Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by moosey

  1. You will now notice that the Construction Intelligence Center website has again been updated for both Paducah and Wilmington since I last posted it here! http://www.construction-ic.com/HomePage/Pr...rview%2F151013# http://www.construction-ic.com/HomePage/Pr...rview%2F168133# You will notice that they have changed the wording from this -: GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) is planning to construct a laser enrichment facility in Kentucky, the US. To this -: Global Laser Enrichment (GLE), a joint venture between General Electric Co. (GE), Hitachi Ltd and Cameco, is planning to construct the Laser Uranium Enrichment Facility in Kentucky, the US. See how they have now broken up the ownership now of GLE into seperate entities, I reckon one of those three companies is leaving, I think it may be Hitachi who may be selling their share, that would effectively mean that GEH is leaving wouldn't it? I very much doubt that GE would ever sell it's controlling interest of it's 51% holding in GLE and then let another company build a laser enrichment plant on GE land (Their Land), I don't believe for one minute that could or would ever occur? Also in an earlier version of the Construction Intelligence Center release about Paducah, they said that the NRC will be providing the License for it to GLE in September 2016. So we may get to see something next month, in other documents it said that the NRC license for Paducah would be provided BY November 2016, so I guess September 2016 would still fit that bill BY November wouldn't it?
  2. Regarding the ownership structure of GLE, I am of the opinion that it may be Hitachi pulling out? which in effect would still leave GE or GENE in particular with the 51% holding still in place? I could see a company like Converdyn who would have some great synergies with GLE/GNF-A being a company that would be interested? they are a company that would also have a great deal to lose if recycling gets up and they were not part of this? they would also have deep pockets, they are owned by General Atomics and Honeywell, as an aside they also make the drone Predator for the US military. I really can't see GE who also hold the license to the Silex process pulling out and then letting some other company build a laser enrichment plant on their land (which as you can see is still happening), it would not add up in my book, I can see Hitachi selling their part, they will need funds shortly to start building the first PRISM reactor in the US, I will show some links on that later' Can anyone here see that if you took out only Hitachi, you would have effectively taken out GEH and the GE component would then come under GENE possibly? I reckon in the end we may get to see four companies owning GLE GE/GNE 51% Cameco 25% Converdyn say 21% and Silex say 4% or somthing along those lines maybe? I believe there may also be a reason why Silex get to own a certain percentage for a very small outlay? It was done for a reason and I think I know what the reason was, it relates to the sudden increase of SP in SLX, we then had the GEH announcement, I believe it had the desired effect! Have a look at page 62 where it shows the ownership structure of GLE http://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1122/ML11229A173.pdf
  3. If you look at the company structure, I believe that GEH were always going to leave at some point? but I very much doubt that GE will be parting with it's 51% controlling interest in GLE and then allow another company to build the Wilming plant on THEIR land, it won't happen in my opinion, I think what may be happening is that Hitachi may be parting with teir 25% because I believe they now have other fish to fry.<br /><br />If wilmington is going ahead then so is Paducah, because part of what they get there (the u235 in the form of UF6 and also the U238 as a future fuel for fast breeder reactors) is a necessary component of the re enrichment of RepU from the Used Nuclear Fuel, all of this is associated with PRISM and the Advanced Recycling Center, the ARC separates out three bundles, one is the Plutonium and some actinides mixed in, the second is what they call the Candu bundle, because it can be used directly in a Candu reactor but only once more, or they can re enrich it back to LEU grade and re use it back in a light boiling water reactor and they can do this many times over, besides nthe US doesn't have any Candu reactors.<br /><br />I will post more on this later.
  4. It,s been a long time since I posted here, this is something that I posted on Hotcopper, maybe some of you are interested as someone from here was asking me? There is more to this but I won't be posting it here, but if I know you I will share it, so long as it isn't revealed here or anywhere else! Paducah and Wilmington are both going ahead NEXT YEAR, Q2 of 2017 is when the estimated start is occurring. Paducah is an integral part of the Wilmington plant, it is required to provide top up fuel in the form of UF6 to enable recycling of UNF. Paducah is a dual purpose plant also just like I predicted, they are going to build a purpose built storage area for the recovered U238, something that Michael Goldsworthy said is valuable in his address to the SA royal commission, it will be used as part of the fuel for next generation IV reactors, I have always said the plant had to be serving more than one purpose and it is, I also said that they would not be selling the Uranium on market and it looks to me as if they are not, they will lease it to GLE for recycling, I won't post the second link about PPaducah, it may possibly be harmful to Silex, for non disclosure reasons? Early this year I found the link below , I was excited about that, but I decided to look further. I first of all found this link -: http://www.construction-ic.com/HomePage/Pr...rview%2F151013# GLE – Laser Uranium Enrichment Plant – North Carolina Project Overview Project Stage: Planning Profile Status: Live Project Type: Parent Project Announcement Quarter: Q1 2009 Project Value: USD 1000 million Construction Start Quarter: Q3 2016(Estimated) Project City: Wilmington Project End Quarter: Q4 2020 Construction Type: New Project Country: United States Location Type: OnShore Last Update: 9 Dec 2015 Funding Mode: Private Project Description Global Laser Enrichment (GLE), a joint venture between General Electric Co., Hitachi Ltd and Cameco is planning to construct the Laser Uranium Enrichment Plant project in North Carolina, the US. The project involves construction of a laser uranium enrichment facility. The project includes the construction of production units, storage tanks and other related facilities and the installation of machinery and safety systems. Silex Systems Ltd (Silex) has been appointed to provide laser technology for the project. In June 2009, GE-Hitachi (GEH) submitted the last part of its license application for the GLE plant. In third quarter of 2009, GLE began a 'test loop' for the commercial use of the laser enrichment process. In April 2010, GLE announced successful completion of the first phase of the test loop program, designs for the commercial facility were evolved and economic feasibility was verified. In February 2012, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) published a favorable environmental review of the project. The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has issued a license for development of the project in September 2012. In May 2013, further tests are being conducted to accumulate performance, operating reliability and life-time data on the technology. Planning activities are underway. Stakeholder Information: Planning Authority: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Consultant Contract (Technology): Silex Systems Limited You will note that if you open the above link now the info has been updated, it is for a 1MWSU pilot plant in my opinion. to test recycling of UNF. Finding this link above made me think! hey I wonder if they also had something on Paducah? So I tried a few tags from the Wilmington one but changed the name to Paducah ! Maybe you can find it yourself if you look hard enough? For those that don't believe GLE are preparing a pilot plant for UNF recycling? just read this link it has lots of useful info in it, some of which I have posted here. The Russians are in the UNF recycling race already, I posted a link about that previously, and guess what? they will alos be adding U235 into the recycled UNF to bring it back up to specs as LEU and the Russians are also going to lease the Uranium in the recycled UNF. http://www.nrc.gov/materials/reprocessing.html#repro Background In 2007, the Commission directed the staff to complete an analysis of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) to identify regulatory gaps for licensing an advanced reprocessing facility and recycling reactor. In mid-2008, two nuclear industry companies informed the agency of their intent to seek a license for a reprocessing facility in the U.S. An additional company expressed its support for updating the regulatory framework for reprocessing, but stopped short of stating its intent to seek a license for such a facility. At the time, the staff also noted that progress on some Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) initiatives had waned and it appeared appropriate to shift the focus of the staff's efforts from specific GNEP-facility regulations to a more broadly applicable framework for commercial reprocessing facilities. I have documents that show that the two companies that approached the NRC were AREVA and GLE.
  5. Several weeks ago now I received an email from someone called service @ support dot com dot au they asked me to update my paypal records, they even had the paypal logo, alarm bells rang, so I called Paypaql and spoke to them asking if they had sent something like that? the answer was no, the person at Paypal said they always address you by your full name whereas in this email they just said Dear Customer , so don't be fooled, it is a scam, more than likely they have your ebay info and are trying to marry up the paypal info. Cheers Moosey
  6. http://www.heraldsun.com.au/business/break...o-1226641319565 Samsung announces 5G data breakthrough From: AAP May 13, 2013 3:25PMSAMSUNG Electronics says it has successfully tested super-fast fifth-generation (5G) wireless technology that will eventually allow users to download an entire movie in one second.The South Korean giant says the test has witnessed data transmission of more than one gigabyte per second over a distance of two kilometres. The new technology, which will not be ready for the commercial market before 2020 at the earliest, will offer transmitting speeds "up to several hundred times faster" than existing 4G networks, it said in a statement on Monday. That will permit users to "transmit massive data files including high quality digital movies practically without limitation", it said. "As a result, subscribers will be able to enjoy a wide range of services such as 3D movies and games, real-time streaming of ultra high-definition (UHD) content, and remote medical services," it added. Samsung said it had found a way to harness millimetre-wave bands which have proved to be a sticking point for the mobile industry to date. The test used 64 antenna elements, which the tech titan said overcame the issue of "unfavourable propagation characteristics" that have prevented data travelling across long distances using the bands. One of the most wired countries on earth, South Korea already has around 20 million 4G users.
  7. moosey


    What's up? SP doing very well today?
  8. After the latest release, I emailed Dr Kelly and spoke to him about some concerns I had with the setting up of Novogen North America, especially after seeing what had happened with Marshall Edwards, he did answer me very promptly and said it was a good question and it gave him the opportunity to explain a few things in the blog, I again emailed him and thanked him and apologised to him for the prickly question, he told me it wasn't a prickly question and he understood completely where I was coming from. here is what Dr Kelly placed on the Novogen website blog. Following question from shareholder ‘Moosey’. The announcement on the 18th April 2013 was great, my only concern was the setting up of Novogen (North America) Inc. I would like an undertaking by Dr Kelly that the company remains an Aussie company and any IP found belongs to the parent, one that doesn’t end up resembling something like MarshallEdwards did. I understand why Novogen would like an American presence, that is where the money is and that is also close to some of the most important cancer research centers, but I have seen other companies who did something similar, the old Novogen being a case in point and then see the American offshoot end up either taking over completely or causing the parent in Oz to fail and then they pick up all the pieces for bugger all and shareholders in Oz end up with stuff all, but in the old Novogen’s case though at least we did end up with shares in MEIP. Like I said I don’t mind an American presence so long as it stays just that, a presence, one where the intent is that the parent Novogen remains in full control and always will unless it is sold. I would love for this great technology to stay here in Australia if possible? Can we have that in writing Dr Kelly? Dear Moosey, One big difference between the MEIPharma Inc situation and the Novogen (North America) Inc. MEI was set up to house oncology drug development. It was always intended to be an independent company, which it eventually became 10 years later. And as you point out, Novogen shareholders have retained their investment in that company which we all hope will deliver a pay-off in due course. The only part of the plan that didn’t work out was that the rest of Novogen was meant to go on to bigger and better things, which for various reasons didn’t happen. In a way I am glad that part of the plan didn’t work out, because it has given 3 ex-Novogen scientists the chance to come back in and take Novogen to a level which we believe will be well beyond anything we ever dreamed of before. Novogen (North America) Inc is not a drug development company. It owns no IP and conducts no R&D and has no intention of ever doing so. It is purely and simply an administrative arm of the parent company. I wanted a presence in North America. We might be an Australian-based company, but two-thirds of our shares are held as ADRs and to the best of our knowledge, our current 3,900 Australian shareholders are about half the number of US shareholders. That situation warrants and deserves a local presence. Also, increasingly we will be conducting more and more of our R&D in the US and Europe. Plus we have made a substantial commitment to having all our manufacturing conducted in Switzerland which Andrew Heaton is overseeing. Plus he is responsible for our patent portfolio and for the lodgement of an IND with the FDA. It just makes sense to have someone closer to that action and able to respond to issues in real time. The challenges of basing an Australia resident in the US on an open-ended basis meant that we needed to have that person employed by a US company. That is the genesis of Novogen (North America) Inc. The Novogen technology will stay in Novogen. You want it in writing? ….. OK. It will leave Novogen Ltd over my dead body. But let’s not get too precious about this country thing. The Company’s primary listing might be Australia…. but we are for all intents and purposes a US company as it currently stands in terms of ownership. Graham Kelly
  9. A poster who calls himself Toby10 posted this on HC, I don't think he posts here or hasn't for some time so I will repost it here with credit to him. I post it because it shows that the Uranium Enrichment Plant/s appear to be going ahead with possibly not one plant but two and maybe more in the future? It also seems clear to me that they intend to use the laser system for enriching Uranium for more than just reprocessing tails or normal new UF6 which comes from the mines and is then treated to become UF6, I believe that this new advancement they are talking of is for special nuclear fuel from the Advanced Recycling Centre that GE talks about. Happy days .. Project Manager, Regulatory Affairs, Global Laser Enrichment Job Date: Apr 10, 2013 Location: Wilmington, NC, United States Description: Job Number: 1736995 Business: GE Power & Water Business Segment: Power & Water About Us: GE looks for innovation everywhere. For 130 years, GE has been at the forefront of innovation, but finding solutions to the world's biggest problems has never been more important than right now. Join us today and become an essential part of the solution! Not just imagining. Doing. GE works. Looking for a challenge where your experience is valued? Come see what you can achieve as a leader with GE Power and Water! Posted Position Title: Project Manager, Regulatory Affairs, Global Laser Enrichment Career Level: Experienced Function: Engineering/Technology Function Segment: Product Design and Development Location: United States U.S. State, China or Canada Provinces: North Carolina City: Wilmington Postal Code: 28402-2819 Relocation Assistance: Yes Role Summary/Purpose: GE is an equal opportunity employer, offering a great work environment, challenging career opportunities, professional training and competitive compensation. The Global Laser Enrichment technology has successfully completed a licensing effort with the USNRC for a facility based on the Wilmington, NC site. This position will interact with the USNRC and DOE, as required, to maintain the license requirements in Wilmington, advance the technology further and support licensing efforts at alternative locations. Essential Responsibilities: In addition, in this role you will: Lead and coordinate the licensing strategy, generation of licensing documentation, and interactions with the U.S. NRC for licensing of a new enrichment facility and other assigned projects, working with Project Managers, Engineering, Legal, Regulatory Affairs resources, and other involved internal and external parties Responsible for implementation of management systems and reporting to corporate and regulatory authorities Represent GLE during public affairs events Accountable for quality and timeliness of all licensing deliverables to NRC and other internal and external parties, as well as timely resolution of all related licensing issues Responsible for defining, scheduling, and resource planning as well as work direction of other Licensing Engineers for all licensing submittals and related activities Responsible for coordinating with Project Managers and Engineering for defining, scheduling, and resource planning of engineering needed for licensing submittals and related activities Stay abreast of regulatory trends and changes that may affect licensing and incorporate these changes into the licensing strategy Work with the Regulatory Affairs team to plan, coordinate and provide GE representation as needed at NRC and other industry meetings dealing with licensing for assigned projects Provide representation and lead GE participation in licensing-related industry task forces that affect licensing Project Management of contracted work force providing licensing engineering supporting licensing including arranging for contracting of resources and budget control Responsible for implementation of management systems and reporting to corporate and regulatory authorities Qualifications/Requirements: Bachelors Degree in Science or Engineering discipline Minimum of 5 years of experience implementing NRC regulated programs such as Nuclear Safety, Radiation Protection, Material Control and Accountability and Transportation Licensing ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS: Currently hold or within the last 2 years hold a security clearance (NRC or DOE Q) Additional Eligibility Qualifications: GE will only employ those who are legally authorized to work in the United States for this opening. Any offer of employment is conditioned upon the successful completion of a background investigation and drug screen. Desired Characteristics: NRC Licensing process and technical regulatory knowledge in one or more areas such as fuel facility licensing, new plants, fuel, operating plants Existing NRC or DOE “Q†clearance Prior experience in working / communicating with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) personnel Experience working with industry groups, such as NEI and Owners Groups, on nuclear licensing matters Inclusive - Ability to communicate well with all levels of the organization; Open communication style and the ability to develop team relationships; Excellent interpersonal and influencing skills Clear Thinker - Ability to make decisions with speed and accuracy, based on the best available information; Commitment to continually strive to increase knowledge with up to date information External Focus - Ability to create a positive representation of GE externally to customers and regulators Autonomy - Demonstrated ability to be a self-starter; ability to work independently with little to no oversight; ability to deal effectively with complex, ambiguous and contradictory alternatives Why join one great company when you can join many? At GE, we’re passionate about making life better with new ideas and technologies. We’re diverse, supporting our communities in more than 100 countries. Experience personal growth and competency development as part of the GE team. GE Power & Water provides customers with a broad array of power generation, energy delivery and water process technologies to solve their challenges locally. Power & Water works in all areas of the energy industry including renewable resources such as wind and solar; biogas and alternative fuels; and coal, oil, natural gas and nuclear energy. The business also develops advanced technologies to help solve the world’s most complex challenges related to water availability and quality. Numerous products are qualified under ecomagination, GE’s commitment to providing innovative solutions that maximize resources, drive efficiencies and help make the world work better. Headquartered in Schenectady, N.Y., Power & Water is GE’s largest industrial business. Follow GE Power & Water on Twitter @GE_PowerWater. Learn More about GE Power and Water Today! To stay connected with exciting news and the latest job opportunities from GE AMSTC, Aviation, Energy Management, Oil & Gas, Power & Water and Transportation, follow us on twitter: @geconnections Nearest Major Market: Wilmington Job Segment: Regulatory Affairs, Engineer, Project Manager, Law, Nuclear Engineering, Legal, Engineering, Technology
  10. CS-6 is basically an extension of a platform that came from other older compounds already in trials with MEIP and also owned by them now, I really don't see any problems with safety first of all, but also with the drug in general because of the path it has taken to where it is now, I just hope they don't try and change the delivery systems whilst in trials, at least not this time around. It is also worth remembering that CS-6 when it was first tested in the US, was when it had both the left AND right handed forms combined which are known as enantiomers,In manufacturing terms, CS-6 is classified as a chiral molecule, meaning that the molecule can exist in both left and right hand forms known as enantiomers. usually one of these entantiomers is much stronger than the other, so the result in that those tests would have been much lower than would have been the case if they had used only the better side of CS-6, but even then they were fantastic, they say this new form is 200 times better, that has to be good for dosage requirements etc, I remember years ago when they were talking about some of the earlier drugs from the earlier platforms, would lead to chemotherapy where only a very small amount of the drug was required, which in turn led to no hair loss or many of the horrific side effects experienced by cancer sufferers when undergoing chemotherapy. "Novogen Chief Scientific Officer, Dr Andrew Heaton, today said, “The ability to manufacture CS-6 in both left and right hand forms represents a significant milestone in the development of this compound. The indication that one form of CS-6 is active at "nano molar concentrations" against a broad spectrum of brain cancer lines is exciting and indicates that the earlier potencies we have seen against cancer cells and cancer stem cells are likely to be even greater with the purified enantiomer. "We are now positioned to rapidly progress CS-6 to the clinic.†This is the definition of nanomolar from wordnik-: “Scientists have for decades been doing experiments using chemi­cals in ­nanomolar quanti­ties, which simply means that they're ­extraordinarily dilute.†http://www.wordnik.com/words/nanomolar So that means bugger all active is required, which is good for profits and I also have read that it is comparatively easy to manufacture in quantity using a new method also developed by Novogen/Triaxial. Hopefully one day this cancer cure may mean that it would be equivalent to not much more than having a flu injection or two?
  11. WHY I'M DEPRESSED Over five thousand years ago, Moses said to the Children of Israel, "Pick up your shovels, mount your asses and camels, and I will lead you to the Promised Land." Forty years ago Whitlam said "Lay down your shovels, sit on your asses, and light up a Camel, this IS the Promised Land." Today Julia Gillard has stolen our shovel, taxed our asses, put camels in plain packaging and mortgaged the Promised Land! Last night I was so depressed thinking about all this. The Health Care Plans, the Carbon Tax, the Slow Economy, the Wars, the Lost Jobs, Savings, Interest Rates, Social Security and Retirement Funds, so I called a Suicide Hotline. I had to press 1 for English, and I was then connected to a call center in Pakistan . I told them I was suicidal. They got all excited and asked if I could drive a truck....
  12. I hasn't held it's price YET simply because this was basically just a repeat of the first release in a fashion, saying that the results were confirmed in a second test, there is more news coming soon, I think that by years end the SP will be much higher if all goes to plan.
  13. It's nice to see Josiah T Austin is still on the board of the new Novogen as Non-Executive Director, that surely means that he hasn't sold his shares one would think? Mr Austin was appointed to the Novogen Board on 20 September, 2010. He is the managing member of El Coronado Holdings, LLC, a privately owned investment holding company, which invests in public and private companies. He and his family own and operate agricultural properties in the states of Arizona, Montana, and northern Sonora, Mexico through El Coronado Ranch & Cattle Company, LLC and other entities. Mr Austin previously served on the Board of Directors of Monterey Bay Bancorp of Watsonville, California, and is a prior board member of New York Bancorp, Inc., and North Fork Bancorporation. He became a director of Goodrich Petroleum, Inc., in 2002. Mr Austin also serves as a trustee of the Cuenca Los Ojos Foundation Trust, a non-profit organisation working to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the borderland region between the United States and Mexico through land protection, habitat restoration and wildlife reintroduction.
  14. moosey


    Personally I would not be too disappointed if the SP drops for a few weeks. I am a long term holder and subscribe to the DRP.
  15. UCLA researchers develop new technique to scale up production of graphene micro-supercapacitors By Davin Malasarn February 19, 2013 http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/artwork/4/3/5/5/3/243553/Micro-supercapacitor-c.jpg Kaner and El-Kady's micro-supercapacitors While the demand for ever-smaller electronic devices has spurred the miniaturization of a variety of technologies, one area has lagged behind in this downsizing revolution: energy-storage units, such as batteries and capacitors. Now, Richard Kaner, a member of the California NanoSystems Institute at UCLA and a professor of chemistry and biochemistry, and Maher El-Kady, a graduate student in Kaner's laboratory, may have changed the game. The UCLA researchers have developed a groundbreaking technique that uses a DVD burner to fabricate micro-scale graphene-based supercapacitors  devices that can charge and discharge a hundred to a thousand times faster than standard batteries. These micro-supercapacitors, made from a one-atom–thick layer of graphitic carbon, can be easily manufactured and readily integrated into small devices such as next-generation pacemakers. The new cost-effective fabrication method, described in a study published this week in the journal Nature Communications, holds promise for the mass production of these supercapacitors, which have the potential to transform electronics and other fields. "The integration of energy-storage units with electronic circuits is challenging and often limits the miniaturization of the entire system," said Kaner, who is also a professor of materials science and engineering at UCLA's Henry Samueli School of Engineering and Applied Science. "This is because the necessary energy-storage components scale down poorly in size and are not well suited to the planar geometries of most integrated fabrication processes." "Traditional methods for the fabrication of micro-supercapacitors involve labor-intensive lithographic techniques that have proven difficult for building cost-effective devices, thus limiting their commercial application," El-Kady said. "Instead, we used a consumer-grade LightScribe DVD burner to produce graphene micro-supercapacitors over large areas at a fraction of the cost of traditional devices. Using this technique, we have been able to produce more than 100 micro-supercapacitors on a single disc in less than 30 minutes, using inexpensive materials." The process of miniaturization often relies on flattening technology, making devices thinner and more like a geometric plane that has only two dimensions. In developing their new micro-supercapacitor, Kaner and El-Kady used a two-dimensional sheet of carbon, known as graphene, which only has the thickness of a single atom in the third dimension. Kaner and El-Kady took advantage of a new structural design during the fabrication. For any supercapacitor to be effective, two separated electrodes have to be positioned so that the available surface area between them is maximized. This allows the supercapacitor to store a greater charge. A previous design stacked the layers of graphene serving as electrodes, like the slices of bread on a sandwich. While this design was functional, however, it was not compatible with integrated circuits. In their new design, the researchers placed the electrodes side by side using an interdigitated pattern, akin to interwoven fingers. This helped to maximize the accessible surface area available for each of the two electrodes while also reducing the path over which ions in the electrolyte would need to diffuse. As a result, the new supercapacitors have more charge capacity and rate capability than their stacked counterparts. Interestingly, the researchers found that by placing more electrodes per unit area, they boosted the micro-supercapacitor's ability to store even more charge. Kaner and El-Kady were able to fabricate these intricate supercapacitors using an affordable and scalable technique that they had developed earlier. They glued a layer of plastic onto the surface of a DVD and then coated the plastic with a layer of graphite oxide. Then, they simply inserted the coated disc into a commercially available LightScribe optical drive  traditionally used to label DVDs  and took advantage of the drive's own laser to create the interdigitated pattern. The laser scribing is so precise that none of the "interwoven fingers" touch each other, which would short-circuit the supercapacitor. "To label discs using LightScribe, the surface of the disc is coated with a reactive dye that changes color on exposure to the laser light. Instead of printing on this specialized coating, our approach is to coat the disc with a film of graphite oxide, which then can be directly printed on," Kaner said. "We previously found an unusual photo-thermal effect in which graphite oxide absorbs the laser light and is converted into graphene in a similar fashion to the commercial LightScribe process. With the precision of the laser, the drive renders the computer-designed pattern onto the graphite oxide film to produce the desired graphene circuits." "The process is straightforward, cost-effective and can be done at home," El-Kady said. "One only needs a DVD burner and graphite oxide dispersion in water, which is commercially available at a moderate cost." The new micro-supercapacitors are also highly bendable and twistable, making them potentially useful as energy-storage devices in flexible electronics like roll-up displays and TVs, e-paper, and even wearable electronics. The researchers showed the utility of their new laser-scribed graphene micro-supercapacitor in an all-solid form, which would enable any new device incorporating them to be more easily shaped and flexible. The micro-supercapacitors can also be fabricated directly on a chip using the same technique, making them highly useful for integration into micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) or complementary metal-oxide-semiconductors (CMOS). These micro-supercapacitors show excellent cycling stability, an important advantage over micro-batteries, which have shorter lifespans and which could pose a major problem when embedded in permanent structures  such as biomedical implants, active radio-frequency identification tags and embedded micro-sensors  for which no maintenance or replacement is possible. As they can be directly integrated on-chip, these micro-supercapacitors may help to better extract energy from solar, mechanical and thermal sources and thus make more efficient self-powered systems. They could also be fabricated on the backside of solar cells in both portable devices and rooftop installations to store power generated during the day for use after sundown, helping to provide electricity around the clock when connection to the grid is not possible. "We are now looking for industry partners to help us mass-produce our graphene micro-supercapacitors," Kaner said. http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/ucla-...que-243553.aspx
  16. I hope they get this to work well, it will be huge for Solar I believe. More Good News About The 'Scientific Accident That May Change The World' by Chris Clarke on February 21, 2013 2:51 PM http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/assets_c/2013/02/Micro-supercapacitor-prv-thumb-600x475-45665.jpg Graphene supercapacitors | Photo: UCLA That battery life video that had gone viral due to a recent post on UpWorthy (and which we told you about Tuesday) now has an update. We told you that researchers at Ric Kamen's lab at UCLA had found a way to make a non-toxic, highly efficient energy storage medium out of pure carbon using absurdly simple technology. Today, we can report that the same team may well have found a way to make that process scale up to mass-production levels. Related http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/assets_c/2012/07/energy-grid-storage-thumb-600x300-32488.jpg What is Grid Storage? http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/understanding-distributed-energy.jpg Explained: Understanding Distributed Generation The recap: Graphene, a very simple carbon polymer, can be used as the basic component of a "supercapacitor" -- an electrical power storage device that charges far more rapidly than chemical batteries. Unlike other supercapacitors, though, graphene's structure also offers a high "energy density," -- it can hold a lot of electrons, meaning that it could conceivably rival or outperform batteries in the amount of charge it can hold. Kaner Lab researcher Maher El-Kady found a way to create sheets of graphene a single carbon atom thick by covering a plastic surface with graphite oxide solution and bombarding it with precisely controlled laser light. English translation: He painted a DVD with a liquid carbon solution and stuck it into a standard-issue DVD burner. The result: Absurdly cheap graphene sheets one atom thick, which held a surprising amount of charge without further modification. That work was reported a year ago; we mentioned it due to the video virally making the rounds this week. Late Tuesday, UCLA announced that El-Kady and Kaner have a new article in press, in the upcoming issue of Nature Communications, describing a method by which El-Kady's earlier, slightly homebrewed fabricating process shown in the video can be made more efficient, raising the possibility of mass production. As the authors say in their article abstract, More than 100 micro-supercapacitors can be produced on a single disc in 30 min or less. El-Kady and Kaner found a way to embed small electrodes within each graphene unit, and place the whole thing on a flexible substrate that allows the supercapacitor to be bent. The team is already claiming energy density comparable to existing thin-film lithium ion batteries. In the video we shared Tuesday, Kaner says that this technology, if it pans out, offers possibilities like a smart phone getting a full day's charge in a second or two, or an electric car reaching "full" in a minute. This week's press release from UCLA offers other intriguing possibilities: The new micro-supercapacitors are also highly bendable and twistable, making them potentially useful as energy-storage devices in flexible electronics like roll-up displays and TVs, e-paper, and even wearable electronics. The researchers showed the utility of their new laser-scribed graphene micro-supercapacitor in an all-solid form, which would enable any new device incorporating them to be more easily shaped and flexible. The micro-supercapacitors can also be fabricated directly on a chip using the same technique, making them highly useful for integration into micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) or complementary metal-oxide-semiconductors (CMOS). As they can be directly integrated on-chip, these micro-supercapacitors may help to better extract energy from solar, mechanical and thermal sources and thus make more efficient self-powered systems. They could also be fabricated on the backside of solar cells in both portable devices and rooftop installations to store power generated during the day for use after sundown, helping to provide electricity around the clock when connection to the grid is not possible. Kaner says that his lab is now looking for partners in industry that can help make these graphene supercapacitors on an industrial scale. It's tempting to be cynical about the possibility of a magic bullet energy storage solution; such a breakthrough could solve any number of problems from annoying dead smart phones to two-hour charge times for electric cars to an inefficient power distribution grid, and it's easy to really want this kind of thing to be true. Plenty of seemingly promising technical innovations in the last few years haven't lived up to their hopeful hype. There's always the chance that further study will reveal a fatal flaw in graphene supercapacitor technology. But for the time being, ReWire officially has its hopes up, at least a little. http://www.kcet.org/news/rewire/science/mo...capacitors.html
  17. Spyglass, I can see Novogen leveraging off Marshall Edwards Pharma (MEIP) because the majority of the compounds they have are the forerunners to what Novogen has now, if MEIP get a partnership say at the beginning of Phase 3 for any of the IP that was originally patented by Novogen, then I believe they would also be stark raving mad not to also take a look at what Novogen now has? seeing as how it is from the same family, but with the possibility of being far better drug possibly and a technology once having passed human safety trial would scream FAST-TRACK to the FDA. Something else worth noting is that the technology Novogen now hold is a PLATFORM technology, they are concentrating on cancer right now, but they say the tech will also apply to many other drugs for many other illnesses and it is from what I read a cheaper manufacturing process with added benefits as well.
  18. Hi Jon, there have been a few naysayers on Hot Copper, I can understand why they would say some of the things they are saying especially if I was unaware of how this drug was found and the path it followed to get to where it is now, I have a feeling much the same as you do, NRT will leverage of any advances in MEIP SP, because most of their compounds under investigation came from Norvet/Novogen in the first place and Dr Kelly and Dr Heaton were the lead investigators, if this new drug passes safety tests ? which I am sure it will, then I can see it being fast tracked Cheers M. PS rrodd you only get one thanks, no matter how many times you post the same stuff, (joking LOL).
  19. Great day for Novogen (NRT) today, it will be worth watching the US tonight for NVGN. Up 194.12% today here in Oz.
  20. I have been mulling over why GE/GLE are taking so long to announce that they will start building the new plant, we already know they will from two sources now, but when is the burning question? I think I may now have a better understanding as to why the delay, after reading this document, or should I say two documents, I don't totally believe GLE is looking at whether the new plant will be viable, sure they wouldn't build it if it isn't, but I believe there is another reason for the delay. I read this document http://www.wilmingtonbiz.com/industry_news...ils.php?id=4449 and after reading that, well it got me thinking (dangerous I know!) What stood out in that document were several parts i.e. "It's a cheaper, more efficient process of enriching uranium than the early technique of gaseous diffusion or the current method that uses centrifuges," To me that puts paid as to the economics of it let alone the national security issues IMHO. But the most important part was this-: "Even if GE does decide to break ground on the facility, it could take years before any significant development follows because thousands of acres surrounding the GE Hitachi facility lack the basic infrastructure needed for robust development: proper sewer capacity." There are a number of things that need addressing, some of them being things like, Transport, Water and Sewerage, Storm Water, Schools, there will be 680 construction workers on site and currently,there are only two restaurants in Castle Hayne and the list goes on! As you may see there are any number of things that are not directly related to the construction site directly but may impinge on it if they were not addressed, these external issues are very important and if some of them were not addressed? if god forbid something terrible happened at the plant,could lead to huge litigation down the track, if every effort was not made to address them before construction of the site even starts, GE would be absolutely NUTS if they do not address these issues first. This thinking made me dig deeper on this, it led me to this PDF document, this document explains in detail some of the more important issues at hand I believe. PDF http://www.nhcgov.com/PlanInspect/Document...inal%20Plan.pdf It is called Castle Hayne Community Plan. (Yes surprise surprise they already have a plan and it is being acted on right now.) There is some very important info in this document, it has to be a primary reason why the plant construction hasn't started yet. For instance, did you know that, the majority of Castle Hayne is not currently serviced by public water or sewer facilities. As a result, most of the residents in Castle Hayne depend on wells and septic tanks for their water and sewer needs? That bit above in my opinion is the number one reason for the delay. The second reason being-: Flooding and drainage issues are present throughout New Hanover County, and the Castle Hayne community is no different, now look at the diagram on page 32 of that PDF, look at the headwater of that small creek near chip road (bottom LH corner) it is by my estimates about 800 meters from GE look at this map http://www.mapquest.com/maps?city=Castle%2...ne&state=NC look for Hermitage road where it meets Castle Hayne Road, on the other side of CH rd opposite Hermitage road is approximately where GE lives, see how close that is to this headwater, also look at the Storm Water areas of concern oin the diagram on page 32 these two point in particular are important in my opinion for a number of reasons, 3. Castle Lakes Road at Prince George Creek 4. Castle Hayne Road at Prince George Creek. You can see where I am going with this, it may be for instance better to monitor what is happening with the Castle Hayne Plan to get some sort of idea on the timing of the announcement that the full plant construction is about to happen. NB. I tried uploading the PDF, probably too big? I also tried to paste the map on Page 32 again no luck, so you will just have to look for yourselves.
  21. I believe these articles may be important, especially to GE-Hitachi, because this may be the first use of the Prism reactors? That may not mean much to some here , but the PRISM reactor is the lead in to the Advanced Recycling Centre, which captures the Uranium from the spent fuel before it is burnt in the Prism reactor, the prism reactor burns Plutonium and some Uranium, but the bulk of the recycled Uranium can ether be used in a CANDU reactor or it can be sent back to an Enrichment Facility where the U235 is recycled back for use in a normal LEU Boiling Water Reactor, that may be where Laser enrichment comes into its own? Report calls for huge expansion of experimental nuclear plants Development of new technology would move UK away from fossil fuels and generate two-thirds of power by 2050 Mark Halper guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 12 February 2013 10.24 GMThttp://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013...art-of-comments http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/About/General/2011/8/23/1314109430315/JETs-fusion-reactor-007.jpg JET's fusion reactor, where physicists recreate conditions inside the sun, is the sort of experimental nuclear technology that could help the UK cut its emissions, government scientific advisers say. Photograph: Efda-Jet The UK will need to develop a huge fleet of currently experimental nuclear reactors by the middle of the century, to generate around two-thirds of the country's electricity supply if it is to meet the most nuclear-intensive scenario for moving away from fossil fuels, according to a report by three of the government's most senior scientific advisers. The expansion would involve developing nuclear generation technologies that are not currently used commercially anywhere in the world, and would also entail a huge expansion from the current electricity contribution of nuclear power to the UK grid. In 2011, nuclear supplied 18% of electricity demand. If each reactor has the generating capacity of the Hinkley Point power station that would mean at least a trebling of the current number of reactors – 16 at nine different sites around the country. The eventual number could be much higher because the new unconventional reactors are expected to have a smaller generating capacity. The expansion is necessary to fill the gap left by fossil fuels such as coal and gas, which the government has pledged to phase out to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The report, which is not yet published, encourages development of unconventional alternatives such as "fast reactors" powered off nuclear waste, designs using thorium rather than uranium, and even fusion power. It implies they could help nuclear to provide as much as two-thirds of UK electricity by 2050. Sir John Beddington, the government's chief scientific adviser, along with David MacKay, the Department of Energy and Climate Change (Decc) chief scientific adviser, and John Perkins, scientific adviser to the Department of Business Innovation and Skills, are the report's authors. They have already made "a number of recommendations" to ministers based on findings in the report, a Decc spokesman said. Some of the alternative reactors can burn plutonium "waste" as fuel. GE Hitachi is in discussions with the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority and with Decc to construct two of its Prism fast reactors to burn some of the 100 tonnes of plutonium at Sellafield, helping resolve the waste controversies. The billionaire entrepreneur Richard Branson is among those who have expressed support for fast reactors. Other technologies highlighted in the Civil Nuclear Industrial Strategy report include the use of thorium, a radioactive chemical element – the proponents of which say is more efficient than uranium and is more difficult to make into a nuclear weapon. Researchers also want to fashion them into small, "modular" sizes that are more affordable and easier to produce than today's large nuclear power stations, and even transportable. The report was commissioned in response to a 2011 House of Lords select committee report warning the government risked becoming complacent about the UK's nuclear power research and development (R&D) skills and knowledge. It looks at what would be needed to deliver the more nuclear-heavy of four government scenarios outlined in 2011, which examined how to meet the UK's target of cutting carbon emissions 80% by 2050. The news comes after a rocky fortnight for conventional power, with Centrica pulling out of a partnership with EDF to build new reactors, MPs warning over the £67.5bn cost of waste at Sellafield and Cumbria council rejecting plans for an underground waste-disposal site. A Decc spokesman said of the report: "In order to potentially deliver against the upper end of this scope, it is likely that more advanced and diverse options will need to be explored by the market." He added: "Ensuring that these options are not foreclosed or essential skills lost will be an important long-term objective, and the R&D roadmap element of the work will set out a number of pathways and key decision points for any future R&D programmes to consider." The report is due to be published in the coming months. and this-: <h1 itemprop="name headline ">Sellafield management sharply criticised by Commons committee</h1> MPs report comes in same week as court action against Sellafield over illegal dumping of nuclear waste in local landfill The reputation of the nuclear industry faces further damage this week with the publication of a highly critical report on Monday on the management of the Sellafield plant in Cumbria, days before a court action over the illegal dumping of nuclear waste. The moves follow Cumbria county council's refusal last week to pursue plans to build a storage facility for radioactive materials needed, many believe, if Britain is to build new atomic power stations. The Commons public accounts committee report claims that Nuclear Management Partners (NMP), the private consortium managing Sellafield, has failed to stem rising costs and delays in dealing with waste and the decommissioning of facilities. Margaret Hodge MP, the committee's chair, said: "Taxpayers are not getting a good deal from the [Nuclear Decommissioning] Authority [NDA] arrangement with Nuclear Management Partners. "Last year the consortium was rewarded with £54m in fees despite only two out of 14 major projects being on track. "It is unclear how long it will take to deal with hazardous radioactive waste at Sellafield or how much it will cost the taxpayer. Of the 14 current major projects, 12 were behind schedule in the last year and five of those were over budget. "Furthermore, now that Cumbria county council has ruled out West Cumbria as the site of the proposed geological disposal facility, a solution to the problem of long-term storage of the waste is as far away as ever." The report, Nuclear Decommissioning Authority: Managing Risk at Sellafield, points out that about £1.6bn is being spent annually at the site, where a variety of hazardous materials – including 82 tonnes of plutonium – are kept. The total lifetime cost of dealing with this has continued to rise each year and has now reached £67.5bn. "It is essential that the authority brings a real sense of urgency to its oversight of Sellafield so that the timetable for reducing risk does not slip further and costs do not continue to escalate year on year," says the report, from which some findings were released last November. The MPs' committee is suspicious that the NDA, a public sector body established to oversee the safe dismantling of the UK's old nuclear power stations and deal with waste, does not have a tight enough rein on NMP – a consortium made up of Amec of Britain, Areva of France and the US firm URS – to properly control costs. The report urges the NDA to work out how to better transfer more risk of failure to the private sector providers. The NDA said great progress had been made in what was one of the most complex nuclear sites to decommission. "Of course, not everything has gone smoothly on such a complex and highly technical programme, and the report has rightly pointed to areas where we and the site need to do better," it said in a statement. "We have a programme of improvements in place and continue to work with Sellafield Ltd and NMP to make continued progress across a broad front of safe operations and project delivery." Further criticism will be heaped on those managing Sellafield when a court case opens on Thursday that will look into claims the nuclear operator breached environmental permits in 2010 by dumping four bags of radioactive waste in a landfill at nearby Lillyhall without authorisation. Workington magistrates court, Cumbria, will consider nine charges, although the law has since changed to make it easier for Sellafield to dispose of certain low-level waste materials at Lilyhall. Management at Sellafield said they did not want to comment before the case, which has been brought by the Environment Agency and the Office for Nuclear Regulation. The government is currently trying to strike a deal with the French company EDF on a power pricing formula that would convince the company to proceed with new reactors at Hinkley Point in Somerset and elsewhere. But EDF and other companies interested in building atomic power stations know that any bad publicity around the industry will undermine already-shaky public confidence. AND THIS <h1 class="entry-title">Regulators to assess new nuclear reactor design</h1> Date:January 15, 2013 – 10:07 am http://news.hse.gov.uk/onr/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/onr-ea.jpgONR and the Environment Agency have today received a formal request from the Minister of State for Energy to start generic design assessment work on a new nuclear reactor for the UK – the UK Advanced Boiling Water reactor (ABWR) of Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy, Limited. Working together, our job is to ensure the protection of people, society and the environment from the hazards of the nuclear industry and, as with any new nuclear technology, we will only consent to its use in the UK if we are satisfied that it meets high standards of safety, security, environmental protection and waste management. In December, we concluded a generic design assessment for the (EDF and Areva)UKEPR nuclear reactor, a process which secured safety enhancements to the original design. This experience shows that we have an appropriate model in place to carry out such work, but we also recognise that the ABWR design is different and will present its own unique challenges. ONR and the Environment Agency will now begin preparatory work with DECC and Hitachi-GE about the timescales and resources involved in assessing this new design.
  22. 30 Jul 2012: Analysis Are Fast-Breeder Reactors A Nuclear Power Panacea? Proponents of this nuclear technology argue that it can eliminate large stockpiles of nuclear waste and generate huge amounts of low-carbon electricity. But as the battle over a major fast-breeder reactor in the UK intensifies, skeptics warn that fast-breeders are neither safe nor cost-effective. by fred pearce Plutonium is the nuclear nightmare. A by-product of conventional power-station reactors, it is the key ingredient in nuclear weapons. And even when not made into bombs, it is a million-year radioactive waste legacy that is already costing the world billions of dollars a year to contain. And yet, some scientists say, we have the technology to burn plutonium in a new generation of "fast" reactors. That could dispose of the waste problem, reducing the threat of radiation and nuclear proliferation, and at the same time generate vast amounts of low-carbon energy. It sounds too good to be true. So are the techno-optimists right  or should the conventional environmental revulsion at all things nuclear still hold? COUNTERPOINT: Say No to Nuclear Fission Arjun Makhijani, president of the Maryland-based Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, offers a strong rebuttal to Fred Pearce's analysis. Pursuing any kind of nuclear power, including fast-breeder reactors, is a dangerous and expensive diversion from a green energy future, Makhijani argues. READ MORE Fast-breeder technology is almost as old as nuclear power. But after almost two decades in the wilderness, it could be poised to take off. The U.S. corporation GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) is promoting a reactor design called the PRISM (for Power Reactor Innovative Small Modular) that its chief consulting engineer and fast-breeder guru, Eric Loewen, says is a safe and secure way to power the world using yesterday's nuclear waste. The company wants to try out the idea for the first time on the northwest coast of England, at the notorious nuclear dumping ground at Sellafield, which holds the world's largest stock of civilian plutonium. At close to 120 tons, it stores more plutonium from reactors than the U.S. and Russia combined. While most of the world's civilian plutonium waste is still trapped inside highly radioactive spent fuel, much of that British plutonium is in the form of plutonium dioxide powder. It has been extracted from spent fuel with the intention of using it to power an earlier generation of fast reactors that were never built. This makes it much more vulnerable to theft and use in nuclear weapons than plutonium still held inside spent fuel, as most of the U.S. stockpile is. The Royal Society, Britain's equivalent of the National Academy of Sciences, reported last year that the plutonium powder, which is stored in drums, Britain's huge plutonium stockpile makes it a vast energy resource. "poses a serious security risk" and "undermines the UK's credibility in non-proliferation debates." Spent fuel, while less of an immediate proliferation risk, remains a major radiological hazard for thousands of years. The plutonium  the most ubiquitous and troublesome radioactive material inside spent fuel from nuclear reactors  has a half-life of 24,100 years. A typical 1,000-megawatt reactor produces 27 tons of spent fuel a year. None of it yet has a home. If not used as a fuel, it will need to be kept isolated for thousands of years to protect humans and wildlife. Burial deep underground seems the obvious solution, but nobody has yet built a geological repository. Public opposition is high  as successive U.S. governments have discovered whenever the burial ground at Yucca Mountain in Nevada is discussed  and the cost of construction will be huge. So the idea of building fast reactors to eat up this waste is attractive  especially in Britain, but also elsewhere. Theoretically at least, fast reactors can keep recycling their own fuel until all the plutonium is gone, generating electricity all the while. Britain's huge plutonium stockpile makes it a vast energy resource. David MacKay, chief scientist at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, recently said British plutonium contains enough energy to run the country's electricity grid for 500 years. Click to enlarge http://e360.yale.edu/images/features/GE_hitachi_nuclear_prism_small.jpg GE-Hitachi Nuclear The GE Hitachi PRISM (Power Reactor Innovative Small Modular) reactor. Fast reactors can be run in different ways, either to destroy plutonium, to maximise energy production, or to produce new plutonium. Under the PRISM proposal now being considered at Sellafield, plutonium destruction would be the priority. "We could deal with the plutonium stockpile in Britain in five years," says Loewen. But equally, he says, it could generate energy, too. The proposed plant has a theoretical generating capacity of 600 megawatts. Fast reactors could do the same for the U.S. Under the presidency of George W. Bush, the U.S. launched a Global Nuclear Energy Partnership aimed at developing technologies to consume plutonium in spent fuel. But President Obama drastically cut the partnership's funding, while also halting work on the planned Yucca Mountain geological repository. "We are left with a million-year problem," says Loewen. "Right now there isn't a policy framework in the U.S. for solving this issue." He thinks Britain's unique problem with its stockpile of purified plutonium dioxide could break the logjam. "The UK is our best opportunity," he told me. "We need someone with the technical confidence to do this." The PRISM fast reactor is attracting friends among environmentalists formerly opposed to nuclear power. They include leading thinkers such as Stewart Brand and British columnist George Monbiot. And, despite the cold shoulder from the Obama administration, some U.S. government officials seem quietly keen to help the British experiment get under way. They have approved the export of the PRISM technology to Britain and the release of secret technical information from the old research program. And the U.S. Export-Import Bank is reportedly ready to provide financing. Britain has not made up its mind yet, however. Having decided to try and re-use its stockpile of plutonium dioxide, its Nuclear Decommissioning Authority has embarked on a study to determine which re-use option to support. There is no firm date, but the decision, which will require government approval, should be reached within two years. Apart from a fast-breeder reactor, the main alternative is to blend the plutonium with other fuel to create a mixed-oxide fuel (mox) that will burn in conventional nuclear power plants. Britain has a history of embarrassing failures with mox, including the closure last year of a $2 billion blending plant that spent 10 years producing a scant amount of fuel. And critics say that, even if it works properly, mox fuel is an expensive way of generating not much energy, while leaving most of the plutonium intact, albeit in a less dangerous form. Only fast reactors can consume the plutonium. Many think that will ultimately be the UK choice. If so, the PRISM plant would take five years to license, five years to build, and could destroy probably the world's most dangerous stockpile of plutonium by the end of the 2020s. GEH has not publicly put a cost on building the plant, but it says it will foot the bill, with Proponents of fast reactors see them as the nuclear application of one of the totems of environmentalism: recycling. the British government only paying by results, as the plutonium is destroyed. The idea of fast breeders as the ultimate goal of nuclear power engineering goes back to the 1950s, when experts predicted that fast-breeders would generate all Britain's electricity by the 1970s. But the Clinton administration eventually shut down the U.S.'s research program in 1994. Britain followed soon after, shutting its Dounreay fast-breeder reactor on the north coast of Scotland in 1995. Other countries have continued with fast-breeder research programs, including France, China, Japan, India, South Korea, and Russia, which has been running a plant at Sverdlovsk for 32 years. But now climate change, with its urgency to reduce fossil fuel use, and growing plutonium stockpiles have changed perspectives once again. The researchers' blueprints are being dusted off. The PRISM design is based on the Experimental Breeder Reactor No 2, which was switched on at the Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois in 1965 and ran for three decades. Here is how conventional and fast reactors differ. Conventional nuclear reactors bombard atoms of uranium fuel with neutrons. Under this bombardment, the atoms split, creating more neutrons and energy. The neutrons head off to split more atoms, creating a chain reaction. Meanwhile, the energy heats a coolant passing through the reactor, such as water, which then generates electricity in conventional turbines. The problem is that in this process only around 1 percent of the potential energy in the uranium fuel is turned into electricity. The rest remains locked up in the fuel, much of it in the form of plutonium, the chief by-product of the once-through cycle. The idea of fast reactors is to grab more of this energy from the spent fuel of the conventional reactor. And it can do this by repeatedly recycling the fuel through the reactor. The second difference is that in a conventional reactor, the speed of the neutrons has to be slowed down to ensure the chain reactions occur. In a typical pressurized-water reactor, the water itself acts as this moderator. But in a fast reactor, as the name suggests, the best results for generating energy from the plutonium fuel are achieved by bombarding the neutrons much faster. This is done by substituting the water moderator with a liquid metal such as sodium. Proponents of fast reactors see them as the nuclear application of one of the totems of environmentalism: recycling. But many technologists, and most environmentalists, are more skeptical. The skeptics include Adrian Simper, the strategy director of the UK's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, which will be among those organizations deciding whether to back the PRISM plan. Simper warned last November in Critics argue that plutonium being prepared for recycling 'would be dangerously vulnerable to theft or misuse.' an internal memorandum that fast reactors were "not credible" as a solution to Britain's plutonium problem because they had "still to be demonstrated commercially" and could not be deployed within 25 years. The technical challenges include the fact that it would require converting the plutonium powder into a metal alloy, with uranium and zirconium. This would be a large-scale industrial activity on its own that would create "a likely large amount of plutonium-contaminated salt waste," Simper said. Simper is also concerned that the plutonium metal, once prepared for the reactor, would be even more vulnerable to theft for making bombs than the powdered oxide. This view is shared by the Union of Concerned Scientists in the U.S., which argues that plutonium liberated from spent fuel in preparation for recycling "would be dangerously vulnerable to theft or misuse." GEH says Simper is mistaken and that the technology is largely proven. That view seems to be shared by MacKay, who oversees the activities of the decommissioning authority. The argument about proliferation risk boils down to timescales. In the long term, burning up the plutonium obviously eliminates the risk. But in the short term, there would probably be greater security risks. Another criticism is the more general one that the nuclear industry has a track record of delivering late and wildly over budget  and often not delivering at all. John Sauven, director of Greenpeace UK, and Paul Dorfman, British nuclear policy analyst at the University of Warwick, England, argued recently that this made all nuclear options a poor alternative to renewables in delivering low-carbon energy. "Even if these latest plans could be made to work, PRISM reactors do nothing to solve the main problems with nuclear: the industry's repeated failure to build reactors on time and to budget," they wrote in a letter to the Guardian newspaper. "We are being asked to wait while an industry that has a track record for very costly failures researches yet another much-hyped but still theoretical new technology." But this approach has two problems. First, climate change. Besides hydroelectricity, which has its own serious environmental problems, nuclear power is the only source of truly large-scale concentrated low-carbon energy currently available. However good renewables turn out to be, can we really afford to give up on nukes? MORE FROM YALE e360 Shunning Nuclear Power Will Lead to a Warmer World http://e360.yale.edu/images/features/nuclear_power_station_climate_change.jpgPhysicist Spencer Weart argues that if we allow our overblown and often irrational fears of nuclear energy to block the building of a significant number of new nuclear plants, we will be choosing a far more perilous option: the intensified burning of planet-warming fossil fuels. READ MORE Second, we are where we are with nuclear power. The plutonium stockpiles have to be dealt with. The only viable alternative to re-use is burial, which carries its own risks, and continued storage, with vast expense and unknowable security hazards to present and countless future generations. For me, whatever my qualms about the nuclear industry, the case for nuclear power as a component of a drive toward a low-carbon, climate-friendly economy is compelling. [A few months ago, I signed a letter with Monbiot and others to British Prime Minister David Cameron, arguing that environmentalists were dressing up their doctrinaire technophobic opposition to all things nuclear behind scaremongering and often threadbare arguments about cost. I stand by that view.] Those who continue to oppose nuclear power have to explain how they would deal with those dangerous stockpiles of plutonium, whether in spent fuel or drums of plutonium dioxide. They have half-lives measured in tens of thousands of years. Ignoring them is not an option. POSTED ON 30 Jul 2012 IN Biodiversity Business & Innovation Business & Innovation Energy Forests Science & Technology Water Central & South America Europe North America
  23. This was posted on Hotcopper by Toby10 (Thanks) It is important so I will re post it here, it may also be the substantiation that I need for my prediction? lol Global Laser Enrichment To enhance our ability to better serve our nuclear energy customers through expanded nuclear fuel services, Global Laser Enrichment (GLE) is developing uranium enrichment services capability. As the nuclear energy industry expands globally and the demand for enriched uranium increases, GLE is planning a consistent and secure source of uranium enrichment services. GLE is implementing a phased approach to commercializing the laser enrichment technology with three key stages: completion of a test loop; construction of the initial commercial cascade; and finally, construction of a full-scale commercial production facility. Features & Benefits GEH plans to deploy a commercial enrichment facility in the near future, with an increase of approximately one million SWU per year thereafter. The initial commercial cascade would then be expanded in modules to a larger commercial facility, with an expected capacity of 3.5 to 6 million SWU per year. Third-Generation Enrichment Technology - Uranium hexafluoride is vaporized into a gaseous form and exposed to a laser beam that preferentially excites the 235-UF6 isotope, which enables separation of natural uranium into enriched and depleted uranium. The process operation, while technically complex, is potentially more efficient than existing second-generation centrifuge enrichment technology. http://www.ge-energy.com/products_and_serv..._Enrichment.jsp here was my reply on HC "GEH plans to deploy a commercial enrichment facility in the near future, with an increase of approximately one million SWU per year thereafter. The initial commercial cascade would then be expanded in modules to a larger commercial facility, with an expected capacity of 3.5 to 6 million SWU per year." That seems to fit almost exactly with the Bellona report 2013 which I posted recently, in that PDF document they said almost the same thing "GEH plans to deploy a commercial enrichment facility in the near future" what was said in the Bellone report was -:General Electric is planning soon to start construction of the new, SILEX-based Uranium Enrichment facility in Wilmington, North Carolina. And if you look at the figures in the Belona PDF the figures seem to fit as well? i.e 2,000,000 SWU by 2015, as I said I have previously read that 1000 SWU per year is the target, and that figure of 3,500,000 by 2020 was also mentioned. If these figures are correct then the first 1,000,000 would be in 2014 meaning that construction has to start any day in my opinion. So now we have "TWO" sources it would seem? Hang onto ya hats when they announce this officially!
  24. Nothing to really substantiate this prediction, but I have a feeling we will hear something from GLE on the construction of the new plant this month, Part of the reason why I say this is that if those figures are true and if they intend to meet those figures in that Bellona report 2013 Nuclear Fissile Materials, then they will need to fast track the development.
  25. Johnson said he learned a lot in his meetings with government legislative leaders. One of the points of discussion centered around the proposed $2 billion loan guarantee being applied for by USEC for the American Centrifuge Project at Piketon. "There's a lot more to what's going on with USEC than most of us really know," Johnson said. "Some positive. Some not so. And I'll leave it at that. I think it's workable, but it's going to take time." While USEC continues to seek a $2 billion loan guarantee from the U.S. Department of Energy, USEC is partnering with the DOE to continue to work on the centrifuge program through the $350 million RD&D (Research, Development and Demonstration) project in hopes it will eventually lead to the loan guarantee for the ACP. Congress recently cleared another $150 million for the project, which eventually could create some 4,000 jobs in southern Ohio. Additionally, USEC is finalizing a sale of NAC International, which representatives of USEC say will improve its financial standing when the DOE loan application is revisited later this year. http://www.equities.com/news/headline-stor...amp;cat=utility I have read where even if the ACP is found to be workable after the R&D period, it isn't guaranteed that they will get the $2 billion loan guarantee, remember they still have to pay the loan back and if there was any doubt about them being able to do so, then I don't reckon they would get it.
  • Create New...