The Rössing uranium mine has been a cause for concern for more than 30 years. Unsafe and inhumane working conditions, occupational exposure to radioactivity and the contamination of the environment with uranium tailings and radioactive waste rock all pose serious public health problems
" In 2005, 19.5 million tons of ore had to be mined in order to produce 3,711 tons of uranium oxide" with 80% remaining value looks very attractive to our technology for fixing historical waste issues ? If 3,711 tons of uranium oxide is just 20% then rossling 'waste is 6679.8 tons left worth - My poor maths suggest 13359600lbs worth USD$667,980,000 ?

That might be a little overoptimistic yet the point remains what was or is currently huge mullock heaps here are being recycled into valable amounts of gold. I hope SLX/Cameco-GLE can help both talings waste,significantly increase mining efficiencies and of course C02 emissions which is urgently required!
PDN's mine NUCLEAR-RISKS | Home did not give men data for tailings for PDNs Henrik Langer uranium. Several places suggest recovery rates at Henrik Langer 80-90% If true 10% remaining is worth $$$ New technology recycling win? If an exhausted mine is fully funded by using SLX/Cameco-GLE technology during rehabilitated by using the tailings it is a game changer!


Those who have supported this recycling, reuse and efficiencies with our investments contribute and will benefit financially. Link to my waffle post


Edit
DOE = US Department of Energy
SLX= Silex systems limited (ASX)
Cameco- Listed in Canada
GLE= Global Laser Enrichment - Owned by 51%SLX and 49% Cameco

Got to love a Aussie butt kicking success story!
Silex is out of our very cool Lucas Heights research reactor[thumbsupbig]

"Acceleration could involve targeting completion of the pilot demonstration program as early as mid-2024, with a view to commencing commercial operations as early as 2027, depending on market demand and other factors. This could also involve bringing forward a commercial feasibility assessment and NRC licensing activities for the proposed PLEF project. The diagram below depicts the baseline (original) and potentially accelerated timelines for commercialisation activities"

Link to the report
NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

The poll was perhaps not the best place so excuse me for a new thread on one of my favorite topic

1 Green Peace founder support for Nuclear power

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RDSs...ature=emb_logo

Why Greenpeace co-founder left to pursue nuclear energy | NewsNation Special Coverage
Dr. Patrick Moore is a founding member of Greenpeace, but tells NewsNation he can't pretend nuclear energy is dangerous. He explains why he thinks it's vital.


2- Small Modular reactor.
My basic understanding. 10 years between refueling. Very very self contained safety

Ansto review of them



"They are “modular” in the sense that each unit can be assembled next to another and scaled up or down to meet the local electricity needs.They are also designed to “plug in” to existing power networks and therefore can essentially replace an aging power station with a modern, reliable, and zero-emissions power source.
SMRs differ from today’s more common nuclear power reactors in a few important ways:
First, their holistic approach to manufacturing occurs through design simplification. Compared to the complex design and construction of currently operating large-scale reactors, simplification opens up the prospect of assembly-line manufacturing of pre-fabricated modules—providing economies of scale.
As the majority of construction takes place off-site, building small modular reactors takes less time. An SMR has a projected construction time of three to five years, while a large reactor takes six to 12 years.
And it is possible to construct a reactor with a single module or use units in combination for greater power output. Additional modular units can be added and brought online incrementally for greater power output.
Secondly, SMRs are designed with a high level of passive or inherent safety features. This means operator intervention or external power supply are not needed to shut down the reactor and maintain cooling to remove the core’s residual heat in the event that power is lost to the plant."


3- Making Nuclear waste safe or recycling waste back as fuel!

I love this one myself "The SILEX Laser Isotope Separation (LIS) technology was invented by Silex Systems scientists Dr Michael Goldsworthy and Dr Horst Struve in the 1990’s at its Lucas Heights facility south of Sydney, Australia."

Recycling "The Paducah project is underpinned by an agreement between GLE and the US Department of Energy for the purchase of over 200,000 metric tons of depleted UF6 tails, which will be enriched using the SILEX laser technology to produce natural grade uranium for sale into the global uranium market, and then further enriched to produce nuclear fuel for clean electricity generation."

I think I posted the link to the making Nuclear waste inert in the other thread. Very deserving of the Nobel prize I thought.

Anyone else think Dr Goldworthy and Dr Sturve will be Noble Prize winners in the next few years? I do.

Not Investment advice. I am a long term uranium tragic [biggrin]

---

Quote:

---

I am a long term uranium tragic [biggrin]

---

So all that glowing & clicking stuff is all in my mind is it?[bigrolf]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4bee

So all that glowing & clicking stuff is all in my mind is it?[bigrolf]

---

No Stress as long as it's in a good tune Des[bigwhistle]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

No Stress as long as it's in a good tune Des[bigwhistle]

---

I don't know, it does seem to click quite loudly & very rapidly but no discernible toon but the glowing & clicking seem to be the same beat.[bigrolf]


Oh well.[bigsad]

every now and again my jaw drops. It might take a while to recover from this


Section 3.c.ii: Fuel supply chain Supporting 200 GW of new nuclear by 2050 would require the fuel supply chain capacity to increase by 200–300%. The U.S. had a recent peak of 2,263 MT U3O8 mined in 2014. However, an additional 22,000 MT were procured by the U.S. globally in support of ~100 GW of existing nuclear power capacity. To support an additional 200 GW, the U.S. would need to expand mining/milling operations by an additional ~50,000 MT per year (i.e., grow by 22x the most recent peak). Mining/milling of uranium will need to be increased from the U.S., allies, and partners to ensure a secure supply for the expected growth in nuclear capacity. As of January 2023, the Converdyn Metropolis Works facility is the only U.S. facility capable of converting triuranium octoxide (U3O8 ) to uranium hexafluoride (UF6 )—required for enrichment. This facility has been shuttered since 2017 due to market conditions but is the process of reopening in 2023. The plant has the capacity to produce 15,000 MT per year of uranium in the form of UF6 (Converdyn facility has reduced its capacity to 7,000 MT per year due to accommodate existing market demands). However, to meet the expected demand for 200 GW of new nuclear, it is expected that an additional ~65,000 MT per year of conversion capacity would be needed (i.e., an additional four Converdyn-sized operating facilities). Existing U.S. uranium enrichment capability is ~4.9M SWU per year, while current U.S. demand is ~15M SWU per year. To meet the additional nuclear demand of 200 GW, the U.S. would need to increase the enrichment capability by ~30M SWU per year (i.e., 6x higher than current capacity) or ~40M SWU per year to be energy independent

https://liftoff.energy.gov/wp-conten...clear-vPUB.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NavyDiver

every now and again my jaw drops. It might take a while to recover from this


Section 3.c.ii: Fuel supply chain Supporting 200 GW of new nuclear by 2050 would require the fuel supply chain capacity to increase by 200–300%. The U.S. had a recent peak of 2,263 MT U3O8 mined in 2014. However, an additional 22,000 MT were procured by the U.S. globally in support of ~100 GW of existing nuclear power capacity. To support an additional 200 GW, the U.S. would need to expand mining/milling operations by an additional ~50,000 MT per year (i.e., grow by 22x the most recent peak). Mining/milling of uranium will need to be increased from the U.S., allies, and partners to ensure a secure supply for the expected growth in nuclear capacity. As of January 2023, the Converdyn Metropolis Works facility is the only U.S. facility capable of converting triuranium octoxide (U3O8 ) to uranium hexafluoride (UF6 )—required for enrichment. This facility has been shuttered since 2017 due to market conditions but is the process of reopening in 2023. The plant has the capacity to produce 15,000 MT per year of uranium in the form of UF6 (Converdyn facility has reduced its capacity to 7,000 MT per year due to accommodate existing market demands). However, to meet the expected demand for 200 GW of new nuclear, it is expected that an additional ~65,000 MT per year of conversion capacity would be needed (i.e., an additional four Converdyn-sized operating facilities). Existing U.S. uranium enrichment capability is ~4.9M SWU per year, while current U.S. demand is ~15M SWU per year. To meet the additional nuclear demand of 200 GW, the U.S. would need to increase the enrichment capability by ~30M SWU per year (i.e., 6x higher than current capacity) or ~40M SWU per year to be energy independent

https://liftoff.energy.gov/wp-conten...clear-vPUB.pdf

---

Makes my jaw drop that you understand any of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tins

Makes my jaw drop that you understand any of it.

---

Some of it means $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$[bigwhistle]

In my case all of that would have a - in front of it.

"High-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) includes uranium enriched to between 5 and 19.75 percent U-235, above the traditional 5 percent threshold for commercial reactors. The fuel pellets that are to be installed at Vogtle-2 contain uranium enriched to 6 percent—1 percent higher than the current license limit. According to Westinghouse, “Through its increased uranium density, ADOPT fuel . . . enables U.S. customers to improve fuel cycle economics and extend their operating cycles.”" link to story on that change

Amazing Science I think

Very advanced Laser Tech from ANSTO via Silex resources and GLE/Cameco tie up Joint venture is all about faster and cheaper High-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU)[thumbsupbig]


Ansto is at Lucas Heights It is our very cool Nuclear reactor a few million people live near for the last 60 years never noticing [bigrolf][bigrolf][bigrolf]
It helps also with radiation therapy, xrays............................... and lots more millions of us have or will use as well!



Even the ANTI Nuclear types forget that when they may have a broke bone, Cancer or ...............

PS I am pro nuclear mediciane, Pro Nuclear industralia and food applications pro nuclear energy as well as being very anti Nuclear war !!! That last one is crazy stuff.

PS2 my bank balance goes to staff who get paid 70% more than 10 years ago. Rent which is 40% more than 10 years ago paid by rates paid that are 20 years out of date for Doctors!!:bat::bat::bat: Lots of zeros need a number in front. The number need is missing in mine most of the time as well John [biggrin]