India’s “Nuclear Liability Bill” – a subsidy to USA business
“There is no legal liability of the foreign reactor supplier even if it supplies faulty and substandard equipment.”
Nuclear bill is hidden subsidy to US firms, says Left LittleAbout – from Indo-Asian News New Delhi, March 16 : The Left parties Tuesday urged MPs to reject the civil nuclear liability bill, saying it amounted to giving subsidies to US suppliers of proposed nuclear plants while disregarding the interests of the Indian people. Continue reading
Depressing outlook for uranium sales: AREVA cuts back production
Waiting for Uranium Prices to Rise, By Melissa Pistilli Uranium Investing News, 15 March.2010, AREVA May Cut Production Depressing uranium prices have forced French uranium miner AREVA to plan a review of its projects, which may lead to a 20 per cent cut in its 2012 output target.
Last September, the company pegged its 2012 production number at 12,000 tonnes of U308, but now says uranium prices are too low to make production costs economical. Continue reading
Foreign companies won’t have to pay for nuclear accidents in India
Nuke accident: India liable, not foreign suppliers?, NDTV , March 14, 2010, New Delhi, The government is set to introduce a contentious bill in Lok Sabha on Monday, which seeks to fix liability in case of a nuclear accident. Continue reading
Costs of U.S. nuclear weapons – the facts
50 Facts About U.S. Nuclear Weapons, Pak Alert Press, March 12, 2010 The U.S. Nuclear Weapons Cost Study Project was completed in August 1998 and resulted in the book Atomic Audit: The Costs and Consequences of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Since 1940 edited by Stephen I. Schwartz. These project pages should be considered historical.
This article goes on to list the projects and costs – from 1945 – 1998
No. 1. Cost of the Manhattan Project (through August 1945): $20,000,000,000
No. 50. Estimated 1998 spending on all U.S. nuclear weapons and weapons-related programs: $35,100,000,000
Even USA’s Right Wing is Worried About Nuclear Loan Guarantees!
The Heritage Foundation Position on Loan Guarantees , The Foundry: Conservative Policy News. 12 March 2010, The Heritage Foundation has not opposed limited loan guarantees (those already authorized under the Energy Policy Act of 2005). ….. Expanding government intervention into capital markets beyond current authorizations would simply distort long-term market integrity. At a minimum, they create taxpayer liabilities, give recipients preferential treatment, and distort capital markets. Continue reading
Uranium One’s losses due to low uranium prices
Uranium One announces $36.5m net loss for full year 2009 , 11 Mar 2010,(Reuters) “….– Uranium One Inc (UUU.TO: Quote) posted a net loss in 2009, hurt mainly by lower realized uranium prices, ….Earnings from mine operations fell 41.2 percent to $54.6 million. The company said average realized sales prices fell 30 percent in 2009.
Shares of the Vancouver, British Columbia-based miner closed at C$2.81 Wednesday on the Toronto Stock Exchange. (Reporting by Abhiram Nandakumar in Bangalore; Editing by Maju Samuel)
First Uranium rescued by shareholders, from financial disaster
First Uranium shareholders provide capital lifeline Winnepedg Free Press, By: THE CANADIAN PRESS 12 March 2010, TORONTO – First Uranium Corp. (TSX:FIU) is getting a much-needed infusion of capital from a major shareholder and a new chief executive.The Toronto-based gold and uranium company had warned last month that its financial condition had been “severely compromised” by problems getting government environmental approval for a future storage site in South Africa.
First Uranium shareholders provide capital lifeline – Winnipeg Free Press
Crummy outlook for uranium prices
Outlook for Uranium, Uncommon Wisdom, by Sean Brodrick on March 11, 2010, Gold is shining … oil is heating up … so what’s up with uranium? The once white-hot metal is certainly way off its highs. In fact, the spot price of uranium recently fell to U.S.$40.50…
.Both Macquarie and UBS forecast spot prices will average$47 per pound this year, down from an average of $52 per pound in 2009. In other words: uranium is not expected to join the recovery elsewhere in the commodity space anytime soon.
Even the nuclear industry itself knows that its future is dodgy
SMi’s 3rd Annual Financing Nuclear Power Conference Will Connect Experts And Executives Nuclear Street, – By April Murelio 8 March 2010,”….. -According to the World Business Academy the availability and cost of financing for new nuclear plants will depend on:
• The level and certainty of government subsidies and incentives•
*The comparative cost and performance of renewable energy sources•
The timing of capital markets’ recovery from the credit crisis•
Estimated construction costs• The structure of the target electricity market (competitive market v. more traditional, regulated cost-of-service market)
• Assessments of plants’ lifetime capacity and performance
• Resolution of the long-term waste storage problem
• Public opinion about nuclear power…
Biggest uranium miner downgraded due to failing uranium price
Cameco downgraded on weak uranium price Financial Post March 03, 2010, by Eric Lam Saskatchewan Even Cameco Corp., the biggest player in the uranium industry, cannot escape recent weaknesses in the mineral’s spot price.
Fraser Phillips, analyst with RBC Capital Markets, has downgraded Cameco Continue reading
Poor longterm trend for uranium prices
A Death Cross For Global Uranium StocksFNArena News – March 02 2010 , By Rudi Filapek-Vandyck A recent sector report by Canadian stockbrokers Haywood Securities has revealed that price charts for many international uranium stocks carry the so-called “Cross of Death”. This is when a shorter term trendline moves below the longer term trendline and stays beneath it. Continue reading Nuclear power- a very risky investment
What Thomas (Steve Thomas, Professor of Energy Studies at the University of Greenwich,) describes paints a very risky picture for nuclear investment.
The State of the Nuclear Industry in Canada and Abroad – Pt 1. Enviralment by: Aizen | March 2, 2010“…while the decision on whether to order new nuclear plants will be taken on a range of considerations, it is important idea of economics behind nuclear power so it can be properly gauged against other options…. Continue reading
The hidden costs of nuclear power
We know about the ever-increasing costs of building a nuclear reactor. Everyone talks about these “central”, or middle costs. But what about the hidden costs at the “front end” and the “back” end of the nuclear fuel cycle? – our theme for March 2010
Failing Nuclear industry trying to save itself in reactor sales to China?
Here’s how the shell game could work. If the coal industry could sell outdated, pollution-spewing, coal-fired power plants to China, could the nuclear power industry do the same thing? Could they get rid of their unresolved and unfunded decommissioning headache with the same trick?
(USA) How Do You Say “Oh Crap!” in Chinese?, THE HUFFINGTON POST, Alexia Parks, February 22, 2010 China is picking up the worst of American technology along with its best. For example, to keep up with U.S. consumer demand, China has bought and imported the worst of our outdated, pollution-spewing, coal-fired power plants. American coal power plant owners made out like bandits in the sale and transfer of outdated technology. Under-regulated, their Chinese counterparts have made millions on their rapid manufacture of products for the U.S. market…………. Continue reading
How the nuclear lobby buys politicians and media
$600 Million Lipstick for a Dead Radioactive Pig THE HUFFINGTON POST, Harvey Wasserman February 22, 2010The mystery has been solved.Where is this “new reactor renaissance” coming from?There has been no deep, thoughtful re-making or re-evaluation of atomic technology. No solution to the nuke waste problem. No making reactors economically sound. No private insurance against radioactive disasters by terror or error. No grassroots citizens now desperate to live near fragile containment domes and outtake pipes spewing radioactive tritium at 27 US reactors.No, nothing about atomic energy has really changed.Except this: $645 million spent on lobbying and media manipulation. Continue reading
-
Archives
- June 2026 (221)
- May 2026 (306)
- April 2026 (356)
- March 2026 (251)
- February 2026 (268)
- January 2026 (308)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (376)
- September 2025 (257)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS











