Canadian uranium to win out over oil and gas

China should start receiving shipments of Canadian uranium within a year. That’s the statement Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall made recently in an interview in Beijing. The Globe and Mail has covered the story here and it makes for some very interesting reading if you’re following the nuclear energy industry and uranium market.

As quoted in the Globe: “I just don’t see a lot of roadblocks” to an arrangement that is expected to open the door to some $3-billion in sales over the next decade, possibly starting as soon as six months from now…It’s very significant.”

I agree, it is indeed significant. What the agreement is not, however, is surprising. If you’ve been following China’s energy industry (or reading my blog regularly) you’ll know that not only is China spearheading a major wave of worldwide nuclear reactor construction but they have made clear that they see Canada as a critical part of securing their energy supplies.

Why is Canada so critical? It’s simple…. grade, environment and infrastructure. Let me break it down into more detail.
• Grade: the Athabasca Basin has the world’s highest uranium grades (and supplies nearly 20% of the world’s uranium.
• Environment: Canada has a pro-mining political environment at every level of government
• Infrastructure:  The Athabasca Basin has been home to uranium mining for over 40 years, which translates into multiple high-capacity mills, three generations of local mining professionals, excellent transport links and power grid access.
How do I know all of this, well aside from the fact that I’ve been involved with successful uranium exploration and development for many years, Fission’s flagship property (Waterbury Lake)  and our newest discovery (PLS) are both situated in the Basin.

If you’ve not already done so, be sure to check out our project pages and as always, if you have any questions feel free to get in touch.

Dev Randhawa

Japan’s Energy Policy – the reality gap still causing trouble

A long but useful article in the New York Times discusses the recent announcement but the Japanese government on future energy policy. The decision is that the country will phase out nuclear power by 204o, however the announcement has sparked even more debate as they are various caveats included that could see Japanese reactors still running by 2070.

I’m not going to cover every element here so I do recommend you read the article. What I do want to discuss is one of the issues that underlines the entire debate in Japan and that’s the reality gap between both sides.

When faced with enough public pressure, most democratic governments will change direction – especially if it’s close to an election. So why hasn’t the incumbent government done so to the satisfaction of the Japanese Public? The reason is facts.
• It’s a fact that idling the countries reactor fleet helped deliver Japan’s first trade deficit in more than 30 years.
• It’s a fact that Japan’s largest power company has increased electricity rates by 8% (for home owners) and whopping 15% (for businesses).
• It’s a fact that the country’s carbon footprint has exploded during the same time as the power companies have been forced to power up oil and gas-fired power stations.
• It’s a fact that nuclear energy is a critical source of clean energy capable of delivering the high-base load power that national grids demand.

Pretty much every method of power generation has risks which need to be dealt with. The Japanese had a completely natural and understandable reaction to Fukushima and are right at every turn to put maximum pressure on their government but in my opinion that pressure should be to ensure the safety of their clean, low-cost power stations rather than cripple their economy further and continue to burn vast amounts of fossil fuels.

Dev Randhawa

Ideology vs Reality: The French Nuclear Debate

I read a very interesting article in the New York Times a few days ago on the French energy debate which you may well find useful to read.

When it comes to nuclear energy, France has long been the darling of Western Europe. Approximately 80% of their energy is generated via nuclear power, the nuclear industry employs over 400,000 people – many of them highly trained and French companies like Areva and Électricité de France are global leaders in the design and operation of nuclear technology.

With nuclear playing such a strong role in the energy mix I’ve been watching with great interest ever since the new Socialist/Green coalition came to power around four months ago. The debate on energy policy is progressing as I would expect, that is to say the anti-nuclear ideology of certain elements of the coalition has hit what I like to call the ‘reality wall’.

In this instance the reality wall is the fact that not only is nuclear power already the foundation of the French energy mix but it needs to stay that way and not just because, in a shaky economy France needs to retain it’s cheap energy and successful nuclear industry.

Don’t get me wrong, having multiple sources of energy generation is a smart move but the fact is the world must increasingly turn to clean energy sources to reduce emissions, nuclear has to play a major role. National grids demand high-base load energy generation and in my opinion renewables such as wind and solar are not going to meet the purpose on their own. Don’t believe me? Why else would oil-rich counties like UAE, which also happen to enjoy climates that lend themselves to solar power, be implementing significant nuclear energy policies? If you read some of my earlier posts you’ll find some comments on these very programs.

Dev Randhawa

Peru’s Macusani region steps closer to uranium production

As many of you will be aware, Peru’s Macusani region has been known to contain considerable quantities of uranium for some time now. Several companies, including Fission, have staked properties there and because the uranium has been found close to the surface there is a lot of interest in the area.

One company in particular – Macuani Yellowcake – is very active and has been vocal in its plans to develop Peru’s first uranium mine. I was therefore interested to read their latest press release showing ‘very favourable’ results from their ion exchange tests.

You can read the release for the full description but in layman’s terms it’s enough to know that the tests suggest that uranium extraction using ion exchange will be both financially and environmentally advantageous. This is important because bringing new sources of uranium supply online can be a mammoth task from both a cost and time perspective and the more these costs can be lowered, the more viable production becomes.

At a time when we are approaching the end of the HEU agreement and, what many believe to be the start of a uranium supply crunch, it is good news that Macusani is getting closer to fulfilling its promise as a new uranium producing district.

If you haven’t already done so, check out our Macusani project page  or, if you are a Spanish speaker you can visit the Spanish language section of our website here.

Dev Randhawa

Fission's Top Geo delivers detailed presentation at recent analyst tour

Dev Randhawa

Fission CEO on the Athabasca, nuclear energy and the Pitchstone acquistition