Energy From Thorium Discussion Forum

It is currently Dec 10, 2018 4:09 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Uranium ISR developments
PostPosted: Jan 05, 2015 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3898
Location: Alabama
Energy Fuels and Uranerz to Create the Largest Integrated Uranium Producer Focused on the United States

Quote:
Energy Fuels is currently well-positioned as the 2nd largest supplier of uranium within the U.S. It currently accounts for about 20% of U.S. uranium production from its wholly-owned White Mesa uranium mill, the only licensed and operating conventional uranium mill in the U.S. Uranerz is the newest uranium producer in the U.S., located in one of the most prolific areas of uranium production in the U.S. Uranerz recently commenced production at its Nichols Ranch ISR Uranium Project and holds one of the largest prospective land positions for ISR-amenable deposits in Wyoming. The Company will have a combined ISR and conventional asset base, unique in its scope and scalability, extending from the ISR-amenable Powder River Basin of Wyoming (the "Basin") to the conventional uranium mining districts of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Arizona.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jun 01, 2016 2:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Dec 22, 2015 8:40 pm
Posts: 360
Location: Florida
Table 4. U.S. uranium in-situ-leach plants by owner, location, capacity, and operating status
Quote:
Domestic Uranium Production Report 1st Quarter 2016
Release Date: May 5, 2016
Next Release Date: August 2016

Uranerz Energy Corporation, Nichols Ranch ISR Project, Johnson and Campbell, Wyoming, 2,000,000 Production capacity (pounds U3O8 per year), Operating

Total Production Capacity: 26,975,000 pounds [12,236 tonnes].

_________________
"Those who say it can’t be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."

—James Arthur Baldwin, American novelist, essayist, playwright, poet, and social critic


Last edited by Tim Meyer on Jun 01, 2016 8:38 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jun 01, 2016 7:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2249
Why cant the Americans use up thier stocks of fissile materials after blending it with thorium.
file:///C:/Users/Sony/Downloads/thorium%20use.pdf
Even the MOX plan is languishing.


Last edited by jagdish on Oct 27, 2018 10:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Jun 01, 2016 7:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Dec 22, 2015 8:40 pm
Posts: 360
Location: Florida
We Americans can and will. NEIMA for advanced nuclear is needed and is presently in committee. Congress must act with the President. There are designs for burning SNF that require modernization of nuclear regulations here to begin the licensing and deployment of such designs. H.R. 4979 and S. 2795 were introduced in April and there's other legislation that will help companies test designs.

Sidenote: Posted on the Lithium-7 topic, so reply there, please:

jagdish, A few days ago on May 20, 2016, Jim L started "Article advocating U.S. nuclear power" and I mentioned at one point the HD lithium problem.
Jim L. wrote:
. . . there was a post about a different process that looked promising. That process is titled: "Green and efficient extraction strategy to lithium isotope separation with double ionic liquids as the medium and ionic associated agent" in case you need to search for it, not sure if it was posted in this forum. Feel free to jump into the discussions on it!

The paper is here: Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry March 2013, Volume 295, Issue 3, pp 2103-2110.
Xu Jingjing, et al. wrote:
The single-stage isotope separation factor of 7Li–6Li was up to 1.023 +/- 0.002, indicating that 7Li was concentrated in organic phase and 6Li was concentrated in aqueous phase. All chemical reagents used can be well recycled. The extraction strategy offers green nature, low product cost, high efficiency and good application prospect to lithium isotope separation.

Another more recent paper is here: Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology Volume 52, Issue 3, 2015. It describes liquid-liquid extraction for lithium isotope separation based on room-temperature ILs containg 2,2'-binaphthyldiyl-17-crown-5.
Received: 4 Mar 2014, Xiao-Li Suna, et al. wrote:
Under optimized conditions, the maximum single-stage separation factor alpha of 6Li/7Li obtained in the present study was 1.046 +/- 0.002, indicating the lighter isotope 6Li was enriched in IL phase while the heavier isotope 7Li was concentrated in the solution phase.

According to the Preface to the text from 2014 Ionic Liquids in Separation Technology, ionic liquids (ILs) are an emerging technology that "has blossomed only within in the last decade."

I read Jingjing, et al. last night. What are the costs of these materials? If commercial implementation of IL techniques is underway because of a strong business case for HD lithium, then details will be cloaked under IP. But that would be a good thing. And it would indicate that 99.995% 7Li or better is commercially achievable.

I wonder if the B&P Process Equipment and Systems POD Liquid/Liquid Extraction Centrifuge (cheesy video music) would work for IL continuous counter-current 6Li/7Li separation?

_________________
"Those who say it can’t be done are usually interrupted by others doing it."

—James Arthur Baldwin, American novelist, essayist, playwright, poet, and social critic


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 21, 2018 5:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3898
Location: Alabama
EPA withdraws proposed Obama-era rule change for uranium mining

Quote:
On Jan. 19, 2017 - a day before Donald Trump took office as president - the EPA had proposed standards to regulate byproduct materials produced by uranium in-situ recovery (ISR) activities, with a primary focus on groundwater protection and restoration. On Friday, the EPA said existing rules were enough for the protection of public health and safety from radiological and non-radiological hazards associated with uranium and thorium ore processing. EPA’s acting administrator Andrew Wheeler cast the proposed rule change as “unnecessary and punishing” on uranium producers. “The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has regulated in situ uranium recovery for nearly 40 years. The agency has never found an instance of ground water contamination that would be addressed by this rule,” Wheeler said in a statement. The National Mining Association (NMA) hailed the decision.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 25, 2018 10:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Nov 30, 2006 3:30 pm
Posts: 3898
Location: Alabama
US EPA withdraws uranium rule


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 27, 2018 10:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Apr 19, 2008 1:06 am
Posts: 2249
ISL is a useful technology for uranium mining. However the best source of nuclear fuel is the once used LWR fuel.
The renewable energy is promoted by tax deductions and Carbon pricing. Why can’t uranium recycling be assisted by higher royalties in mining?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Oct 28, 2018 1:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Sep 22, 2013 6:43 am
Posts: 18
Location: Prescott, AZ USA
Isn't there a law in the US that proscribes reprocessing the nuclear fuel rods? That is a political issue which I would not expect to be touched by any of our representatives/senators/president in the forseeable future.

_________________
Norm


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group