This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

PEN - Peninsula Energy

Jump to new
mickqld said:
Germany saying it is weaning itself off nuclear power. Funny how Chancellor Angela Merkel has argued that Germany needs to keep nuclear energy for now as a "bridging technology" until it has developed more renewable power sources.
Click to expand...

Mickqld, you seem to view supply and demand as static. Instead you should imagine them as two cars side by side. If the demand car is accelerating faster than the supply car then supply will never catch up to demand. All the forecasts pre-Fukushima assumed this was the case.

However, now we're seeing a slow down in demand and that could easily allow supply to gradually close the gap. Taking stockpiles into account as well as the possibility that Megatonnes to Megawatts will live on in some other form, the previous forecasts of shortages no longer seem entirely valid to me.

Nuclear is not going away. The existence of the nuclear industry is no more under threat now than it was in 1980 (the US still have most of the plants that were built around that time). What's under discussion is the rate of acceleration of demand.

Germany's contribution to this acceleration was projected to be relatively small, but it's not insignificant. There are dozens of other small nations that may also delay or halt their nuclear expansion. So what is _possible_ is that Nuclear energy will keep moving forward just not accelerating away from demand like it was before.

We're too close to the action right now. What's needed is the perspective that will come in 6-12 months.

Italy putting a moratorium on nuclear power, Only a referendum because they know it will get defeated.
Click to expand...

I thought referendums were used when the government doesn't want to pick sides on a divisive issue. ie In Australia we had a referendum on becoming a republic.

They are merely delaying the process and circumventing the referendum till Fukushima hysteria is forgotten.
Click to expand...

Delays to the acceleration of demand might be all supply needs to catch up over the next decade.


Agreed, but it's impossible for the world to go cold turkey on its coal addiction, so the case for Nuclear is a bit like the case for wearing a nicotine patch for an hour a day and continuing to smoke cigarettes for the other 23 hours.

Coal isn't going away any time soon and the difference between 85% coal generated power and 80% coal generated isn't that much in the bigger scheme of things. However, that said, I agree any move in that direction would be preferable to no move at all.

Grant
 
Garpal Gumnut said:
A chart from today shows some support at 0.0775 to 0.085, with increasing volume.
Click to expand...

Yes this was a resistance area on the way up and is also approximatly the 50% Fib. It could well hold here until the DFS and, if it lives up to the hype, it could send the stock to 9-10 cents.

PEN is hostage to greater forces than its own good news unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Still lots of stale bulls above 10 cents I'd fancy.

If it survives tomorrow it may continue up, otherwise it will fall as I indicated above, dropping further out of it's descending triangle.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, but these comments always make me chuckle. You've narrowed it down to either going up or down!

It is in the hands of the gods, not opinion nor sentiment.
Click to expand...

You mean like the Icelandic 'Masters of the Universe'?

Grant
 
It is in the hands of the gods, not opinion nor sentiment.

You mean like the Icelandic 'Masters of the Universe'?

LOL I would have thought the share price was more in the hands of world opinion and sentiment rather than Thor, Zeus or Olympus. :fan
 

Mock as you will.

Price and volume never lie.

And twinging them both in to the RSI in the upper window of the attached chart makes me worry for your fortune mick.

The RSI is the mojo of a stock should you be unacquainted with the term.

PEN is not a picture of a stock that the Gumnut Family Trust would touch with a bargepole.

This is not to say that others may have more as yet undisclosed information on PEN, that will be shown in the charts as time passes.

gg
 

Attachments

  • pen.jpg
    183 KB · Views: 16
Boggo said:
Some reasonably sized orders going through on the sell side today similiar to this example at 15:46:18.
.
Click to expand...

What a difference a day makes! If these 'seller/s' running for the door to bail at 0.075c had sold a day later they would have been 7.5 to 10% better off.
 
Design benefits to PEN at Lance.

In the upcoming DFS I expect to see something that Lyntec have included in the final plant design. A feature that separates the high opex/capex producers that can only be achieved via ISR processes.

A satellite plant that will capture the uranium using resin beads which is then transported to the main "central processing" (ring a bell) facility at Ross.

For those not familiar with design optimisation, the purpose of the DFS, this is the stage the designers have an opportunity to reduce both capex and opex by design. Lyntek have previously done just this in previous designs and PEN has mentioned I am almost certain they intend the same at Lance. This little master stroke of design expertise enables PEN to reduce capex significantly by onlly having a single centralised processing plant, without need to duplicate plants.

Lance is a vast area and this will enable PEN to place remote Ion Exchange Units for uranium removal and then transport to the central processing plant.

This will be a significant benefit to PEN and will make the all important bottom line (nett profit) even better. This along with the Permit to Toll they have applied for will provide benefits others could only wish for. In South Australia they wanted to use this at the Honeymoon mine, but not to be.

Remote Ion Exchange Unit (IEU):
Photos courtesy of: http://www.uraniumproducersamerica.com/situ.html
Worth a look if not familiar with ISR processing.
 

Attachments

  • image116.jpg
    40.3 KB · Views: 5
  • image114.jpg
    17.6 KB · Views: 242

I'm not so sure about that projection Grant.

It will be interesting to see the effect of the Megatonnes to Megawatts programme finishing in 2013

In an attempt to make up the shortfall, last month USEC(US major supplier of U) signed a multi-year contract with TENEX (Russian supplier to USEC) for the 10-year supply of low enriched uranium (LEU) beginning in 2013

But .......... until 2015, the level supplied to USEC will be less than half the level currently supplied under the Megatons to Megawatts program.

And the big question regarding Supply ..... the limitations on imports of Russian enriched uranium into the United States means that USEC will be delivering most of the enriched uranium to customers outside of the United States.

Companies who are well positioned to provide Uranium to the US utilities at 2013 onwards will be in the box seat to fill the Supply void.

I wonder which Company might fit that profile?
 
Been a way for a while and the games are still on

PEN has suffered from the effects of Japan, no question about that.

What needs to be taken into consideration is that you believe it (PEN) has a future or you do not. Pretty simple stuff I reckon.

I am holding for the eventual change in SP. I also believe PEN is in the midst of looking to use some of that money for another ISR play. I have no idea but this is what I am reading between the lines.

There are some depressed SPs for uranium players, this I feel is the time to take the bull by the horns and go for some leases, tenements, permits and fire sales around?

I wonder when we will read of more land acquisitions in the Wyoming permits. I am sure the land Manger is Fitzsimmons LLC (Land team) is been hard at work.

Interesting times ahead.
 
barney said:
Companies who are well positioned to provide Uranium to the US utilities at 2013 onwards will be in the box seat to fill the Supply void.
Click to expand...

Of course, there's a transportation cost advantage and also an advantage in terms of security of supply. Price is what matters though, not the seating arrangements. PEN got a good price for 8% of its Uranium when sentiment was at a peak. The big challenge is to secure a similar price for the other 92% post-Fukushima.

When you read about the supply gap, you're reading about a gap in world supply with projections out to 2020 - 2050. So it doesn't really matter where the Russian supply goes, it will still be meeting projected world demand. If the Russians use it to supply their own reactors then that means Russian utilities don't need to compete for supplies in world markets, and that will translate into less demand and lower prices than would otherwise occur. Most of the modelling assumes the Russian supply evaporates into thin air. It doesn't appear to be the case (definitely not in 2013), so the terrifying gap that bulls have been referring to since 2001 probably won't eventuate.

For Uranium bulls, 2013 is going to be very disappointing I'd say. Reminds me of all the anticipation for the Y2K bug. The media prophesied planes falling out of the sky, but it was pretty much business as usual despite a few minor disruptions.

Grant
 
Megacents said:
What needs to be taken into consideration is that you believe it (PEN) has a future or you do not. Pretty simple stuff I reckon.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's any question that PEN has some sort of future. The debate revolves around what kind of future and how certain it is. If I buy today and in 2013 the share price has barely budged, I'm not going to be singing praises about how I was correct that PEN had 'a future'. Instead, I'll be disappointed that I didn't correctly evaluate how that future would really impact the bottom line of the company.

Grant
 
For PEN follower I am attaching two links

http://www.infomine.com/Investment/HistoricalCharts/ShowCharts.asp?c=uranium as published in PEN website today

http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/9379 - this is an extract from Energy Report and quoted Russian President Medvedev: Russia's Energy Future Nuclear
Source: The Voice of Russia 04/25/2011

IMO Russian voice with a large number of nuclear reactors will assist to address the nervousness of nuclear industry and hence PEN's future movement along with other uranium hopefuls/ producers

DYOR
 
Thanks for the information miner.

The tide will turn back in our favour eventually and logic will prevail.

In fact maybe today it has already commenced, the trading in PEN was telling with some very large buy orders from 8.2 through to 8.6. Until that commenced volume was rather low, it ended up much higher from around 5m and going to over 32m.

We know positive imminent announcements are coming but what if this is just more that that.

With the latest situation in Namibia would you like to be a holder of mining stocks operating there? I know I definitely wouldn't, as the risk just incresed significantly. What if a shift in sentiment away from these stocks into lower risk stocks such as PEN was to occur? Just a thought...

Govt Pockets All Rights to Mine Uranium
http://allafrica.com/stories/201104210360.html
 
This is what I was talking about. Note the volumes in the 8.4 plus ranges and most late in the session today.

Credit to abu from afar:
 

Attachments

  • 2h6c36x.gif
    66 KB · Views: 18
hangseng]In fact maybe today it has already commenced said:
This is what I was talking about. Note the volumes in the 8.4 plus ranges and most late in the session today.
Click to expand...

For someone who claims to be an investor and actually ridicules and berates traders for worrying about 'a few pips', you sure do look like one yourself sometimes.

On top of posting like a trader you actually refuse to enter into any meaningful FA discussions. For instance, you've not yet explained why you feel that the Hartley's valuation is more accurate than the RCR valuation.

Grant
 
gnealson said:
27 April 2011

Indian protestors willing to lose their lives and storm a police station to prevent a Nuclear plant going ahead

Grant
Click to expand...

Nothing like a bit of sensationalism to wet the anti-nuclear appetite .......

The Nuclear plant in question has been operating for 16 years longer than its proposed time frame, without incident. ......

But the BBC needs to inform us that a local farmer has indicated he and his comrades would rather die than let more nuclear reactors be built in the area.

As it has eventuated .... they are more likely to be injured or killed by the local police than be hurt by the nuclear reactors that provide the power to their land .......

Journalism can be extremely informative and beneficial to society at times ..... Unfortunately it can also be incredibly misused
 
Good morning PEN enthusiastics

Sharing the Quarterly report from PEN published this morning in ASX.

We all heard about the increased resources, permit approval on positive side and nuclear cynism around some section of the world on negative side.

Notwithstanding it is only matter of time for us to recognise the strength of PEN all the more, what intrigued me in the report about location of power resources in Wyoming.

There are some good locations for power within PEN easy reach compared to rest of the industries in Wyoming. That is an awesome infrastructure advantage for a power intensive uranium extraction process.

Fundamentally there are so many technical reasons for this process and product making me very encouraged with PEN all the more.

Good luck to you all and please do not forget to DYOR and look into your investment strategy.
 

Attachments

  • PEN THURS APRIL 2011.pdf
    1.2 MB · Views: 9
barney said:
Journalism can be extremely informative and beneficial to society at times ..... Unfortunately it can also be incredibly misused
Click to expand...

It's like we read a different article, so here's some key quotes:

A leading campaigner against a massive nuclear power plant in India has pledged that villagers are ready to sacrifice their lives in order to prevent a repeat of Japan's nuclear disaster.
Click to expand...




To me the above is significant because it shows:

1) The Indian Government may back Nuclear, but that does not mean the public does.
2) Public sentiment is already driving much more stringent safety reviews
3) India has old Reactors that it was advised to shut down in 1995. It seems more likely that they will be shut down now
4) India has several reactors in Earthquake zones that are now considered unsafe by experts
5) Old reactors in unsafe Earthquake zones are a perfect recipe for another Nuclear emergency.

So Barney, the way I see it, the article has a bit more depth than you implied. We've previously been told that the Indian Nuclear programme (along with China and Russia) are unchanged, but it's clear that there's quite a lot going on under the surface.

Once again, I'd remind people that this is not an issue of what's rational. It was irrational for the Nuclear program to stop in the 80s, but it did anyway. So those who are ignoring the under-currents of public sentiment are likely to be caught out.

Grant
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Locked
MEE - Metex Resources
13 14 15
Replies
296
Views
54K
Joe Blow
BCC - Buccaneer Energy
16 17 18
Replies
341
Views
72K
zzaaxxss3401
Z
CNF - Continental Goldfields
2 3
Replies
55
Views
17K
Boyou
Uranium in for correction, not a rout
Replies
0
Views
8K
motion
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...