#i like looking into general facts about the show and its different productions and uranium city | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

back-and-totheleft · 1 year

Text

While in New York City promoting the release of Nuclear Now, Oliver Stone and screenwriter Joshua S. Goldstein (who is a PhD professor) sat down with Screen Rant to discuss their film, its themes, and the virtues of nuclear energy. They spoke about how companies like Shell and Exxon knew about climate change back in the 1960s but did nothing to stop it, placing their profits before the future of the planet. They also discussed overblown fears regarding nuclear power plants and their supposed environmental dangers.

Screen Rant: I'm thinking back to try and remember when I first heard of nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. Warren Smith had a song called "Uranium Rock," which is about mining for Uranium like the next gold rush. There was this brief window where nuclear power was absolutely going to be the future.

Oliver Stone: I love that. We should have kept going on that path, and we'd be out of the woods now.

Screen Rant: Had things turned out differently, what would carbon emissions be today?

Joshua S. Goldstein: Pretty close to zero. The heart of the problem is the fossil fuel economy, globally. And the emissions from that. We wouldn't have that problem. The United States was planning to have no carbon for electricity by the turn of the century, and we think the rest of the world would have followed suit.

Oliver Stone: Historically, this was a big deal. The fact that America detoured away from it is shocking. I think, to historians of the future, I don't think it's going to be overlooked.

Screen Rant: I think we'll look at this fossil fuel era as the dark ages.

Oliver Stone: [Laughs] If we get out of it.

Screen Rant: There was a perfect storm of circumstances that conspired to take down nuclear energy. I don't like to use the word "conspired," but it just crushed nuclear power.

Oliver Stone: It seemed like God's destiny or something. But you're right. In the beginning, in the 40s, it was horribly conflated with nuclear war. Nuclear power is not like nuclear war at all. Different origins. Different. At the beginning, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that was a shame and a real disgrace, that we dropped those bombs, may Harry Truman be damned…

Screen Rant: As documented in your show, The Untold History of the United States.

Oliver Stone: Oh, you saw that? Bravo! I wasn't knowledgeable on that growing up. I should have been. It was my generation that screwed it up. It was guys like me and women like Jane Fonda who came along and we were mis-educated.

Joshua S. Goldstein: And there were all the films in the 50s…

Oliver Stone: That was a little before me. I'm not responsible for that! The radioactive monsters… So many of them. Great films, too! All those creatures, what the fuck were they? It was all scary shit, right? Then the United States embraced war, in Vietnam. In response, that generation brought into the idea of peace at any price. But they didn't get their information correct, and I don't know why that is. I don't know why there was no Einstein to emerge and go, "Hey guys, wake up!" I'd love to research that more. Why wasn't there somebody to question all this, when The China Syndrome came out.

Screen Rant: Your film doesn't lean into the idea of the fossil fuel and oil industries doing what we expect them to do.

Oliver Stone: We take the point of view of Rod Adams, who said it wasn't conspiracy. It was simply business. Have you read the recent reports about Shell Oil? They knew all about this back in the 70s and buried it. There's a whole court case coming up. It's a big one. They're suing the sh** out of them. They are responsible. They knew climate change was coming, but they wanted to make money. Now, can oil help us? Yeah! I think they still can help us. They make all kinds of products. Like sweaters, clothing, plastics, and they can be cooperative in this. They won't go out of business. They'll find a new way of doing it!

Joshua S. Goldstein: The next thing for oil companies to do is deep geothermal wells. They're good at digging underground for geothermal power. But there's a whole attitude about finding what's underground, and part of it is storing carbon down there and part of it is finding heat for geothermal, and part of it fossil fuel. I heard another thing where they take nuclear power to process kelp. Lots of kelp. Seaweed, into something that looks like crude oil to a refinery. And you feed that into the refinery.

After that, all the products you produce are carbon neutral because you used seaweed! And oil companies can still refine and sell that, instead of trying to switch it all over, it's just making gas differently, making diesel differently. There's a number of technologies… You use nuclear energy for a big shot at the start of the process, but you end up something that looks like diesel that you put in your pick up truck, or aviation fuel for planes. We don't know which of these may pan out in the future.

Screen Rant: The industry was stunted before it could be applied to fueling alternatives, even alternatives to itself. I think we talk about wind and solar being the future, but nuclear was the future 70 years ago. Can you talk about whether wind or solar have the capacity to sustain us?

Joshua S. Goldstein: You can't run a grid them alone. People say, "Well, batteries are getting cheaper," and that's true, but the scale doesn't add up for trying to run the world on batteries charged by wind and solar. They're great as part of the grid, and you can fill in around them when they're not producing. But if you've got a grid powered by wind and solar and it's not sunny and windy that day, you have nothing, and sometimes that can last for weeks. How are you going to run the entire grid for weeks? Batteries are orders of magnitude off from what we can build and afford now, since mining is very intensive for batteries.

Hydro-electric is great from a climate point of view, but it does flood valleys and destroy ecosystems. Then there's natural gas hovering in the background. The oil companies are like, "Yeah, it's a renewable future" and they have wind and solar all over the front of their websites, but then behind it, when they're not producing, they'll burn natural gas. "Clean" natural gas. It's not clean. It's producing carbon and methane. It's a very powerful greenhouse gas, but not as long-lived as carbon dioxide. I see so much natural gas advertising, how it's part of a "clean" solution, but it isn't. If you're sitting in Pennsylvania, on top of all the frakking fields, then natural gas is pretty cheap. But in South Korea or Japan, they have to import the LNG (liquefied natural gas), and that's pretty expensive.

Oliver Stone: Who's making the most money in America from shipping the LNG? Do you know?

Joshua S. Goldstein: I'm not sure. But the big oil companies. That industry is fragmented with companies you've never heard of that are making piles of money. There's independent producers, then there's the big ones. There's a big company that runs an LNG import terminal in Massachusetts, where we've phased out nuclear power. It's where I live. So, I look up, who owns this big solar array near where I live. It's the biggest one in Massachusetts. Who owns this? It's a big LNG import company. Why would they be building a solar field?

Screen Rant: The front door says "solar," but they're letting all the natural gas in through a side door when no one's looking.

Joshua S. Goldstein: When solar isn't producing, which is most of the time… Actually, in Massachusetts, our capacity factor, the percent of the theoretical capacity that's produced on average is 13%. So most of the time, it's not producing. And when it's not producing, that's when natural gas comes in. It makes sense for them. Put solar out there, and it's cheap when it produces, but most of the time it doesn't. So now we're 3/4 methane. A few decades ago, Massachusetts was 1/4 coal, 1/4 nuclear, 1/4 natural gas, and then 1/4 everything else. They phased out coal and nuclear entirely, the dirtiest thing and the cleanest thing. Now it's just 3/4 natural gas. We haven't de-carbonized at all.

Screen Rant: Right now there's a whole thing about the waste water at Indian Point, where the local protests stopped them from dumping water into the Hudson. Is that water dangerous?

Joshua S. Goldstein: I would drink that water. It's the most ridiculously tiny amount of radioactivity. People think radioactivity is a 'yes or no' thing. Like, one bite from a radioactive spider will turn you into Spider-Man. But it doesn't work that way. We're bathed in radiation all the time. This room is full of it. Nuclear power doesn't add much. Background radiation varies a lot from one place to another. In Denver, Colorado, it's twice what it is here at sea level in New York. And yet there's no health effects from that variation.

This tritium that they want to dump, they want to dump water that has tiny amounts of tritium, is a tiny fraction of that difference between Denver and New York. We know that it's not an amount that can have any effect. Tritium is in EXIT signs, like that one over there. The total amount they want to dump from Indian Point is greatly diluted and gets safer every day from radioactive decay. The total amount is about equal to one of those EXIT signs, roughly. We're around tritium all the time. It's something that can be written as, "Radioactive water dumped into our natural sources!"

Oliver Stone: These websites turn out these articles, like CounterPunch, they turn out everything anti-nuclear. They believe this sh** because they give you so many numbers they can convince you.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Tritium is so weakly radioactive. It produces low-energy electrons. Yes, it's radioactive, it throws off electrons, but the electrons won't go through a couple inches of air. It won't penetrate skin. It's just like a version of hydrogen. It passes through the body like any water does. It doesn't accumulate in the body. If they put it in the Hudson River, it will be so diluted, it will have no effect.

Screen Rant: So, it's not a case where as soon as they dump it, the fish will all rise to the surface with Xs over their eyes.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Right. It's just fear. We have fears of radioactivity from movies in the 50s, and then from Silkwood and those kinds of films. If they can ping those fears, they can raise money on it, politicians can get votes off it, but I'd drink it.

Screen Rant: What about stuff like spent fuel and more immediate byproducts? They bury that, right?

Joshua S. Goldstein: Well, they were going to bury it in Yucca Mountain. Finland is actually building a repository similar to Yucca Mountain to bury it. We put it in "dry casks." Concrete casks, 18 feet high. Concrete. It stops the radiation. I've stood right next to them with no protective gear at all. They don't leak. They're safe for 100 years in that form. While we go about solving Climate Change…

Oliver Stone: [Laughs] Then we can worry about it.

Joshua S. Goldstein: After we solve Climate Change, either bury them like Finland is doing, or turn them into fuel for new reactors.

Screen Rant: They can be recycled?

Joshua S. Goldstein: Yeah.

Oliver Stone: Waste is very carefully managed because there's a small amount of it. It's watched. There's not one piece of waste that's out there. Whereas oil and coal, there's a lot of waste. A lot of waste. And solar batteries.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Cadmium, mercury. Solar Panels have all these minerals that are mined. It's very difficult to mine. And they're turned into solar panels in China, in Xinjiang, where the genocide is going on.

Oliver Stone: What genocide? Oh, you're going with that? Okay. But listen, you understand, as a filmmaker, how can you resist this story? It's important! With this turnaround that's happened. If there was no turnaround, if we just became nuclear-powered, we would be rather passive about all of it. It would become uneventful. In France, when I was shooting there, there's lots of people who don't even know there's a nuclear plant there, but they're happy it works. But it doesn't cross their consciousness.

Screen Rant: A great scene in your film is the Three Mile Island incident. There was a meltdown tragedy averted because it was evidence that the safety precautions worked.

Oliver Stone: Key is the guy who says, "They never tell us the truth, it's worse than they're telling you."

Screen Rant: We look at coal and natural gas as the devil we know, even though it's so much more destructive than nuclear. Young people don't have a whole lot to look forward to in this world, but we won't have a planet at that point if we don't change things now.

Oliver Stone: We'll have a planet, but it will be ruined. Or close to ruined. I wonder where we'll go. Maybe the South Seas. I'm not sure. I don't know where to go.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Oliver, maybe you can go to South Pacific ahead of time and check and see if it's safe for the rest of us.

Oliver Stone: The scientist in the film says, "It's a shame Nuclear didn't come along until later, in the 80s, because it wouldn't have been so resisted. It's important to have more accidents, actually. (Laughs) We'd understand that it's like a plane crash. Planes have to develop into better planes. There's a need for accidents, for any industry to grow.

Screen Rant: I wrote that in my notes before it came up in the film. We hear about every plane crash, but flying is still the safest way to travel. Yes, Chernobyl was a terribly mismanaged incident, and that mismanagement was what led to the massive loss of life. The thing I'm worried about with regard to nuclear power is Material Unaccounted For.

Oliver Stone: Yeah, that senator, what was his name… From Georgia… Sam Nunn. When the Soviet Union went down, they had to account for all the nuclear material. There was a rush. For example, Kazakhstan was part of the Soviet Union and had a load of material, so George Bush or whoever ran over there and said, "Hey, give it to us!" Ya know

Joshua S. Goldstein: When the Soviet Union fell apart, there were weapons all over the place.

Oliver Stone: Ukraine gave theirs back to the Soviet Union. They had a good leader at that time, Kuchma.

Joshua S. Goldstein: There was a rush to scoop up all the nuclear material and the weapons and bring them back.

Oliver Stone: What about the missing stuff that he's scared of? The stuff that's gonna fall into Iranian hands or something?

Joshua S. Goldstein: They collected all this stuff and it culminates when they take megatons of Soviet weapons, downblend the fuel, and run American reactors on them for about 15 years. Half of all the nuclear power in the USA was running off these Soviet warheads.

Oliver Stone: What do they do to the fuel?

Joshua S. Goldstein: They downblend it, so instead of "highly enriched" uranium, it goes all the way down to 5%. You take something and turn it from one into twenty. It's downgraded that way. We ran our reactors for 15 years on it. Nobody really knew about it. It's called 'megatons to megawatts.' The downside of it was, it discouraged the US fro making more of our own nuclear fuel. After that, we just kept on buying nuclear fuel from the Russians. Sam Nunn was all involved with that. As for the Materials Unaccounted For, the idea that this low-enriched Uranium would get out and someone could make it into a bomb, it hasn't been an issue. If you want to make a bomb, you have to enrich Uranium.

Screen Rant: Which not a lot of people have the capacity to do.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Right. Iran is a major country with a big program, all those centrifuges enriching uranium. You can do it. You can get there. Pakistan and India have civilian nuclear power, and it's separate from their military program for weapons. A civilian nuclear power plant is not useful for making weapons.

Oliver Stone: It's never happened. You can't say that it's ever happened.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Then Israel and North Korea, big proliferators, creating nuclear weapons…

Oliver Stone: I'm curious, why did Israel develop nuclear weapons but not nuclear power plants?

Joshua S. Goldstein: I think they wanted to keep their nuclear technology for their weapons program, which they were keeping secret, so they didn't want a public facing…

Oliver Stone: But it would be two different departments.

Joshua S. Goldstein: That's how it is in India and Pakistan. I can't answer you on Israeli policy. South Korea was going to build nuclear weapons, but they chose civilian nuclear power because they couldn't do both over the international framework. Israel dropped out of the framework and made weapons, but South Korea… Sweden, too, they were pursuing nuclear weapons, but decided, they're not really much use, let's build power plants instead.

Screen Rant: Regarding how you can't weaponize a nuclear plant, we saw Russia occupy Chernobyl. What, if anything, could they have done? It felt, at the time, like nuclear blackmail.

Joshua S. Goldstein: Chernobyl is on the road straight into Kyiv, so that's why they went through there. There were all these stories about Russian soldiers digging through the Chernobyl dirt and how it's going to irradiate them and all this terrible stuff, but nothing ever materialized. It was just a lot of fear. Anytime Chernobyl's back in the picture. And the same thing is with the Zaporizhzhia plant in Ukraine, which Russia is currently occupying. But they had shut the plant down

Oliver Stone: And it's encased in concrete, right?

Joshua S. Goldstein: Yes. The safest place to be in a warzone is in a nuclear plant!

You can conjure up scenarios where a bunker-buster bomb could breach containment and you'd end up with some low-level radioactivity spreading around. It's easy to map because you can measure very small measures of radioactivity, but that doesn't mean it's having any harmful effects.

Oliver Stone: Is that the one-in-a-million shot?

Joshua S. Goldstein: Yes. My parents were biological scientists, and they used radioactive tracers to follow molecules around the body and see where they end up. Just low-level radiation.

Screen Rant: I can't tell if you're just exploring the science or if you have a storytelling idea.

Joshua S. Goldstein: This is beyond the movie, but I've been thinking about the topic we broach in the movie briefly about what happened in the 1940s and 50s when there was this scientific fraud to make people afraid of radiation. That's a story about finding the lie. The Rockefeller Foundation was the main funder of science, not the government. They put all their money into creating the idea that low-level radiation is dangerous.

Oliver Stone: As Rod Adams says, he doesn't think it was conspiracy, he thinks it was business. The interesting thing, now, is that we discovered the Shell oil papers from those days. They knew in the 1960s that Climate Change was here, but they kept doing what they were doing, which makes them possibly liable in this new mentality we have of courtroom legal warfare. Lawfare. Maybe they can go after Shell or Exxon, because they knew. They explored the future.

-Zak Wojnar, ScreenRant, May 3 2023 [x]

#oliver stone #nuclear now #joshua goldstein #screenrant

0 notes

gt-adventures · 8 years

Text

Giant Species Infodump: Ankaniim

You like giants? I know you do!

This species belong to me, and belong in the world I made for them, which is the world of my original fantasy story Beanstalk. The following is almost all the information I have written up on the giant species of my own invention, which I call Ankaniim.You can find all of the story so far on my deviant art! (i’ve been slowly working on it since I was 16, and im turing 22 in 2017...)

I posted this info on DeviantArt a long time ago, but I should have it here too!

A lot of this information wont be revealed in story, it's stuff for me to keep in mind as I write. Also this is... what is the word? A CLOSED RACE* meaning, no you can't use them. not yet. *not because I think any of you will steal them, my dream is to have people write fanfiction for my stories! But my story isn't ready for that. I haven't supplied enough world building, plus I don't want you using the magic wrong. This document will help with that, as it does explain some things.

if you have any questions about Ankaniim or Higher Ground (the series of Beanstalk is Book 1), just ask!

Name origin: Anka (singular) Ankaniim (plural) is just my augmentation of one of the hebrew words for Giant (Anak (singular) Anakiim (plural). You might think, isn’t the hebrew word for giant "nephiliim?" Yes, that is another word, and notice it's plural. It also means "fallen ones" as the hebrew word for fall is naphal. This word would be more appropriate for my story but I want to be different. Humans: the human race are called Gamda (singular) Gamdaniim (plural) from the hebrew word for dwarf (gamad/gamadiim). Height Range: 50-80ft tall (average is about 72ft). their scale is ~11:1, so yes, compared to humans, they have a fairly large average height. age range: 50-60 years. 60 is old age. 70 is the equivalent of reaching like, 90 in a human. Giants are physically mature at 13 years old, with mental maturity at 16. (For reference: Tam is 15 years old, Jedraek is 19) Appearence: Giants come in all shapes and colors found in humans! but in more fun combinations. feet: Giants have larger and flatter feet than humans, and look a bit like hobbit feet (but again flatter). Hair: Giants have very distinct dichromatic and sometimes tricromatic hair. This takes the form of spots or stripes. There is always one primary color (which can be any color found in humans) and a secondary color (which can be any color, including pastels, metallic, etc, anything goes!). For trichromats there are two secondary patches (the secondary color appears in more than one place, usually in spots, trichromatic stripes are more rare) or, even more rarely, two secondary colors. [yes im using the words that are normally used to describe a persons vision but they are good words] In many societies having a more vibrant and contrasting secondary color meant better breeding. Also having eye color that matches your secondary is often seen as special. Body temperature: Ankaniim's body temperature is a bit lower than a humans, at 32C/90F but their body chemistry is amazingly resilient. able to hold temperatures that would death in a human but only for a few hours. So the toggle is about 30C- 43C/85-110F (this is a huge temperature range for a warmblooded creature btw, homeostasis is usually means a core temperature is pretty much constant. However, ranges like this are typical of cloud dwelling creatures) Culture: Ankaniim live all over the world and there are many cultures, it would take to long to describe them all. I will save culture for another time. However Ankaniim do not eat gamdaniim. There may be some cultures that do, but it would be more of a ritualistic thing, not an "attack the humans and eat them" thing. Ankaniim do not like gamdaniim, at least ankaniim of the featured kingdoms don't. There are reasons for this, but no one really knows them since it's ancient history and now it's a culturally imbedded species rivalry. Long ago, the two species were friends. there are still many cultures where they are friends! but they are on other continents. then why live where there are giants that do attack? Well it's not super frequent! Gamdaniim, like us regular humans, are stubborn as mules, we live in places that have tornadoes and earthquakes and hurricanes! Magic/Work: Hoowee, you ready for some complicated science fantasy bullshit!? Because I am! -Ankaniim are a magical race. They have "magical powers". This is a trait belonging to of ALL species that dwell in the clouds. The difference is that animals cannot use it the way Ankaniim do. There are no spells, no words or symbols, in fact, Ankaniim don't call it magic, it's called Work. It's the innate ability to redirect some of their metabolism over to generate and manipulate, with their mind, a stabilizing form of energy (referred to as magical energy for simplicity). -Magical energy exists in them, and but in it's low amounts is only enough to facilitate the metabolic redirection to generate more. Basically, in addition of making chemical energy and heat, their bodies will make magical energy as well. (How do they have magical energy to start with? When not switched, magical energy is a very minor by-product of neural electrical impulses. In fact, magic energy is what makes life possible, but magical beings produce a little extra) -Another way of putting it: The cellular metabolism of Cloud Dwelling animals can be redirected to create magical energy (this of course means they are not making their normal amount of biochemical energy and get tired very fast when using magic). Giants have the ability to control this energy with their minds. Direct it’s flow and purpose (while it still maintains its stabilizing properties). Energy (not just magical) is the capacity to do work or transfer heat. Thus using magic is called doing work or working. -what can magic really do? It stabilizes and controls other energy. Energy effects matter, so control of energy is control of matter! The simplest forms involve just transferring heat, the more difficult forms involve making or breaking chemical bonds or cold fusion and cold fission. I will provide some examples, from simple concepts to the more complex. Important Note: Calorie Count. One Calorie is the amount of energy needed to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree. Water has a high heat capacity, so changing the temperature of water takes a lot of heat. (btw, calories in food are actually kiloCalories, which are 1000 calories). All work takes energy, magical energy mostly makes work possible, though it does assist in lowering the amount of energy needed to do these tasks. example: thermal transfer: [The most simple and easy work]. This is the directed transfer of heat either into or out of an object. Usually used to heat and cool liquids. All heat being transferred into an object must be generated by the person doing the transfer*. All heat being transferred out of an object must be taken into the person.* *simultaneous transfer: one can transfer heat from one thing to another to avoid having to use energy to generate their own source of heat, however they must serve as the conduit for the heat. Phase Change: the difficulty of this task depends on the substance(s) being changed. Changing a substances phases between solid <--> liquid <--> gas. This is basically pushing thermal transfer until enough energy is taken out or put in that the substance changes phase. But, since their is a energy barrier that must be crossed to achieve change (the link shows it for water. it's different for every substance. Plus atmospheric pressure is a factor in how difficult this is) cold fusion and fission you know any of the elements beyond Hydrogen exist? Fusion in stars. The pressure and heat is so great the hydrogen atoms fuse into helium, and those fused atoms fuse. They can't make elements beyond Iron there is not enough heat or pressure to make the next element. It takes a supernova to burst through and make it all the way to Uranium. Fission is the opposite, breaking atoms apart, releasing energy. This usually results in explosions that vaporize their immediate surroundings and melt/set on fire the less immediate. e=mc^2 and all that Work Fusion/Fission: magic allows for both fusion and fission to be done safely. How? This is the science fantasy bullshit part. Where does the energy go from fission? where is the energy needed for fusion coming from? idk, it's magic! Also a great deal of energy is coming from the Anka performing the work. However this is how metal is made in the cloud world, since elemental metals are not found in the cloud land. The starting material must be the clouds themselves. The hydrogens in the water provide units of 1 proton for fission and the oxygen provide units of 8 protons. It must be done with the clouds, since those contain a high amount of magical energy otherwise it can't be done. Of course, pulling bonds hydrogens and oxygen apart requires energy. Any elements made will most likely be bonded to each other, which releases energy. Magic makes this possible. the easiest and most commonly performed work of this type is making of oils and other hydrocarbon fuels. the hardest is complex substances that are made of more than just hydrogen, carbon, and oxygen. These require more than just thinking and directing the energy, it takes steps and chemistry. Making metals is also difficult just because of the fusion involved. Ok, so now you know what magic can do. the Fusion/Fission thing should provide you will all the possibilities! (condensed: an Anka can make any material they wish starting from clouds if they are trained and have the energy. Overexertion is possible, easily possible when making things beyond hydrocarbons like alkanes, alkenes, and also other oils) what magic can't do: magic takes energy and time, it is not something that can be used to cast shields or attacks. There are no enchantments or illusions. Magic can't conjure, it can't do anything except what I described above. Congrats, you made it through the science fantasy babble! You have earned a fun fact: fun fact: Gamdaniim evolved from Ankaniim. The species diverged about 70,000 years ago. Ankaniim felt like exploring more of the world, and that included the surface, so a sizable group was sent down while the rest spread out across the clouds! Over the years the lack of magical energy along with the environment being harsher, less plentiful, caused each generation to decrease in size until it was sustainable. They also lost the ability to do Work but gained more innate curiosity and cunning, which is why Gamdaniim are at a higher technology level than Ankaniim. Here is an image of my main Anka, Tam, drawn by my friend sailerscrimshaw.tumblr.com (link has fully image, showing my OCs Tam, Camden, and Aliza, but with Tam at a human scale. And bellow that is Tam and Camden at the proper scale! (Tam’s skin color is correct in the first image!)

Once again, if you have questions or comments, my askbox is open :D

#giant tiny #size difference #giants #tinies #higher ground beanstalk #gt

11 notes · View notes

jamieclawhorn · 6 years

Text

This contrarian play could have millionaire-making potential

What’s the ultimate contrarian play right now? High street retailers? Gold stocks? Emerging markets? There’s another candidate…

Now in the 11th year of a bear market, uranium remains one of the most detested metals around. Having hit $137 back in 2007, its price tag drifted below $20 per pound in 2017. Things have got so bad that many of the biggest players in the industry have struggled to generate a profit — leading them to either cut production or suspend it completely.

Although it may take a period for the full impact of this to be felt, knowledge that the supply of any commodity is being constrained can often be a great time to consider taking a position. And while demand hasn’t soared just yet, things are beginning to look favourable.

Fifty-nine nuclear reactors are currently under construction (with many of these in China) and 170 are planned for the next decade. Having ceased using the metal following the disaster at Fukushima back in 2011, Japan is also restarting its plants.

Moreover, new mines take many years to be approved and built — a positive for those companies are already several stages into the process. If demand follows the same curve it took from 2004 to the middle of 2007, the rise in the price of uranium could be simply breathtaking.

So how can I get involved?

As far as specific stocks are concerned, there are two ways a private investor can get exposure.

The first is via Spain-focused miner Berekely Energia (LSE: BKY). Construction of its Salamanca project is expected to begin later this year and should, according to the company, reach production when the “unavoidable” supply-demand deficit really kicks in.

In addition to July’s announcement of a potential €9m in cost savings associated with building the mine, Berkeley has recently joined the main market and listed in Spain. This listing should serve to raise its profile and encourage new institutional investors to climb on board.

Unfortunately, this progress hasn’t been reflected in the share price. Having hit a high of 69p back in January 2017, the stock now trades a little below 43p.

The second — and arguably less risky option — would be to buy shares in Yellow Cake (LSE: YCA). Named after the appearance of powdered uranium oxide, the business plan is hardly complex: buy uranium at the bargain basement prices, hoard it, and wait for a recovery.

Based on recent performance, it would seem at least some market participants appreciate the simplicity of this strategy. Yellow Cake’s stock is already up 26% since its IPO in early July.

Buyer beware

Clearly, anyone considering investing in an uranium-focused stock needs to be aware of the risks involved. An obvious drawback is that no one knows when its price will recover. In the meantime, there’s no guarantee it won’t drop even further.

A related consideration, particularly for those with shorter investing horizons, is the fact that neither Berkeley or Yellow Cake pay dividends, which in this context could be regarded as a reward for being patient. Like any mining project, there’s also the possibility of the former encountering a host of setbacks between now and its target date for commencing production.

Nevertheless, should you be comfortable devoting a proportion of your capital to speculating on an eventual sustained recovery, I suspect uranium could prove a very rewarding investment in time.

You Really Could Make A Million

Of course, picking the right shares and the strategy to be successful in the stock market isn’t easy. But you can get ahead of the herd by reading the Motley Fool’s FREE guide, “10 Steps To Making A Million In The Market”.

The Motley Fool’s experts show how a seven-figure-sum stock portfolio is within the reach of many ordinary investors in this straightforward step-by-step guide. Simply click here for your free copy.

More reading

Two stocks I was dead wrong about and what I have learned

Avoid the biggest financial mistake I ever made

3 secret stocks for low-risk investors

FTSE 100 vs FTSE 250: Which is the better buy for your SIPP?

Think your money is safe in a cash ISA? Read this now

Paul Summers has no position in any of the shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. Views expressed on the companies mentioned in this article are those of the writer and therefore may differ from the official recommendations we make in our subscription services such as Share Advisor, Hidden Winners and Pro. Here at The Motley Fool we believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

0 notes

volkmarguidohable · 7 years

Text

Analysis And Price Projection Of The Uranium Market BY VOLKMAR HABLE

Dr. Volkmar Hable writes: I travel a lot for the purpose of identifying new investment opportunities. In that process earlier this year I was offered by the governments of two countries Uranium exploration concessions of outstanding quality and location, and was told that no one would be interested in Uranium in these days. This caught my attention and we started to investigate. And sure enough, as a matter of fact, in these days it seems to be extremely easy to pick up Uranium concessions anywhere between Greenland and South-Africa.

The exceptional price decay in Uranium in the past 10 years seems to offer a reasonable explanation. Many Uranium deposits require a minimum price of 45 to 50 USD per pound in order to only operate at breakeven. The current and past price levels simply don’t accommodate the development or exploration of Uranium rich areas. Low prices are usually caused by low demand. And here is the Uranium “conundrum”, supported by detailed figures (Source: courtesy of the World Nuclear Council). As readers can easily see, by checking the bottom lines of the respective tables, there has been consistently a significant gap between production and a much higher demand. In 2013 production from world Uranium mines supplied about 85% of the requirements of power utilities. This gap so far has been bridged by supply of military Uranium and Plutonium resources, I’ll come to that in a minute. All mineral commodity markets tend to be cyclical, for example, prices rise and fall substantially over the years. In the Uranium market, however, high prices in the late 1970s gave way to depressed prices in the whole of the period of the 1980s and 1990s, with spot prices below the cost of production for all but the lowest cost mines. In 1996 Uranium spot prices recovered to price levels where many mines could produce above breakeven, but a decline followed again and prices only started to recover strongly from 2003 onward. However, readers should keep in mind that the quoted spot prices apply only to trading and always have represented less than 18% of the entire supply. Most trade is via 5-15 year term contracts with producers selling directly to utility companies. The reasons for fluctuation in mineral prices relate to demand and perceptions of scarcity. The price cannot indefinitely stay below the cost of production (see below), nor will it remain at very high levels for longer than it takes for new producers to enter the market and anxiety about supply to subside.

CIVIL NUCLEAR ENERGY PRODUCTION AND REQUIRED URANIUM

PRODUCTION OF URANIUM

DEMAND

About 445 reactors worldwide with combined capacity of over 376 GWe, require some 78,000 tonnes of Uranium oxide concentrate containing 66,000 tonnes of Uranium from mines (or the equivalent from stockpiles or secondary sources) each year. This includes initial Uranium for new reactors coming online (thus the difference to the table above, which does not include this additional demand for new reactors). The demand is growing steadily, and at the same time the reactors are being run more productively, with higher capacity factors. Each GWe of increased new capacity will require about 155 tU/yr of extra mine production routinely, and about 300-450 tU for the first fuel load on start up of the new reactor. The nuclear fuel consumption is measured in MW days per tonne U, and many utilities are increasing the initial enrichment of their fuel (eg from 3.3 towards 5.0% U235) and then burning it longer or harder to leave only 0.5% U-235 in it (instead of twice this). Due to the cost structure of nuclear power generation, with high capital and low fuel costs, and the long planning periods, the demand for Uranium fuel is much more predictable than with any other mineral commodity. Once reactors are built, it is very cost-effective to keep them running at high capacity and for utilities to make any adjustments to load trends. Demand forecasts for Uranium therefore depend for the overwhelming part on installed and operable capacity, regardless of economic fluctuations. And it is this point exactly that would make Uranium mining an attractive stable long-term business proposition. Looking 20 years ahead, the market is expected to grow significantly. The WNA 2013 Global Nuclear Fuel Market Report reference scenario (post Fukushima accident) shows a 49% increase in Uranium demand until 2024 , assuming a 36% increase in reactor capacity. Electricity demand by 2030 is expected (by the OECD's International Energy Agency, 2008) to double from that of 2004, and it is hard to see how in a world concerned with limiting carbon emissions, and very much limited fossil fuel supplies, this additional demand can be supplied other than by nuclear power generation.

SUPPLY

In 2012 mines supplied some 58,344 tU, about 84% of utilities' annual requirements. The balance has been covered by secondary sources including military supplied and stockpiled Uranium held by utilities. Stockpiles of Uranium at the end of 2013 they were estimated to be at 90,000 tU in Europe and USA, and a bit less in East-Asia. Basically we are looking at stockpiles of a 1.5 to 2 years of annual consumption at current burn rates, which is not too bad. The perception of imminent scarcity drove the pot price to over USD 130 in 2007 but since then has return back to above the 30 USD level, which is well below the breakeven cost of many mines. However, the long-term contracts are a different story, and there the prices are well above the spot price. Most long-term contracts and the prices in new contracts have, in the past, reflected a premium of at least 15 to 20 USD above the spot market, and in some cases even higher. This divergence clearly is unsustainable and most certainly point to higher prices going forward, even without the prospect of an increase in electricity consumption. The main growth in Uranium demand takes place today in India, Russia and China, and their vertically-integrated sovereign nuclear industries have sought equity in Uranium mines abroad, bypassing the market to a large degree 8which explains the low spot price despite high demand). Strategic investment in Uranium production is a priority for these sovereign industries.

An important source of nuclear fuel is ex-military weapons-grade plutonium, as MOX fuel. Commitments by the USA and Russia to convert nuclear weapons into fuel for electricity production is known as the Megatons to Megawatts program. Weapons-grade Uranium and plutonium surplus to military requirements in the USA and Russia is being made available for use as civil fuel. Weapons-grade Uranium is highly enriched, to over 90% U235 (the fissile isotope). Weapons-grade plutonium has over 93% Pu-239 and can be used, like reactor-grade plutonium, in fuel for electricity production. Highly-enriched Uranium from weapons stockpiles has been displacing some 8850 tonnes of U3O8 production from mines each year, and met about 13% to 19% of world reactor requirements through to 2013. It is unclear at this point how much longer the military is willing or able to supply fissile material to cover the short-falls of mine production. There was talk already in 2012 that in 2013 Russia would stop all sales for concerns about keeping enough for its army.

The demand side finishes the bullish picture for Uranium. The main catalyst is the move to green energy. Nuclear power plants have no carbon emissions. The growth of nuclear power is just beginning, but planned production is expected to greatly increase the demand for Uranium. Westinghouse Electric signed a deal to build four nuclear reactors in eastern China. The price tag on the deal is $8 billion. This is just one tiny piece of the puzzle. China plans to spend approximately $50 billion to build 30 nuclear reactors by 2020. This will increase its nuclear energy production by 40 gigawatts. That’s basically enough power to supply all of Spain with electricity. The growth in the nuclear market has resulted in a very large increase in the demand for Uranium The production of these mines takes time and money. Even if everything goes well, we are talking about at least six years until a mine becomes operational from initial exploration, and it’s for this reason that there is a long period of time during which demand exceeds supply. This shortage will always show up in price, and that’s exactly what we have and will continue to see.

PRICE PROJECTTION FOR URANIUM TILL 2024

Based on the above figures I expect a widening gap between supply and demand, which may be covered in part by increased efficiencies of new nuclear reactor plants, which will be exacerbated by the decrease in military supplies to the civilian market, and a s result should cause rising prices in both long-term contracts and spot prices. I expect prices to continue their sideways pattern for some more time. But as the transfer of military supplies to civil use is being reduced and more reactors are coming online we have reason to assume prices beyond the 100 USD mark in the next 5-7 years or so.

About the author: Dr. Volkmar Hable is a geologist and physicist by training, he holds a Ph.D. in geosciences and a B.Sc. in Agriculture and Agronomics among other, and is fluent in English, French, Spanish, and German. He was CEO CEN-European operations of Fortune 500 company Adecco, manager of a Swiss hedge fund for 7 years and has spent a year in the Diplomatic Corps. He currently is a member of the in British-Columbia accredited Consular Corps, a director and fund advisor of Samarium Investment Corporation and CEO of Samarium Borealis Corporation.

#VolkmarGuidoHable VolkmarHable Volkmar #Volkamr Guido Hable #Volkmar #Volkmar Guido #Volkmar Hable

0 notes

alienation2016-blog · 7 years

Text

New Post has been published on Alienation

New Post has been published on https://alienation.biz/why-investing-in-humans-could-be-the-next-safe-haven-asset-class/

Why investing in humans could be the next safe haven asset class

Various, adaptable and ample: It may seem facetious to lessen human beings to a series of funding traits, however, by means of positive metrics, it is quite easily done… for all 7.5 billion of us.

That is what a developing variety of new start-ups seem to assume, as a minimum, raising new questions on what the destiny of investment might appear like.

Could you search for to make money from the person on the street?

Making an investment in humans is, of course, nothing new. We’ve got been Making an investment in humans as a body of workers since the earliest degrees of trade. An investment in a company is regularly as tons a punt on its group of workers as it’s far at the product itself.

Certainly, early stage Investing is based almost solely on taking a gamble on an entrepreneur’s today’s concept.

However, the emergence of recent businesses, which meld peer-to-peer lending with social impact Making an investment, recommend we might be approximate to go into new funding territory.

Take Prodigy Finance, for instance, a border much less in tech start-up which allows investors to provide postgraduate loans to worldwide students for an income. global students – specifically those from rising economies, who may not be eligible for a traditional mortgage – are capable of fund their educations, at the same time as investors can make ordinary returns from their funding.

Up to now, so like social effect Investing. However, without a bodily property to talk of, the mortgage is classed and accredited based only on human characteristics – particularly intelligence.stock trades

“students are assessed on their academic overall performance and anticipated earning potential,” Joel Frisch, head of commercial enterprise development at Prodigy Finance, instructed CNBC over the smartphone.Presently loans are open only to MBA, MPP, regulation and engineering students, so one can guarantee graduate salaries on the higher give up of the income scale. To this point, the company has a 99.1 percent loan reimbursement rate.

Tips for Developing Astute Investing Skills

Learn how to parent conflicting analyses, reviews, and records as you research making investment possibilities

As an investor, you need to make selections based on your look at, research, and private critiques and ideas. You ought to now not depend totally on the studies and opinions of others. There’s a good deal excellent recommendation and records to be had to you.

However, there may be additional loads of differing records which you must reduce through to make informed investing decisions. Here’s what you may begin doing now: online brokers

Apprehend selections made by using entities impartial of publicly traded companies

Preferred Electric powered (NYSE: mind-setGE), through its Power & Water division, GE Hitachi, gives advanced and complex technology for the nuclear strength enterprise. The GE Hitachi nuclear alliance unites GE’s layout knowledge and records offering reactors, fuels, and services international with Hitachi’s proven enjoy in superior modular production. That is all properly and suitable.

Though, formerly, the Canadian Press referred to that, “A Federal Court docket ruling has thrown out the initial approvals for a chain of recent nuclear Energy reactors in Ontario.” Consequently, This is a case of weighing agency initiatives in opposition to the piano mindset of the jurisdiction wherein they perform, or might also want to operate with new projects. You have to be aware of this whilst you invest.

Recognize the difference between enterprise outlooks and what is going on within the market

Cameco (TSX:C CO) (NYSE:C CJ), concerning its long-time period potentialities, became very high quality about its outlook and the outlook for the uranium industry in Widespread. The enterprise did say in its 2013 annual report that any development or enlargement of its ultimate tasks might depend on how marketplace conditions increase. Cameco’s purpose is to build up Cigar Lake and to enlarge the McArthur River/Key Lake operation.

Business manufacturing started in may additionally 2015 at Cigar Lake with a complete of eleven.3 million kilos (a hundred% basis) produced through the crease of the year. The expectation is that the increase in the licensed capacity of 18 million pounds in step with 12 months will be in 2017.

What’s’ going on within the marketplace? In 2014, Mining.Com stated that bad markets triggered Cameco to place its Millennium uranium mine on maintaining. The fairly prospective Millennium deposit is on the shorelines of Slush Lake in Saskatchewan. Cameco had asked the Canadian Nuclear Safety Fee (CNSC) to delay a hearing scheduled for June 2014 right into a licensed utility for the Millennium Mine venture. The estimation is that this project has in excess of 50 million kilos of uranium.

How About A Voting App So You Could Vote On Your SmartPhone

For the duration of this ultimate 2016 Presidential Election we mentioned a tremendous flip-out, however even that was best fifty eight.6%, which was a hundred thirty-five.6 million human beings, however, recognize which means 41.four% of our populace did no longer vote. The overall wide variety of eligible electorate within the US in 2016 become 231,556,622. What passed off to everybody who didn’t vote? Do not tell me they didn’t care. Perhaps we make it too difficult, Perhaps humans failed to need to robotically be signed up for jury responsibility. Maybe electorate is apathetic for different motives – but I ask what if it had been easier to vote, particularly in the presidential years?

We have been discussing this in our think tank and one person stated that the idea of a clever smartphone balloting app, a concept which has been formerly floated, wouldn’t simply be tremendous for Federal Elections;

I think this app would be brilliant for the government on the nearby level! A lot might be determined speedy and then carried out rapidly in a while

I also think that there would really be a window of possibility to vote after the mass textual content turned into despatched out. I suppose kind of forty-eight hours could be accurate, simply to provide absolutely everyone time to do remaining minute studies if vital.”could sentences

Certainly, in thinking about this myself, well, I like the 48-hours to vote once the app sends out the query because it’s now not goodbye groups can shower the media with ads, or the media can input the fray with unique programming, smart circulate, just lengthy sufficient to do a chunk of research, talk it over with pals and family after which “vote your thoughts” – speaking of which we genuinely are talking about YOUR thoughts, that is why those votes have to be stored privately and those need to accept as true with that, so no dishonest by NSA etc, that records is just not transferable regardless of what.

“Yes, maximum thirteen yr olds have a telephone, however, I Don’t assume they should vote just yet

I suppose as we become older we learn more and more approximately ourselves and approximately how we think our u. S . A . need to be. at the age of thirteen more often than not every kid remains beneath the political opinions of their mother and father so if we deliver them voting rights than its almost like giving adults with youngsters the 2nd vote. Thoughts on that?”

Oh on the 13 12 months antique element, well, I did not mean they might actually vote, extra so, allowing them to exercise vote and show their typical chances for all to see, then inside the future, they may have buy-in to the machine, and consequently, use it and vote inside the destiny. I agree their votes will most probably reflect that in their dad and mom for the maximum component.

Maybe we need a reconsider about how we vote and Maybe using all this new generation may want to definitely help us all take part in OUR authorities. think on this.

Health Clubs – A Haven For Loving Your Body

Pass in advance with poise. Flow ahead with a blazing spirit, with an ardor to invigorate your body. That is what I learned when I joined the Gym. It gave me the entirety that it promised to give.

I was quite doubtful and unwilling in the first section however as time exceeded it became my ‘Second Domestic’ and now I cannot believe a single day without doing some aerobics or walking on my preferred treadmill for hours.

It has given me the bliss, the confidence, and the extremely good shape that I usually dreamt.

The privateness could be maintained through sheets covering the glass in the instances of want and brutal warmth. That is a plus point due to the fact some decide on sweating their body inside the afternoon. The cooling equipment work for 24/7 and the gym never runs out of it.could vs would

The doorway would be spick and span and you will feel like you are getting into a web page-3 apocalyptic environment with the soft and hard beat of the music. As soon as you enter you will experience the energy building inner you.

There will be a relaxing and changing room for men and women and you can have a warm steam bath together with a grooming length.

After a hard middle session, you may slump down and take heavy breaths to calm your soul.

Coming to the workout gadget, they’re dazzling, well-maintained, and striking.

0 notes