Uranium — The White-Hot Metal: Demand is Outstripping Supply

[jpak]

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article273.html

<snip>

Uranium — The White-Hot Metal: Demand is Outstripping Supply
In 2005 (the most recent complete statistics), uranium mines supplied 102.5 million pounds of uranium, but demand was 171 million pounds. The gap of 68.5 million pounds was filled by rapidly dwindling stockpiles. Uranium demand probably hit 180 million pounds in 2006, and is going higher yet. Supply just can't keep up. Then, in October, uranium kingpin Cameco reported that its Cigar Lake Mine, which was scheduled to go into production in 2008, suffered a disastrous flood. Water is still pouring into the mine so fast that some miners joke that Cameco should convert Cigar Lake into a hydroelectric plant.

Cigar Lake was supposed to ramp up production to 18 million pounds of uranium a year; 18 million pounds — that's more than a tenth of last year's total global demand. One expert said: “It's like the oil industry losing Saudi Arabia.” Cameco is trying to stem the flooding at Cigar Lake, but this project is probably delayed for years. The biggest challenge of all: Right this very moment, there are over 100 nuclear reactors under construction or in the planning stages, a huge 25% increase over the number of existing reactors. Japan has 11 in the works. China, 30. India, 20. A typical 1 gigawatt nuclear reactor requires around 200 tonnes of natural uranium per year.

Bottom line: Demand is going to soar, and supply can't keep up.

<snip>

So sayth the Oracle...

:evilgrin:

[rman]

1. Yep, it's Peak Resource, not just Peak Oil

So, where are the nay-sayers claiming there are infinite quantities of Uranium?

[GliderGuider]

2. Invest in uranium mining stocks

Cameco has been an absolute sweetheart.

[jpak]

3. Invest in seawater and granite outcrops

a sure thing...

:evilgrin:

[yellowcanine]

5. Invest in swamp land in Florida. If you choose carefully you could have your own island.

[yellowcanine]

4. This is the subject the "Nukes are the silver bullet" cure for Global Warming" crowd doesn't talk

about. There really is no free lunch. What does it take to get people to see that?

[TheWraith]

6. Supply is going down because a lot of countries--including us--have basically stopped new mining.

Of course when you stop or restrict the production of something, it becomes more scarce. That's basic economics. Catch is, none of these articles that get thrown around talk about the total reserves of uranium yet to be mined, which is a very large number, and it gets higher as the price of uranium increases, making it more economical to pursue less pure veins. Actual scientific studied have projected that we have enough uranium to supply all our nuclear power needs at current growth rates for several hundred years or more, without the price going above $135 per kilogram.

Second thing is that there's dilute uranium present in seawater and granite, which can be extracted if the price ever gets high enough to make it profitable. Even if uranium went from the current price of $40 per kilogram, to $1000 per kg, a nuclear plant would still produce electricity at a price of roughly 6 cents per kilowatt-hour.

Simply put, the "peak uranium" argument is fantasy, perpetuated either by the fossil fuels industry or anti-nuclear activists with more enthusiasm than scientific experience.

[jpak]

7. It's called resource depletion

If one exploits a nonrenewable resource - one will deplete it...

http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:G89SyixLCZ0J:www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/stb0903.xls+uranium+overview+1949+2004&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Funny how that works...

To supply existing US reactors, we would have to extract >7000 cubic kilometers of seawater per year.

The volume of Chesapeake Bay is "only" 73 cubic kilometers

The annual discharge of the Mississippi River is "only" 535 cubic kilometers.

Seawater uranium = pie in the sky...

...and how many mountains (not just mountain tops) are we going to dig up and crush to supply uranium for our clean and green reactors?????

(clue: lots n' lots)

[Dead_Parrot]

8. Trouble is...

almost all the alternate energy solutions people talk about are decades away. They're too immature, too small, or too expensive. The only solution that packs both the volume and the power to make a difference immediately is atomic power. There's simply no other that even comes close.

So sayeth the Oracle...

[jpak]

9. The Oracle huffs natural gas on this one - and is promoting The Precious, not renewables

Those in the PV and wind industry would beg to differ here...

[Dead_Parrot]

10. So, he's right if you agree with him

And wrong if you don't? Gotcha.
:D
I'd tentativly suggest, however, that nobody should be listening to him - It's assclowns like this that that got us into this shit in the first place ("Hey, coal is really cheap! Use that you'll be rich!").

[jpak]

12. No - I believe him/her when he/she is reporting verifiable facts

such as global metrics of uranium production and demand...

But I do not believe mystical opinion which is easily refutable using data

Gotcha!!

:evilgrin:

[Dead_Parrot]

13. Wow

But I do not believe mystical opinion which is easily refutable using data

OK, So who are you, and what did you do with the real Jpak !?

:D

[jpak]

14. I was channeling

got out of it safely thank you

:evilgrin:

[Dead_Parrot]

15. That's alright then...

;) :hi:

[Porcupine]

11. Reactors can run on Thorium....

but we can deplete that too given time and a total consumption economy. The central problems are overpopulation and overconsumption. Until we deal with those we are scheduled to live on a planet with blackberries, cockroaches, seagulls and not a lot else.

[glitch]

16. and rats. Lots and lots of rats. nt