Jump to content

EXT


ShareCafe

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

The important thing I see in the announcement is that they have confirmed that any offer for KAH MUST have an attendant downstream offer for EXT.

 

In my mind that has the effect that there is now little advantage going for full KAH takeover as a leverage play. There is a slight advantage that you have one small group of people to deal with who will (it seems) recommend whatever offer you come up no matter how stupid it is. However that brings no assurance that shareholders will follow the advice of the board.

 

If not for this ruling you could have been clever and controlled Husab by simply controlling KAH. You can't do that now but you can have great influence as long as you don't take over KAH.

 

I believe the AIM rule is that you trigger a takeover if you exceed 30% of a company listed with them. So in theory you could hold 29% of KAH and have great influence over Husab without having to go any further than that. You would not control it but you would have great influence over KAH which almost has control of EXT, which of course controls Swakop, which controls Husab.

 

So, we may see more grappling for a higher chunk of KAH with contestants staying below the 30% mark so as to not be forced to go the whole hog. One would hope that the ASX price of EXT would benefit from such a tussle but I have given up trying to predict what ASX traders will do.

 

In any case, message to all potential bidders. If you want a minority stake and are happy with merely being influential then KAH can still hold allure for you. However, if you want to take over Husab you will have to deal with all EXT shareholders not just KAH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

this may have already been posted

 

http://www.u3o8.biz/s/MarketCommentary.asp...roject-in-Nam...

 

 

 

 

Last Thursday, Extract Resources Limited (ASX:EXT) was offered $2.2 billion by China Guangdong Nuclear Power Corp (CGNPC) for its Husab uranium project in Namibia, conditional on the success of an additional proposal to acquire Kalahari Minerals (LSE:KAH).

 

 

 

CGNPC is primarily interested in the acquisition of Kalahari for $990 million because of its position as the top shareholder in Extract Resources with a 42.7 percent interest. The Husab uranium project is considered to be the world's fourth largest known primary uranium deposit and with the potential to be one of the world's largest uranium mines.

 

 

 

The markets have responded positively to the news, as share prices for Extract Resources and Kalahari have both appreciated, 5.2 percent and 3.7 percent respectively, above closing prices prior to the announcements.

 

 

 

Potential for competitive bids

 

 

 

Rhys Bradley, research analyst at Patersons Securities, maintains an even higher price target for Extract with an implied 12 percent premium to the current range given the potential of a counter offer by Rio Tinto PLC (LSE:RIO,NYSE:RIO,ASX:RIO), which already owns a majority interest of the nearby Rossing uranium mine. Uranium investors will certainly be familiar with the strong resource appetite of Rio Tinto, the ambitious poly-metallic, energy and mineral giant, following its recent success in its acquisition of Hathor's Roughrider uranium asset last month.

 

 

 

According to Merrill Lynch analyst Glen Chipman, the existing offer for Extract's Husab resource is at a relatively low multiple given a current enterprise value per resource of $4.20 per pound of uranium, comparable to half of the $8.40 per pound offered by Cameco for Hathor in the first of its two bids. Rio ended up paying $10.80 per pound of uranium for the Hathor deposit.

 

 

 

Strong Chinese demand

 

 

 

Alex Latzer, Head of Metals & Mining Research at Daiwa Capital Markets, explained during a recent interview on CNBC a bullish outlook for uranium leveraged on Chinese continued upside risk, "equities have been hurt down significantly; some of them are trading well below book value. There will be more newsflow, China will begin to look again at restarting its build on the nuclear power side. In the first half of next year they will start to talk to equipment suppliers with the aim to adding [at least] 50 gigawatts of nuclear power generation over the next ten years. In 2013 the Russians will stop supplying reprocessed [uranium] nuclear fuel from their weapons stockpile."

 

 

 

China has just approved a five-year nuclear safety plan, potentially removing a big hurdle to Chinese nuclear power projects. The 2011-2015 nuclear safety plan, which covers rules from uranium mining to nuclear power reactors, is a prologue to the keenly anticipated nuclear development plan. The uranium mining industry is anxious to see whether the country will modify its 2020 nuclear capacity targets, originally planning to increase nuclear capacity to over 70 gigawatts by 2020, up from 10.9 gigawatts at the end of last year. China's National Nuclear Safety Administration, a department of the environmental protection ministry, is also expected to increase its staff to more than 1,000 from about 300. As a relative comparison, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approximately 3,780 employees overseeing 104 reactors.

 

 

 

Uranium spot market prices climb

 

 

 

Uranium spot market prices increased slightly to a reported $52.50 per pound of uranium on December 9, as indicated by TradeTech uranium consultants. A total of seven transactions were reported last week. The participants included electric utility operators, producers and traders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Small Modular Nuclear Reactors to be Mass Produced in US?

/pdf/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Small-Modular-Nuclear-Reactors-to-be-Mass-Produced-in-US.pdf/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Small-Modular-Nuclear-Reactors-to-be-Mass-Produced-in-US/Print.html/component/option,com_mailto/link,aHR0cDovL29pbHByaWNlLmNvbS9BbHRlcm5hdGl2ZS1FbmVyZ3kvTnVjbGVhci1Qb3dlci9TbWF

sbC1Nb2R1bGFyLU51Y2xlYXItUmVhY3RvcnMtdG8tYmUtTWFzcy1Qcm9kdWNlZC1pbi1VUy5odG1s/tmpl,component/ Written by Brian Westenhaus Thursday, 15 December 2011 23:44###New studies from the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago (EPIC) conclude that small modular reactors may hold the key to the future of U.S. nuclear power generation. The reports assess the economic feasibility of classical, gigawatt-scale reactors and the possible new generation of modular reactors. The smaller modular reactors as considered would have generating capacities of 600 megawatts or less, would be factory-built as modular components, and then shipped to their desired location for assembly.

 

As a beginning point on other news this week, the reports followed up a 2004 University of Chicago study on the economic future of nuclear energy. The 2004 study concluded that the nuclear energy industry would need financial incentives from the federal government in order to build new plants that could compete with coal and gas fired plants.

 

The other news this week is the realization by many that the Obama appointment of Gregory Jaczko, to Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission should be removed. A petition drive is underway at Change.org, following an inspector generalÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s report released last June that said Jaczko intimidated staff members who disagreed with him and withheld information from members of the commission to gain their support. The report also said several high-ranking employees at the independent agency complained that Chairman Jaczko delayed and hindered their work on important projects.

 

The inspector general report times well with the four experienced and well-educated nuclear energy professional commissioners, who among them can count close to 100 years of working with nuclear reactors, nuclear safety analysis, nuclear propulsion plants, advanced nuclear energy research and development, and nuclear project management, that have signed a letter addressed to the Chief of Staff of the President of the United States detailing their frustration with the leadership style and decision making processes used by the 41-year-old, politically-appointed Chairman.

Its far past time for Jaczko to return to Congress where his skill set can be hidden more effectively.

 

Back out in Chicago the newest University of Chicago report is clear, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“It would be a huge stimulus for high-valued job growth, restore U.S. leadership in nuclear reactor technology and, most importantly, strengthen U.S. leadership in a post-Fukushima world, on matters of nuclear safety, nuclear security, nonproliferation, and nuclear waste management.ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ

 

Robert Rosner, the EPIC director and the William Wrather Distinguished Service Professor in Astronomy & Astrophysics, sums the obvious and now well proven with, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“Clearly, a robust commercial SMR industry is highly advantageous to many sectors in the United States.ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ

 

The earlier report, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“Analysis of GW-scale Overnight Costs,ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ updates the overnight cost estimates of the 2004 report. Overnight costs are the estimated costs if you were to build a new large reactor ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¹Ãƒƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“overnight,ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ that is, using current input prices and excluding the cost of financing. It would now cost $4,210 per kilowatt to build a new gigawatt-scale reactor, according to the new report. This cost is approximately $2,210 per kilowatt higher than the 2004 estimate because of commodity price changes and other factors. A near doubling in just 7 years.

 

The problem is explained in part by Center for Strategic and International Studies CEO John Hamre who said that economic issues have hindered the construction of new large-scale reactors in the United States. The key challenge facing the industry is the seven-to-nine-year gap between making a commitment to build a nuclear plant and revenue generation. ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“This is a real problem.ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ Hamre said. Few companies can afford to wait that long to see a return on the $10 billion investment. Nor can the ratepayers. But the advent of the small modular reactor ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“offers the promise of factory construction efficiencies and a much shorter timeline.ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ

 

That could be so if the Nuclear Regulatory Commission would be at work executing on its mandate.

 

This could be a huge economic development opportunity. Small modular reactors could be especially appealing for markets that could not easily accommodate gigawatt-scale plants, such as those currently served by aging, 200- to 400-megawatt coal plants, which are likely to be phased out during the next decade.

 

The other hand holds some problems. The new modular designs in mass production affecting price reductions depends partly on how quickly manufacturers can learn to build them efficiently. ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“The faster you learn, the better off you are in the long term because you get to the point where you actually start making money faster,ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ Rosner noted.

 

ItÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s the risk that matters. Nuclear is vastly more capital demanding than natural gas. Should efficiency continue its trend, or a new technology breakout, or the economy drift lower and slower, having a huge capital investment waiting years to build, more years to recover the investment, with rates indeterminate sets an investor up for a generationÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s worth of worry.

 

Yet the new reactors could be the low capital investment leaders if the stage were to be set for the good of the nation over the fears of the fools.

 

By. Brian Westenhaus

 

Source: Hope Glimmers for US Nuclear Power

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Japanese study underlines nuclear cost advantages 19 December 2011 New cost estimates for nuclear power generation in Japan are over 50% higher than previous figures, but are still comparable to costs for wind and geothermal generation and competitive with fossil fuels.

 

 

The costs are estimated in a draft report prepared for a committee reporting to the ministerial level Japanese Energy and Environment Council and estimate nuclear generation costs for 2010 to be ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥8.9 per kWh (11.4 US cents). Following on from the March 2011 Fukushima Daiichi accident, the estimate factors in the possibility of a core meltdown at a nuclear plant, and includes societal costs such as the cost of dealing with future accidents and policy costs related to governmental budgets for the first time.

 

Like earlier estimates, the ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥8.9 includes capital costs (ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥2.5 for the 2010 estimate), operation and maintenance costs (ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥3.1) and fuel cycle costs (ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥1.4). In addition, the newest estimate includes ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥0.2 for additional post-Fukushima safety measures, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥1.1 in policy expenses and ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥0.5 for dealing with future nuclear risks. The ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥0.5 for future nuclear risks is a minimum: the cost would increase by ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥0.1 for each additional ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥1 trillion ($13 billion) of damage.

 

The ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥8.9 figure is calculated based on a model nuclear power plant using average figures from four plants operating over the period since the last estimate, with an output of 1200 MWe and construction costs of ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥420 billion ($5.4 billion). Costs were calculated assuming a discount rate of 3%, a capacity factor of 70% and a 40-year operating life.

 

Although the latest estimate is some 51% higher than the ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥5.9 estimated by the same committee in 2004, it shows that even factoring in the experiences of Fukushima Daiichi, nuclear remains competitive in Japan. The same study found best-scenario 2010 wind generation costs of ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥9.4 for offshore wind, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥9.9 for on-shore wind, and ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥8.3 for geothermal ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ although in less favourable conditions onshore wind could reach ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥17.3 per kWh with offshore wind estimated to cost a maximum of ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥23.1. 2010 costs for fossil fuel generation, including costs for CO2 measures, range from ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥9.5 for coal through to ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥10.7 for LNG to ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥36.0 for oil.

 

The estimates were also carried through to 2030. For nuclear and geothermal, the estimated cost remains unchanged over the period. Likewise, maximum costs for wind generation remain unchanged, and minimum costs could even decrease very slightly, the report finds. All the fossil fuel options are estimated to increase still more by 2030.

 

The cost of solar power in Japan, currently estimated at between ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥33.4 and ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥38.3 per kWh, is forecast to fall substantially over the next two decades through technological innovation and the effects of mass production. By 2030, the report estimates, solar generation will cost at best ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥9.9 per kWh - still more than nuclear - and at most, ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥20.0 per kWh.

 

For nuclear, the report would appear to concur with calculations released earlier this year by the Institute of Energy Economics of Japan, which put the cost of nuclear electricity generation at ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥8.5 taking into account compensation of up to ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ¥10 trillion ($130 billion) for loss or damage from a nuclear accident.

 

Nuclear power has long been a cornerstone of energy policy in Japan, a country with few natural resources of its own, generating some 30% of its electricity. A significant expansion in the use of nuclear energy - to more than 50% in 2030 - had been proposed under the country's basic energy plan, which had been based on the 2004 figures. Following on from the Fukushima Daiichi accident, the Japanese government is now in the throes of reviewing its energy policy. Prime minister Yoshihiko Noda has said that the country must aim to reduce its reliance on nuclear power in the longer term. However, the country still remains firmly in support of exporting its nuclear goods and services, with Japan's lower house recently signing international agreements on nuclear trade with emerging nuclear countries Jordan and Vietnam and renewing agreements with Russia and South Korea.

 

 

 

Researched and written

 

by World Nuclear News

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is a few shares that they won't get. Thought it might be of interest

 

Sale of KAH Shares by Henderson

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

19 December 2011

 

RECOMMENDED CASH OFFER FOR KALAHARI MINERALS PLC ("Kalahari") BY TAURUS MINERAL LIMITED ("Taurus") (A COMPANY FORMED AT THE DIRECTION OF CGNPC URANIUM RESOURCES CO., LTD ("CGNPC-URC") AND THE CHINA-AFRICA DEVELOPMENT FUND ("CADFund"))

 

 

 

Sale of Kalahari Shares by Henderson Alternative Investment Advisor Limited and Henderson Global Investors Limited (together "Henderson")

 

 

 

On 8 December 2011 CGNPC-URC released an announcement (the "Announcement") that the boards of Kalahari and CGNPC-URC had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended cash offer for the entire issued and to be issued share capital of Kalahari (the "Offer"), to be effected by means of a takeover offer within the meaning of Part 28 of the Companies Act.

 

In the Announcement it was stated that Taurus had received non-binding letters of intent from Henderson confirming its intention to accept the Offer in respect of an aggregate 9,839,083 Kalahari Shares, representing approximately 3.9 per cent. of the existing issued share capital of Kalahari.

 

Taurus has been notified by Henderson that, on 16 December 2011, Henderson sold 466,317 of its Kalahari Shares that were subject to the non-binding letters of intent received from Henderson. Accordingly, these non-binding letters of intent now apply to an aggregate 9,372,766 Kalahari Shares, representing approximately 3.7 per cent. of Kalahari's existing issued share capital.

 

This announcement is being made in accordance with Rule 2.11(d)(ii) of the City Code.

 

Terms and expressions used in this announcement shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the same meanings as given to them in the Announcement.

 

Enquiries:

 

Deutsche Bank (Financial adviser to CGNPC-URC, CADFund and Taurus)

 

 

 

 

Omar Faruqui

 

Geoff Tarrant

 

Pei-Shen Chou

 

Tel: +44 20 7545 8000

 

Tel: +61 28258 1234

 

Tel: +852 2203 8888

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few more gone.

 

Regulatory Story Go to market news section http://www.londonstockexchange.com/media/img/icon/print.gif

Company CGNPC Uranium Resources Co., Ltd http://www.londonstockexchange.com/media/img/void.gifTIDM

Headline Sale of Kalahari Shares by Henderson Released 12:22 21-Dec-2011 Number 4268U12

RNS Number : 4268U CGNPC Uranium Resources Co., Ltd 21 December 2011 

 

NOT FOR RELEASE, PUBLICATION OR DISTRIBUTION IN WHOLE OR IN PART IN, INTO OR FROM ANY JURISDICTION WHERE TO DO SO WOULD CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE RELEVANT LAWS OF SUCH JURISDICTION

 

 

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

 

21 December 2011

 

RECOMMENDED CASH OFFER FOR KALAHARI MINERALS PLC ("Kalahari") BY TAURUS MINERAL LIMITED ("Taurus") (A COMPANY FORMED AT THE DIRECTION OF CGNPC URANIUM RESOURCES CO., LTD ("CGNPC-URC") AND THE CHINA-AFRICA DEVELOPMENT FUND ("CADFund"))

 

 

 

Sale of Kalahari Shares by Henderson Alternative Investment Advisor Limited and Henderson Global Investors Limited (together "Henderson")

 

 

 

On 8 December 2011 CGNPC-URC released an announcement (the "Announcement") that the boards of Kalahari and CGNPC-URC had reached agreement on the terms of a recommended cash offer for the entire issued and to be issued share capital of Kalahari (the "Offer"), to be effected by means of a takeover offer within the meaning of Part 28 of the Companies Act.

 

In the Announcement it was stated that Taurus had received non-binding letters of intent from Henderson confirming its intention to accept the Offer in respect of an aggregate 9,839,083 Kalahari Shares, representing approximately 3.9 per cent. of the existing issued share capital of Kalahari.

 

On 19 December 2011, it was announced that Taurus had been notified by Henderson that, on 16 December 2011, Henderson sold 466,317 of its Kalahari Shares that were subject to the non-binding letters of intent received from Henderson.

 

Today Taurus has been notified by Henderson that, on 20 December 2011, Henderson sold a further 508,244 of its Kalahari Shares that were subject to the non-binding letters of intent. Accordingly, these non-binding letters of intent now apply to an aggregate 8,864,522 Kalahari Shares, representing approximately 3.5 per cent. of Kalahari's existing issued share capital.

 

This announcement is being made in accordance with Rule 2.11(d)(ii) of the City Code.

 

Terms and expressions used in this announcement shall, unless the context otherwise requires, have the same meanings as given to them in the Announcement.

 

Enquiries:

 

Deutsche Bank (Financial adviser to CGNPC-URC, CADFund and Taurus)

 

 

 

 

Omar Faruqui

 

Geoff Tarrant

 

Pei-Shen Chou

 

Tel: +44 20 7545 8000

 

Tel: +61 28258 1234

 

Tel: +852 2203 8888

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

College Hill (Public Relations adviser to CGNPC-URC and Taurus)

 

 

 

 

Tony Friend

 

Alexandra Roper

 

Henry Chow

 

Tel: +44 20 7457 2020

 

 

 

Tel: +852 3791 2289

 

_______________________________________________________________

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Extractors & all that post on Sharescene.

 

 

Everybody have a great Xmas with family & friends, and I hope Santa rewards you all,

 

heres hoping the New Year is a prosperous one for all EXT s/hs & all that post on Sharescene.

 

Have a great one.

 

Cheers.

 

Simmo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...