PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Are we facing Peak Uranium?

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Joe



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 596
Location: Leeds

PostPosted: Wed Nov 08, 2006 3:55 pm    Post subject: Are we facing Peak Uranium? Reply with quote

John Stepek, 25/10/2006, Money Week:
http://www.moneyweek.com/file/20488/are-we-facing-peak-uranium.html

Quote:
?Losing Cigar Lake in the uranium world is like the oil market having to deal with the loss of Saudi Arabia,? reports Toronto-based Sprott Asset Management?s Kevin Bambrough."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 5:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Jan Willem Storm van Leeuwen. and Philip Smith (2004), "Nuclear Power: The Energy Balance", at www.stormsmith.nl, stated that there is only enough nuclear fuel in the world to last three years if all electricity was generated by nuclear.

A good precis of the case by Flemming is available at
http://www.feasta.org/documents/energy/nuclear_power.htm

I did, however, meet a gentleman at a recent seminar who said that Thorium based nuclear was viable and there is plenty of thorium fuel available for donkeys years. He had worked in the field until retiring recently. I've not done any research to prove or disprove this statement
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
isenhand



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 1296
Location: Sweden

PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

According to ?Uranium ? a sustainable energy source? produced by the Analysis Group of Swedish Nuclear Training and Safety Centre ?at present, economically viable deposits ? would last for 50 years?. It goes on to say ?doubling the price of uranium ? would increase reserves to hundreds of years.?

Smile
_________________
The only future we have is the one we make!

Technocracy:
http://en.technocracynet.eu

http://www.lulu.com/technocracy

http://www.technocracy.tk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
kenneal - lagger
Site Admin


Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 9807
Location: Newbury, Berkshire

PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It not a cost thing it's EROEI again. Uranium ores are found in very low concentrations. The problem is the amount of energy required to separate the Uranium from the ore.

Quote:
economically viable deposits ? would last for 50 years?

This is on the basis of current usage. Increase the rate of usage and you're down to a few years. Read my link

http://www.feasta.org/documents/energy/nuclear_power.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Joe



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 596
Location: Leeds

PostPosted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal wrote:
I did, however, meet a gentleman at a recent seminar who said that Thorium based nuclear was viable and there is plenty of thorium fuel available for donkeys years. He had worked in the field until retiring recently. I've not done any research to prove or disprove this statement


World Nuclear Association's (predictably positive) discussion on Thorium: http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf62.htm
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SaturnV



Joined: 11 Jan 2006
Posts: 46
Location: Sydney, Australia

PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2006 7:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The thorium cycle is even more problematic than the breeder cycle to develop apparently.
_________________
"The human species may be seen as having evolved in the service of entropy" - David Price.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joules



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 255
Location: Canterbury, UK

PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 12:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

$10 hike in the Uranium price this week:

http://www.uxc.com/review/uxc_Prices.aspx
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Totally_Baffled



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2824
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 1:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal wrote:
It not a cost thing it's EROEI again. Uranium ores are found in very low concentrations. The problem is the amount of energy required to separate the Uranium from the ore.

Quote:
economically viable deposits ? would last for 50 years?

This is on the basis of current usage. Increase the rate of usage and you're down to a few years. Read my link

http://www.feasta.org/documents/energy/nuclear_power.htm


Economically viable oil in 1980 would of lasted 35 years at 1980's levels of consumption.

With demand growth we should of peaked by 1989 and run out completely 5 years ago...

But we haven't... (well on the latter point anyway) Wink
_________________
TB

Peak oil? ahhh smeg..... Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Totally_Baffled



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2824
Location: Hampshire

PostPosted: Thu Feb 22, 2007 1:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

kenneal wrote:
It not a cost thing it's EROEI again. Uranium ores are found in very low concentrations. The problem is the amount of energy required to separate the Uranium from the ore.

Quote:
economically viable deposits ? would last for 50 years?

This is on the basis of current usage. Increase the rate of usage and you're down to a few years. Read my link

http://www.feasta.org/documents/energy/nuclear_power.htm


Economically viable oil in 1980 would of lasted 35 years at 1980's levels of consumption.

With demand growth we should of run out completely 5 years ago...

But we haven't... Wink

These types of statements are misleading are they not?
_________________
TB

Peak oil? ahhh smeg..... Sad
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group