Its breakout will perhaps continue for a while. Looking good.sydneysider said:Hit 38, does not want to lie down. Volumes screaming.
every stock has its price.watsonc said:If you mentioned this a month ago I would have been all in! I think the price is a bit high now. Oh well.
This stock has tremendous potential. I haven't bought as yet. The Mega Uranium JV looks exciting indeed. If there are good results I predict that AEE will be taken over within a year.nizar said:About time this one had a run.
It flopped as a float, at a time expectations were HUGE shortly after Toro.
mick2006 said:seems that not many people on the ASX realise that AEE is one of the largest Uranium exploration land holders currently listed on the ASX.
It has been quietly crawling upwards with none of the speed of some of the other explorers, but just wait for the latest drill results to be released and the some of the un-informed will sit up and take notice.
It seems to me that people are not buying the quality uranium explorers, rather just any company that has uranium in its name. Just Crazy.....
I wonder what the price of AEE shares would be if the changed their name to Aura Uranium, any thoughts guys?
Nuclear power 'cheaper than coal'
By Samantha Maiden
January 01, 2007 12:48am
AUSTRALIANS risk higher electricity prices if the nation fails to embrace nuclear power and relies on low-emission coal technology.
In a new push to force the Labor Party to abandon its opposition to nuclear power, the Howard Government is preparing to warn consumers that the anti-nuclear stance could hit the family budget.
Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane has conceded that companies are unlikely to establish nuclear power plants until a bipartisan approach is offered.
Companies would be fearful that investment in a nuclear power plant would be too risky unless Labor ruled out a future ban on construction, Mr Macfarlane told The Australian
A day after a Newspoll in The Weekend Australian revealed just 35 per cent of voters support the construction of nuclear power plants, Mr Macfarlane cited Ziggy Switkowski's report on uranium mining and nuclear energy to warn that failure to embrace the nuclear option would cost families.
"You are also committing yourself to higher electricity prices," he said.
"Low-emission coal technology could be double or even triple the existing cost. I don't think it's a question of if we go to low-emission technology, but when.
"But if you look at the figures in the report, it's $50-100 a megawatt hour compared with nuclear, which is $40 and $65 a megawatt hour. If you turn your back on nuclear, you've got to rely on the commercialisation of low-emission technology for coal. That may happen, but it's a decade or so away."
Mr Macfarlane defended the safety of nuclear power, echoing the Switkowski report's statement that Australians were more likely to die of a shark attack or be hit by lightning than from a nuclear plant disaster.
"The history of nuclear globally is very good compared with any other energy source," he said. "Even if you count Chernobyl, which never would have been built in a Western country, the accidents and deaths are below the coal industry."
But Mr Macfarlane was sceptical about some of the timelines in the Switkowski report.
"Ziggy says 10 years. It's probably 15 years or better," he said. "Nuclear power stations will be built in Australia when there is bipartisan support. If there is nonsensical opposition from the Labor Party, then it won't happen."
Mr Macfarlane said imposing a carbon trading scheme nationally would put Australia at a disadvantage in trade with Southeast Asia.
"It would simply cause manufacturing to move offshore," he said. "But we haven't ruled it out, on the basis there would be a global trading scheme."
Opposition Treasury spokesman Wayne Swan said the underlying finding of the Switkowski report was that nuclear power economics did not add up.
"Even if Australia were to implement the report's recommendations, it would come too late to be of any practical use in the battle to reduce greenhouse gas emissions over the next 10 to 15 years."
This one has done well since the Mega Uranium JV ann. As stated earlier, I wouldn't be surpirsed if this one gets taken over down the track.Caliente said:Hi mick, I agree this is an absolute star! However, this one has now appreciated significantly.
How are the landholdings relative to NEL?
Caliente said:Hi mick, I agree this is an absolute star! However, this one has now appreciated significantly.
How are the landholdings relative to NEL?
Off topic, Yes, but useful info yet again Young Trader. Thanks mate.YOUNG_TRADER said:Off topic but its actually NRU's tennement at Lake Way that feeds into NEL's Lake Way and Centipede Deposits,
NEL has nearly doubled in the last 2 weeks, NRU hasn't moved that much
Back on AEE nice pick guys, those opies were gold to whoever grabbed em at 10c, 40c now = 400% return I LIKE IT ALOT, HIGH FIVE!
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?