I found this in an investment spiel;

The world’s worst fuel shortage has driven the price of one commodity through the roof… and it’s not oil…

The yellow stuff that drives almost every reactor in the world – uranium – is under attack on three sides… While world leaders are pledging to triple the number of nuclear power plants worldwide over the next few years, the reactors already in use have eaten up more than half the world’s uranium reserves.

Add that to the explosively growing energy demand of countries like China, and you have a supply gap that dwarfs the wildest dreams of the most successful oil or coal investors. In fact, worldwide uranium demand already exceeds supply by 139%. Mines may never be able to crank up production high enough...

This has driven prices of uranium from $10.10 per pound in 2003 to over $56 today… a rise of 454% in three years. And a few stocks are poised to jump as the fuel’s price shoots higher.

You’ll get all the urgent details of the uranium boom, including…

The uranium investment that’s projected to grow from $72 million to $119 BILLION in less than two years...
Why the world’s commercial uranium reserves could be totally gone before mines can produce enough fuel to run the reactors we already have...
The “new” nuclear power plant that will turn penny stocks into blue chips and shoot larger companies The world’s worst fuel shortage has driven the price of one commodity through the roof… and it’s not oil…

The yellow stuff that drives almost every reactor in the world – uranium – is under attack on three sides… While world leaders are pledging to triple the number of nuclear power plants worldwide over the next few years, the reactors already in use have eaten up more than half the world’s uranium reserves.

Add that to the explosively growing energy demand of countries like China, and you have a supply gap that dwarfs the wildest dreams of the most successful oil or coal investors. In fact, worldwide uranium demand already exceeds supply by 139%. Mines may never be able to crank up production high enough...

This has driven prices of uranium from $10.10 per pound in 2003 to over $56 today… a rise of 454% in three years. And a few stocks are poised to jump as the fuel’s price shoots higher.

You’ll get all the urgent details of the uranium boom, including…

The uranium investment that’s projected to grow from $72 million to $119 BILLION in less than two years...
Why the world’s commercial uranium reserves could be totally gone before mines can produce enough fuel to run the reactors we already have...
The “new” nuclear power plant that will turn penny stocks into blue chips and shoot larger companies through the moon… through the moon…
______________________________________________________________________________

http://www.investmentu.net/ppc/t4uranium.cfm?kw=X300G533


If the stock market prices are up as dramatically as what's said in above quote a lot of people will go broke if we don't go nuclear.

I was particularly interested in the prophecy of us running out of uranium. Does anyone know how true that is?

It really depends on who the shareholders are I suppose. If Murdoch had a large interest in Uranium his papers would promote Uranium and Nuclear.

Power means Influence.

Who is behind the push by the government for nuclear power?  Why the rush and how much of taxpayers' money is going to be invested to initially prop this industry up?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Aussies-embracing-nuclear-power-poll/2007/03/06/1172943389296.html

Concerns about climate change have swung Australian opinion in favour of nuclear power for the first time, a poll shows.

A Newspoll published in The Australian newspaper reveals support for nuclear power has surged 10 percentage points to 45 per cent in four months, outstripping opposition, which has plummeted 10 points to 40 per cent.

But a vast majority - 66 per cent - are against having a nuclear power station in their local area.

The key to the shift appears to have been Prime Minister John Howard's repeatedly linking nuclear power to strategies for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the newspaper reports.

The survey asked whether respondents supported the development of nuclear power industry in Australia as one of a range of energy solutions to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and whether they would personally be in favour or against a nuclear power station being built in your local area.

---

Don't go nuclear, says nuke waste expert

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Dont-go-nuclear-says-nuke-waste-expert/2007/03/14/1173722540045.html

Australia could face serious environmental problems if it went ahead with a nuclear power industry, a visiting American expert has warned.

Kevin Kamps, a nuclear waste specialist at the Nuclear Information and Resource Service in Washington DC, said marine life would suffer if superheated water used to cool nuclear reactors built on the coast was released back into the sea.

Mr Kamps said there could be no safe disposal of nuclear waste.

In the US, the proposed nuclear waste dump at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, had so far cost $US9 billion ($A11.53 billion) and 25 years work to set up.

"The earliest they can open it is 2021, but it's looking more and more likely it may never open now, so it's back to square one with our dilemma," Mr Kamps said.

But the US experience had been that marine life was seriously affected by coast-based nuclear plants, Mr Kamps said.

"Even large animals like endangered sea turtles are sucked into these cooling systems," he said.

"In one year, 933 endangered sea turtles were sucked into a reactor in Florida.

---

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Nuclear-bill-fails-to-pass-upper-house/2007/04/19/1176696996514.html

Nuclear bill fails to pass upper house

A bill that would have required a statewide voter plebiscite before a nuclear power plant could be built in Victoria has failed to pass through the upper house.

Energy Minister Peter Batchelor said he was outraged the upper house's three Greens members did not vote for the bill, ensuring it was lost 18 to 20 votes.

Liberal MPs plus members of the Nationals and the Democratic Labor Party also voted against the Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Amendment (Plebiscite) Bill 2007.

"As energy minister I am outraged at what the Greens have done in preventing the Victorian people from having a say on whether a nuclear power plant is built in this state," Mr Batchelor told AAP.

"This has made is easier for John Howard or Peter Costello to build a nuclear power plant or nuclear waste facility in Victoria."

But Greens upper house MP Greg Barber said the bill was deficient because it did not allow the parliament to set a plebiscite question.

He also pointed to next week's ALP national conference, where overturning Labor's no new uranium mine policy will be on the table.

"The most important vote is not the one we had in parliament today, it's the one (Premier) Steve Bracks will cast as a delegate to the ALP National Conference on uranium policy," Mr Barber said.

---

Nuclear is part of climate solution: PM

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Nuclear-is-part-of-climate-solution-PM/2007/04/22/1177180462297.html

The Labor Party needs to accept nuclear power is part of the solution to global warming, Prime Minister John Howard says.

His comments come after Labor's resources spokesman Anthony Albanese earlier said he would push for the ALP's no new mines policy to be retained.

---

ALP 'not damaged by nuclear debate'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/ALP-not-damaged-by-nuclear-debate/2007/04/22/1177180462137.html

Labor's water spokesman Anthony Albanese denies he is being disloyal to party leader Kevin Rudd by opposing his stance on uranium mines.

Mr Albanese will push for the no new mines policy to be retained at the ALP's upcoming national conference in Sydney, putting him at odds with Mr Rudd.

---

Rann's opposition to nuclear 'ignorant'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Ranns-opposition-to-nuclear-ignorant/2007/04/23/1177180522426.html

The South Australian opposition has branded Premier Mike Rann's opposition to nuclear power ignorant and short-sighted.

He said Mr Rann's stand on nuclear power was at odds with his lobbying for federal Labor to drop its long-standing no new uranium mines policy.

Mr Hamilton-Smith said the SA premier had instigated a scare campaign over nuclear power when his only argument against it appeared to be the lack of a business case.

But the Liberal leader said business was in the best position to make such judgments.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Japan-quake-triggers-nuclear-plant-leak/2007/07/17/1184559782193.html

More than 12,000 people prepared for a second night in evacuation centres in northwest Japan on Tuesday after an earthquake the previous day killed nine people, injured more than 1,000 and triggered radioactive leaks from a nuclear plant.

A small fire and a leak of 1,200 litres of water containing radioactive materials at Tokyo Electric Power Co.'s (TEPCO) Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant - the world's largest - reignited fears about nuclear safety in a country reliant on atomic power for one-third of its electricity.

Hundreds of homes were damaged and water, gas and electricity supplies were cut by the 6.8 magnitude quake that hit Niigata prefecture on Monday morning.

Nine elderly people were killed and one person was missing, a Niigata prefecture official said. In hard-hit Kashiwazaki City, a team of orange-clad rescue workers with five sniffer dogs said they were calling off operations for the day.

I think we're a lot more stable than japan.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/breaking-news/japan-nuclear-plant-to-stay-closed/2007/07/18/1184559862726.html

A quake-hit Japanese city insisted that the world's biggest nuclear power plant remain closed after a tremor caused radiation leaks, as the top UN nuclear watchdog said the utility had misjudged seismic risks.

Howard-Bush nuclear deal puts Australia at risk - Greens
20/07/07

The Prime Minister's plan to sign a nuclear pact with President Bush risks Australia's future security and environmental wellbeing, Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.

"A thirty percent reallocation of current electricity supplies through energy efficiency, to meet future industrial, retail and domestic needs is a much safer, cleaner, cheaper option to dangerous nuclear power," Senator Brown said.

"Mr Howard's proposed pact with President Bush will anger neighbours like Indonesia and Malaysia and foster nuclear installations in our neighbourhood. The massive radioactive leak in Tokyo Electrics' giant nuclear plant this week shows how dangerous nuclear power stations on Java could be."

"The Howard move will inevitably bring Australia under pressure to become a global nuclear waste dump. It will increase terrorists' focus on Australia and will create a direct incentive for nuclear power plants to be built near our major cities, like Sydney and Melbourne," Senator Brown said.

freediver wrote on Aug 15^th, 2007 at 7:08pm:


At this stage I think its a bad idea..who know if India can be trusted?