• STOCKTALK
• POLITICS
• PASTIMES

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Dino's Bar & Grill -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

---

To: Goose94 who wrote (20524) 7/27/2016 12:01:47 PM From: Goose94 Respond to of 203664   Wales must maintain nuclear industry, says parliamentary committee The proposed Wylfa Newydd nuclear power plant can deliver value for money, a UK parliamentary committee looking into the future of nuclear power in Wales has concluded. Meanwhile, it says the Trawsfynydd site is a "standout candidate" for locating a first-of-its-kind small modular reactor (SMR). The Commons Select Committee on Welsh Affairs launched an inquiry into nuclear power's future of in Wales in January. Since then, six evidence sessions have been held, hearing from 33 witnesses. Members of the committee also visited the two main nuclear sites in Wales - Wylfa and Trawsfynydd. The committee has taken into consideration the decommissioning of shut down plants, the construction of the new plant at Wylfa and the UK government's plans for the development of SMRs. It has now published its conclusions and recommendations. "Nuclear power has a long history in Wales, supplying power to large parts of the nation and providing thousands of people with well-paying jobs," the report said. "Wales has played a key part in establishing the nuclear industry in the UK, having hosted two first generation nuclear reactors for the past half a century. However, the future for nuclear power in Wales is uncertain. Both the [Wylfa and Trawsfynydd] power stations are now closed, and therefore Wales no longer has any operational nuclear power plants." The committee noted Horizon Nuclear Power's plans to build a new nuclear power plant at the Wylfa site on the Isle of Anglesey. However, it said it had received conflicting evidence on the potential cost of the new plant. The committee said it is reassured that the taxpayer will be protected from excessive costs, "as the risk of investment is placed on the developer". The report said the UK's energy policy should "balance cost against energy and environmental concerns". It added, "We recommend that the government negotiate a strike price for Wylfa Newydd below that agreed for Hinkley Point C and seek a price that would be competitive with renewable sources, such as on-shore wind. The government should not continue with the project if the price is too high." "We believe that Wylfa Newydd can deliver value for money and deliver a significant portion of the country's future energy needs," the committee concluded. "To achieve this, the developers and the government will need to manage potential delays and bottlenecks, to keep costs down and the project on schedule." The report recommends the UK government puts in place a contingency plan "to fill the gap in the energy supply" if there is a delayed start to the Wylfa Newydd project. "The nuclear industry has made a major contribution to the economy of North Wales, and Wylfa Newydd would make a strong contribution in the future," it said. "Without the nuclear power industry, there is little prospect of many high-quality, well-paid jobs in the area, which will negatively affect the local economy." The committee said it is surprised the government's plans for nuclear skills development in the UK does not have "a Welsh dimension". It recommends the UK government sets out plans to create a North Wales campus for the National Nuclear College, announced in May this year. SMR for Trawsfynydd Last November, the government announced plans to invest at least £250 million ($352 million) over the next five years in an "ambitious" nuclear research and development program to include a competition to identify the best value SMR design for the UK. "It is clear that Trawsfynydd would be an ideal site for a first-of-a-kind SMR," the committee suggests. "The availability of cooling water and the grid connections mean it would meet the technical requirements, and its history as a nuclear site and its ownership by the government mean that it would be easy to designate it as a site for SMR development. The presence of a skilled workforce, which is strongly in favour of the project, would also be a major boost to SMR development." North Wales is well positioned near centres of nuclear excellence in north-west England and needs investment to stimulate the economy, the report said. Researched and written by World Nuclear News

To: Goose94 who wrote (20524) 7/28/2016 1:02:16 PM From: Goose94 Respond to of 203664   Japanese institute sees 19 reactor restarts by March 2018 Seven Japanese nuclear power reactors are likely to be in operation by the end of next March and 12 more one year later, according to an estimate by the Institute of Energy Economics, Japan (IEEJ). Judicial rulings and local consents will influence the rate of restart, it notes. In its Economic and Energy Outlook of Japan Through 2017, the IEEJ has considered the economic and environmental impacts in financial years 2016 and 2017 (ending March 2017 and 2018, respectively) of various scenarios for the restart of reactors in Japan. The organization estimates that if restarts take place according to the current schedule - the "reference scenario" - seven reactors could restart by the end of FY2016 (ending March 2017). By the end of FY2017, 19 units could be restarted, generating some 119.8 TWh of electricity annually, compared with total nuclear output of 288.2 TWh in FY2010, the year prior to the accident at the Fukushima Daiichi plant. Under this scenario, compared with FY2010, total spending on fossil fuel imports in FY2017 decreases by JPY4.7 trillion ($45 billion), while the electricity cost - including fuel costs, feed-in tariffs and grid stabilization costs - increases by about JPY100/MWh. Relative to the same period, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions to 1094 million tonnes CO2. According to the IEEJ, energy-related emissions reached a historical high of 1235 million tonnes CO2 in FY2013. The IEEJ's high-case scenario assumes a total of 25 units are restarted by the end of FY2017, generating 151.2 TWh annually, with total fossil fuel imports spending decreasing by JPY0.7 trillion relative to the low-case scenario where only 12 reactors are assumed to restart, producing 39.1 TWh. In the high-case scenario, the average electricity unit cost is lowered by about JPY600/MWh and energy-related emissions decrease by 52 million tonnes CO2. Under the "best mix" scenario - which reflects the generation mix of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry's long-term energy supply and demand outlook - nuclear output reaches 195 TWh by the end of FY2017. Total fossil fuel import spending falls by JPY1.2 trillion and energy-related emission drop by 114 million tonnes CO2. However, the average electricity unit cost increases by JPY600/MWh, reaching JPY6900/MWh, which is the highest among the four scenarios. So far four Japanese reactors - Sendai units 1 and 2 and Takahama units 3 and 4 - have been restarted under the new safety regulations. However, both Takahama 3 and 4 have been offline since March due to an injunction imposed by a district court. "Gradually, the passing of safety checks and the process of restarting [reactors] under the new regulation standards is proceeding," the IEEJ said. "And yet, there is still much ambiguity including judicial ruling and/or local acceptance which will influence the pace of restart." It added, "Because of the judicial ruling that ceased operations at the Takahama units 3 and 4, it is important to analyse the effect of stopping operations of nuclear power plants from a local point of view," the IEEJ said. "As a rule, if one nuclear plant with a capacity of 1GWe stops operation for one year in an area where annual demand is about 100 TWh, total fossil fuel costs increase by JPY60 billion and the energy-related CO2 emissions increase by 4 million tonnes CO2. The average electricity unit cost will increase by JPY400/MWh." Researched and written by World Nuclear News

To: Goose94 who wrote (20524) 8/8/2016 8:00:58 AM From: Goose94 Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 203664   NexGen Energy (NXE-T) Aug 8, '16 is pleased to report assay results for seven holes from our recently completed winter 2016 drilling program on our 100% owned, Rook I property, Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan. Highlights: A2 Sub-Zone Scissor drilling collared from the southeast to the northwest at the Arrow Deposit has returned extensive high grade uranium mineralization in the higher grade A2 sub-zone (the "Sub-Zone"). Scissor hole AR-16-91c2 (38 m up-dip and northeast from AR-15-44b) intersected 40.5 m at 12.69% U3O8 (522.0 to 562.5 m) including 25.0 m at 19.97% U3O8 (526.0 to 551.0 m) and 1.5 m at 63.93% U3O8 (541.0 to 542.5 m). Hole AR-16-91c2 has confirmed and increased the known width of the Sub-Zone and returned a continuous grade x thickness ("GT") of 514. The Sub-Zone is now outlined by 23 holes, all of which intersected dense accumulations of massive-to-semi-massive pitchblende, sixteen of which were drilled after the release of the Company's maiden NI 43-101 compliant Inferred Mineral Resource for the Rook I project on March 3, 2016. A2 Shear High-Grade Domain Infill drilling continues to verify that mineralization in the A2 shear is both extensive and continuous. These include 3 scissor holes drilled outside of the Sub-Zone but inside the A2 High-Grade Domain; highlights include: Scissor hole AR-16-84c4 (30 m down-dip and northeast from AR-15-44b) intersected 38.0 m at 1.92% U3O8 (566.0 to 604.0 m) including 11.0 m at 6.15% U3O8 (573.5 to 584.5 m). Scissor hole AR-16-91c3 (96 m up-dip and northeast from AR-15-44b) intersected 18.5 m at 3.26% U3O8 (485.0 to 503.5 m) including 7.5 m at 7.40% U3O8 (490.5 to 498.0 m). A1 Shear Significant expansion of the newly discovered mineralized zone in the A1 shear has been confirmed. The A1 shear remains primarily untested, and is already host to mineralization over a strike length of 360 m. AR-16-91c3 (30 m up-dip and northeast from AR-16-84c1) intersected 19.0 m at 0.82% U3O8 (628.0 to 647.0 m) including 3.5 m at 3.05% U3O8 (639.5 to 643.0 m), and 6.0 m at 1.02% U3O8 (657.0 to 663.0 m). Table 1: Higher Grade A2 Sub-Zone Drill Hole Comparison 2015 AR-15- 59c22 AR-15- 54c12 AR-15- 58c12 AR-15- 622 AR-15- 44b2 AR-15- 49c22 AR-15- 57c32 Total composite mineralization = 75.5m 42.0m 86.0m 143.0m 135.6m 73.5m 62.5m Total Off-scale (>10,000 to 29,999 cps)3 = 11.4m 5.9m 14.3m 17.8m 30.3m 15.7m 4.4m Total Off-scale (>30,000 to 60,999 cps)3 = 4.5m 3.0m 3.9m 10.6m 7.8m 5.2m 2.5m Total Off-scale (>61,000 cps)3 = 1.0m 0.5m 2.0m 2.0m 1.5m 2.2m 1.8m Continuous GT (Grade x Thickness) = 371 277 200 and 345 787 655 605 319 2016 AR-16- 81c32 AR-16- 76c42 AR-16- 76c12 AR-16- 76c32 AR-16- 63c12 AR-16- 63c32 AR-16- 86c12 AR-16- 74c12 AR-16- 63c22 AR-16- 91c21 AR-16- 64c32 AR-16- 64c22 AR-16- 64c12 AR-16- 72c22 AR-16- 78c12 AR-16- 78c42 Total composite mineralization = 48.5m 105.7m 73.5m 67.5m 55.5m 147.0m 90.0m 88.0m 138.0m 89.0m 102.0m 76.0m 74.0m 93.0m 64.0m 120.5m Total Off-scale (>10,000 to 29,999 cps)3 = 5.2m 19.9m 14.8m 14.9m 6.9m 22.1m 8.8m 21.2m 17.1m 13.4m 18.8m 16.0m 10.3m 7.0m 11.6m 25.8m Total Off-scale (>30,000 to 60,999 cps)3 = 4.0m 1.0m 2.8m 5.0m 0.5m 3.0m 2.3m 1.2m 9.9m 6.0m 2.5m 4.7m 3.7m 0.5m 3.0m 6.2m Total Off-scale (>61,000 cps)3 = 2.5m 0.0m 5.3m 4.5m 0.0m 0.5m 2.0m 0.0m 13.9m 3.0m 0.0m 5.5m 0.0m 1.7m 2.5m 5.5m Continuous GT (Grade x Thickness) = 395 142 and 63 762 761 203 274 and 124 394 160 and 35 638 and 604 514 172 and 92 541 338 156 and 45 485 660 and 88 and 67 1 radioactivity results previously released 2 radioactivity and assays results previously released 3 minimum radioactivity using RS-120 gamma spectrometer Arrow, Activities & Financial The land-based and basement hosted Arrow Deposit currently covers an area of 870 m by 280 m with a vertical extent of mineralization commencing from 100 m to 920 m, and remains open in most directions and at depth. The summer 2016 program comprising 35,000 m of drilling is underway with seven drill rigs active. The Company has cash on hand of approximately $91 million. A three-dimensional view of the A2 High Grade Domain, long sections of the A1 and A2 shears, and a plan map are shown in Figures 1 to 4. Table 2 shows complete assay results. Garrett Ainsworth, Vice-President, Exploration and Development, commented: "The robust nature of the higher grade A2 sub-zone is clearly evident with scissor hole AR-16-91c2 returning a continuous GT of 514. The drill results continue to be outstanding whether the sub-vertically dipping mineralization is drilled from the northwest to the southeast or vice versa. Additionally, the mineralized zone in the A1 shear is expanding rapidly since discovery hole AR-16-84c1." Leigh Curyer, Chief Executive Officer commented: "These batch of results deliver two important objectives of the summer drilling program. Firstly, the scissor holes confirming the robust nature of the higher grade A2 sub-zone and secondly, expanding the area of mineralization within the A1 shear. The combination of infill drilling, expansion testing and regional exploration is meeting all the objectives of the summer program." Table 2: Arrow Deposit Assay Results Drill Hole Athabasca Group - Basement Unconformity Depth (m) SRC Geoanalytical Results Hole ID Azimuth Dip Total Depth (m) From (m) To (m) Interval (m) U3O8 (wt%) AR-16-84c4 328 -70 651.00 127.00 415.00 415.50 0.50 0.07 419.50 424.50 5.00 0.02 433.50 435.00 1.50 0.05 440.00 444.00 4.00 0.05 471.50 481.00 9.50 0.07 490.00 499.50 9.50 0.03 502.00 503.00 1.00 0.04 541.00 542.00 1.00 0.03 545.00 546.50 1.50 0.04 553.50 561.00 7.50 0.03 566.00 604.00 38.00 1.92 incl. 573.50 584.50 11.00 6.15 608.50 616.00 7.50 0.16 AR-16-85c3 143 -70 840.00 114.40 419.50 424.00 4.50 0.12 429.00 429.50 0.50 0.06 432.00 432.50 0.50 0.06 438.00 440.00 2.00 0.19 443.00 447.50 4.50 0.12 455.50 457.00 1.50 0.20 460.50 472.00 11.50 0.08 475.50 476.50 1.00 0.23 485.50 498.50 13.00 0.06 506.50 507.00 0.50 0.16 515.00 515.50 0.50 0.09 531.00 531.50 0.50 0.26 549.50 552.00 2.50 3.82 572.50 580.00 7.50 0.46 584.00 585.00 1.00 3.11 611.50 612.00 0.50 5.53 614.50 617.50 3.00 1.03 629.50 630.50 1.00 0.39 633.00 633.50 0.50 0.05 647.50 648.00 0.50 0.13 671.50 672.00 0.50 0.24 693.00 694.00 1.00 1.23 714.50 716.00 1.50 0.35 720.00 720.50 0.50 0.09 789.50 790.50 1.00 0.26 AR-16-85c4 143 -70 822.00 114.40 426.50 441.00 14.50 0.33 453.50 454.50 1.00 0.19 459.00 472.50 13.50 0.08 476.50 477.50 1.00 0.11 480.00 480.50 0.50 0.22 484.50 485.00 0.50 0.07 488.00 488.50 0.50 0.06 492.00 492.50 0.50 0.05 578.00 580.50 2.50 0.19 587.50 588.00 0.50 0.12 591.50 596.00 4.50 0.09 604.00 604.50 0.50 0.07 616.50 618.50 2.00 0.12 622.50 623.00 0.50 0.07 630.00 633.00 3.00 0.06 635.50 637.50 2.00 0.05 670.00 670.50 0.50 0.47 690.50 696.00 5.50 0.05 743.00 743.50 0.50 1.74 747.00 750.50 3.50 0.33 760.00 760.50 0.50 0.08 AR-16-86c2 142 -71 750.00 110.50 402.00 429.00 27.00 0.12 431.50 432.00 0.50 0.06 435.50 440.00 4.50 0.16 447.00 462.50 15.50 0.05 465.00 468.50 3.50 0.10 471.00 472.00 1.00 0.02 475.00 490.50 15.50 0.04 497.00 499.00 2.00 0.01 509.00 518.50 9.50 0.02 526.50 535.00 8.50 0.84 545.50 554.00 8.50 0.14 563.50 578.00 14.50 0.70 587.50 589.00 1.50 0.70 593.00 593.50 0.50 0.10 607.00 607.50 0.50 0.07 623.00 623.50 0.50 0.13 652.00 653.00 1.00 0.21 658.00 658.50 0.50 0.02 697.00 697.50 0.50 0.01 AR-16-91c1 327 -70 799.00 132.20 396.50 397.00 0.50 0.67 402.00 404.00 2.00 0.05 411.50 412.00 0.50 0.05 416.50 417.00 0.50 0.22 419.50 420.50 1.00 0.07 425.50 428.00 2.50 0.37 430.50 439.50 9.00 0.50 443.00 452.50 9.50 0.09 458.00 461.00 3.00 0.03 465.50 482.50 17.00 0.12 489.50 494.00 4.50 0.15 499.00 503.50 4.50 0.20 506.50 525.00 18.50 1.91 528.50 537.00 8.50 0.58 542.50 549.50 7.00 0.34 556.00 559.50 3.50 0.10 562.50 563.50 1.00 0.41 691.50 692.50 1.00 0.20 698.50 701.50 3.00 0.07 706.00 729.50 23.50 0.20 759.50 760.00 0.50 0.06 766.50 767.00 0.50 0.09 AR-16-91c2 327 -70 915.00 132.20 387.50 388.00 0.50 0.07 396.00 396.50 0.50 0.32 401.50 405.50 4.00 0.17 411.00 411.50 0.50 0.05 415.50 420.00 4.50 0.06 425.50 428.00 2.50 0.45 430.50 432.00 1.50 0.09 434.50 441.50 7.00 0.34 444.00 445.00 1.00 0.36 448.00 453.50 5.50 0.43 466.00 468.00 2.00 0.05 470.50 474.00 3.50 0.08 477.50 486.50 9.00 0.10 491.00 491.50 0.50 0.12 494.50 495.00 0.50 0.12 503.50 506.00 2.50 0.06 517.00 518.50 1.50 0.12 522.00 562.50 40.50 12.69 incl. 526.00 551.00 25.00 19.97 incl. 541.00 542.50 1.50 63.93 573.50 574.00 0.50 0.21 576.50 577.00 0.50 0.12 596.00 597.00 1.00 0.07 612.00 614.50 2.50 0.17 619.50 620.50 1.00 0.13 638.00 641.00 3.00 1.05 645.00 645.50 0.50 0.47 654.00 655.00 1.00 0.14 718.00 718.50 0.50 0.46 772.00 772.50 0.50 0.06 830.50 832.00 1.50 0.15 834.50 838.50 4.00 0.08 AR-16-91c3 327 -70 879.00 132.20 393.50 394.00 0.50 0.06 396.50 398.50 2.00 0.12 402.00 403.00 1.00 0.07 407.00 407.50 0.50 0.10 419.50 420.00 0.50 0.11 423.00 428.00 5.00 0.14 430.50 440.00 9.50 0.17 444.50 446.00 1.50 0.34 449.50 451.50 2.00 0.09 455.00 455.50 0.50 0.06 460.50 461.00 0.50 0.13 464.50 466.50 2.00 0.14 473.50 479.50 6.00 0.20 485.00 503.50 18.50 3.26 incl. 490.50 498.00 7.50 7.40 513.50 514.50 1.00 0.13 520.50 537.00 16.50 1.31 575.00 584.00 9.00 0.05 628.00 647.00 19.00 0.82 incl. 639.50 643.00 3.50 3.05 652.50 653.00 0.50 0.08 657.00 663.00 6.00 1.02 676.50 677.50 1.00 0.10 709.50 710.00 0.50 0.36 714.00 720.00 6.00 1.37 Composite parameters: Minimum thickness 0.5 m downhole Cutoff grade 0.01% U3O8 Maximum internal dilution 2.00 m downhole U3O8 analyzed by ICP-OES at SRC Laboratories, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan All depths and intervals are meters downhole, true thicknesses are yet to be determined Split core samples were taken systematically, and intervals were submitted to SRC Geoanalytical Laboratories (an SCC ISO/IEC 17025: 2005 Accredited Facility) of Saskatoon for analysis. All samples were analyzed using ICP-MS for trace elements on partial and total digestions, ICP-OES for major and minor elements on a total digestion, and fusion solution of boron by ICP-OES. Mineralized samples were analyzed for U3O8 by ICP-OES and selected samples for gold by fire assay. All assay batches reported herein are subjected to and have passed rigorous internal QA/QC protocols that include, but are not limited to, the blind insertion of standard reference materials, blank materials and field duplicates into the sample stream at both random and systematic intervals. Technical Information All scientific and technical information in this news release has been prepared by or reviewed and approved by Mr. Garrett Ainsworth, P.Geo., Vice President – Exploration & Development for NexGen. Mr. Ainsworth is a qualified person for the purposes of National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects ("NI 43-101"), and has verified the sampling, analytical, and test data underlying the information or opinions contained herein by reviewing original data certificates and monitoring all of the data collection protocols. For details of the Rook I Project including the quality assurance program and quality control measures applied and key assumptions, parameters and methods used to estimate the mineral resource set forth above please refer to the technical report entitled "Technical Report on the Rook 1 Property, Saskatchewan, Canada" dated effective April 13, 2016 (the "Rook 1 Technical Report") prepared by Mark B. Mathisen and David Ross, each of whom is a "qualified person" under NI 43-101. The Rook I Technical Report is available for review under the Company's profile on SEDAR at www.sedar.com. About NexGen NexGen is a British Columbia corporation with a focus on the acquisition, exploration and development of Canadian uranium projects. NexGen has a highly experienced team of uranium industry professionals with a successful track record in the discovery of uranium deposits and in developing projects through discovery to production. NexGen owns a portfolio of highly prospective uranium exploration assets in the Athabasca Basin, Saskatchewan, Canada, including a 100% interest in Rook I, location of the Arrow Discovery in February 2014 and Bow Discovery in March 2015. The Arrow Deposit's maiden Inferred mineral resource estimate is 201.9 M lbs U3O8 contained in 3.48 M tonnes grading 2.63% U3O8. SOURCE NexGen Energy Ltd. Image with caption: "Figure 1: Three-Dimensional View of the A2 High Grade Domain (CNW Group/NexGen Energy Ltd.)". Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20160808_C2594_PHOTO_EN_748833.jpg Image with caption: "Figure 2: A2 Mineralized Long Section (close-up) (CNW Group/NexGen Energy Ltd.)". Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20160808_C2594_PHOTO_EN_748835.jpg Image with caption: "Figure 3: A1 Mineralized Long Section (CNW Group/NexGen Energy Ltd.)". Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20160808_C2594_PHOTO_EN_748837.jpg Image with caption: "Figure 4: Arrow Drill Hole Locations (CNW Group/NexGen Energy Ltd.)". Image available at: http://photos.newswire.ca/images/download/20160808_C2594_PHOTO_EN_748839.jpg Leigh Curyer, Chief Executive Officer, NexGen Energy Ltd., +1 604 428 4112, lcuryer@nexgenenergy.ca , www.nexgenenergy.ca ; Travis McPherson, Corporate Development Manager, NexGen Energy Ltd., +1 604 428 4112, tmcpherson@nexgenenergy.ca , nexgenenergy.ca

Home

Mail

Hot

SubjectMarks

PeopleMarks

Keepers

Settings

Terms Of Use

Contact Us

Copyright/IP Policy

Privacy Policy

About Us

FAQ

Advertise on SI

© 2026 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News