Uranium Boom in Kazakhstan

Kazakhstan's international energy image is now that of one of the world's rising oil exporters, an extraordinary feat given that, two decades ago its hydrocarbon output was beyond insignificant when the USSR collapsed. The vast Central Asian nation, larger than Western Europe, has now quietly passed another energy milestone.

Kazakhstan produces 33 percent of world's mined uranium, followed by Canada at 18 percent and Australia, with 11 percent of global output. Kazakhstan contains the world's second-largest uranium reserves, estimated at 1.5 million tons. Until two years ago Kazakhstan was the world's No. 3 uranium miner, following Australia and Canada.

Together the trio is responsible for about 62 percent of the world's production of mined uranium.

According to Kazakhstan's State Corporation for Atomic Energy, Kazatomprom, during January-September, the country mined 13,957 tons of uranium. "The volume of uranium mining in the Republic of Kazakhstan (for January - September) comprised 13,957 tons, which is 11 percent higher than the same period last year." Even more impressive, Kazatomprom's revenues soared 72 percent year-on-year. Kazatomprom is the state-owned Kazakh national operator for the export of uranium, as well as rare metals, nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants, special equipment, technologies, and dual-purpose materials.
Full article at: Kazakhstan Now World's Largest Uranium Miner

Comments (23)

11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

bhp @ 65...

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
In The Flesh, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Good that the country is diversifying, but Europe is buying into antinuclear hysteria right now, which is sure to put a crimp in demand. The industry isn't being allowed to expand in the Western world.

Metal. Music. Life. www.headofmetal.com
11y
bonono, what's your opinion? Comment below:
In The Flesh:
Good that the country is diversifying, but Europe is buying into antinuclear hysteria right now, which is sure to put a crimp in demand. The industry isn't being allowed to expand in the Western world.

You have do not have a clue about the effects of radioactive materials on organisms or the state of scientific advancements in energy sources. Stick to banking and leave science to the scientists.

11y
STorIB, what's your opinion? Comment below:
jktecon:
In The Flesh:
Good that the country is diversifying, but Europe is buying into antinuclear hysteria right now, which is sure to put a crimp in demand. The industry isn't being allowed to expand in the Western world.

You have do not have a clue about the effects of radioactive materials on organisms or the state of scientific advancements in energy sources. Stick to banking and leave science to the scientists.

I do and I still find it absolutely absurd that nuclear energy is not pursed more. Solar energy is a joke, in terms of efficient conversion, and wind power is not competitive without government subsidies.

11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Germany will just buy from France.

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
Learn More

300+ video lessons across 6 modeling courses taught by elite practitioners at the top investment banks and private equity funds -- Excel Modeling -- Financial Statement Modeling -- M&A Modeling -- LBO Modeling -- DCF and Valuation Modeling -- ALL INCLUDED + 2 Huge Bonuses.

Learn more
11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

^

lol what's your position on this dude?

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

It is - in India and China.

I'm just debating whether I should be buying etf URA or stock CCJ when they drop a little more...

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Transport?

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
bonono, what's your opinion? Comment below:

They are just now realizing just how difficult it is to safely store used plutonium rods (impossible) and nuclear waste is not something that can be neutralized. No one knows the effects and unlike a poorly made finance formula the potential catastrophe could destroy human life.

I'm sure you would look forward to the future health and environmental effects of unnatural radiation permeating through the Earth but I do not. I say stop letting business get so involved into avant garde scientific advancements so that things can be done properly. I do feel energy is just one sector that should be a loosely regulated government run agency.

Problem is most people now do not see the purpose of experiments, and tests. If it looks good, why isn't it out yet? Well they didn't want to kill you but if you don't think it is important then things will be relaxed until the catastrophe. Sounds familiar right?

Maybe bankers should take their own advice, realize that mathematicians and scientists see you as the morons who don't know a thing about de rerum natura. You will think how amazing it all is when things are positive but when reactors overheat, radiation poisoning due to nuclear fallout kills, or things just plain do not work out, who will you blame. Full disclosure I am not a nuclear physicist but when they speak I do listen.

  • 2
11y
UFOinsider, what's your opinion? Comment below:
jktecon:
* They are just now realizing just how difficult it is to safely store used plutonium rods (impossible) and nuclear waste is not something that can be neutralized.
  • No one knows the effects
  1. It is not necessary to have permanent storage for nuclear waste at this point. Temporary facilities that will last for 20-30 years are sufficient, and then they can be rebuilt. The technology will eventually exist at some point in the not too distant future to put what we call 'waste' today, to good use then.

  2. Radiation poisoning is not exactly unproven or unknown science at this point....

  • Souce: nuclear physicists at my alma mater, and a buddy of mine who works on a particle accelerator.

I'm personally in favor of nuclear energy, but I do agree with you that there should be ridiculous safety standars, this shit is no joke.

Get busy living
  • 2
11y
bonono, what's your opinion? Comment below:
UFOinsider:
jktecon:
* They are just now realizing just how difficult it is to safely store used plutonium rods (impossible) and nuclear waste is not something that can be neutralized.
  • No one knows the effects
  1. It is not necessary to have permanent storage for nuclear waste at this point. Temporary facilities that will last for 20-30 years are sufficient, and then they can be rebuilt. The technology will eventually exist at some point in the not too distant future to put what we call 'waste' today, to good use then.

  2. Radiation poisoning is not exactly unproven or unknown science at this point....

  • Souce: nuclear physicists at my alma mater, and a buddy of mine who works on a particle accelerator.

I'm personally in favor of nuclear energy, but I do agree with you that there should be ridiculous safety standars, this shit is no joke.

1) The safe storage and effective rebuilding of nuclear waste facilities is like fighting against humans being human. Even if the argument is taken at face value, you still need to make the argument that people will never make mistakes(and there are many ways that could kill) in order for it to be true. You can't regulate systems failing. I understand there are several precautions in place but the potential for disaster is way too large to be a proponent for nuclear power.

If we were so close to safe storage, why would the issue be to make more waste now that can't be reused or stored effectively? If you spent the storage money on research to recycle the waste you could realize an exponential growth function in the profit, efficiency and safety of nuclear power but everyone just wants it now. It is widespread social immaturity to me and maybe statistics will prove you right but even there is a .0001 chance of a catastrophic event I wonder if the probability matters after the fact.

2) Sorry I meant the storage of the nuclear waste (rods) which sometimes trace amounts have been recorded leaking.

Best Response
11y
STorIB, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Europe and Japan have been storing spent rods for decades now. They even have processes for utilizing the energy still available in spent rods.

The reason we don't utilize more nuclear reactors is precisely because of regulators. A new reactor hasn't gone online since 1990.

According to your logic, I should have stayed in academia, instead of pursing my passion. Thank God we live in a country where I can get information on whatever I feel like learning about -- and if I have half a brain, I can understand it in a timely manner. It's also incredible that anyone with two hours to spare could slap down your pithy arguments in seconds, too.

jktecon:
Maybe bankers should take their own advice, realize that mathematicians and scientists see you as the morons who don't know a thing about de rerum natura. You will think how amazing it all is when things are positive but when reactors overheat, radiation poisoning due to nuclear fallout kills, or things just plain do not work out, who will you blame. Full disclosure I am not a nuclear physicist but when they speak I do listen.

Look buddy, take your own advice. You're speaking out of place here, and people like you are the primary reason we are still burning coal for energy.

11y
bonono, what's your opinion? Comment below:
STorIB:
Europe and Japan have been storing spent rods for decades now. They even have processes for utilizing the energy still available in spent rods.

The reason we don't utilize more nuclear reactors is precisely because of regulators. A new reactor hasn't gone online since 1990.

According to your logic, I should have stayed in academia, instead of pursing my passion. Thank God we live in a country where I can get information on whatever I feel like learning about -- and if I have half a brain, I can understand it in a timely manner. It's also incredible that anyone with two hours to spare could slap down your pithy arguments in seconds, too.

jktecon:
Maybe bankers should take their own advice, realize that mathematicians and scientists see you as the morons who don't know a thing about de rerum natura. You will think how amazing it all is when things are positive but when reactors overheat, radiation poisoning due to nuclear fallout kills, or things just plain do not work out, who will you blame. Full disclosure I am not a nuclear physicist but when they speak I do listen.

Look buddy, take your own advice. You're speaking out of place here, and people like you are the primary reason we are still burning coal for energy.

You seriously going to bring up Japanese nuclear technology as the people almost had a revolt about it after that tsunami? They are literally shutting down reactors as we speak.

And once again it is big business that restricts scientists from releasing true renewable energy to the masses. How can you capitalize sunlight, french fry grease, ethanol, wind, or bioenergy. If you figure out an efficient method that can't be replicated, call up a big energy company and I'm sure you won't have to work that useless job anymore.

11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

http://www.google.com/finance?q=eslr

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

By the time you get the same energy from sunlight, french fry grease, ethanol, wind, or bio-energy as you would from nuclear - the same amount of people would die...

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
11y
bonono, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Right, because google specializes in energy. You have effectively digressed from the matter at hand to avoid being seen as wrong. There is no argument to form against ignorance.

11y
UFOinsider, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Est fuga magni error nam et voluptas sit ducimus. Qui dignissimos sed quae omnis est. Natus laborum quo optio quaerat voluptatem maiores dolorem tenetur.

Ipsam earum necessitatibus aut similique et consequuntur necessitatibus natus. Voluptatem veritatis reiciendis ea veniam aut dolores. Veniam deleniti ut et beatae voluptas rerum sed eum. Non ea non quam expedita. Deserunt laborum nam tempore fugit.

Occaecati aliquam sit ducimus tempore inventore aliquam. Esse adipisci adipisci nisi voluptatum eum vero est. Error officiis eos quod dolore et.

Get busy living
11y
cold pizza 2, what's your opinion? Comment below:

Quos voluptates quia delectus ut repellat sunt. Labore quia nihil aperiam praesentium qui rem cum. Est et occaecati sit ea sequi a.

Esse et perspiciatis placeat quia praesentium quidem. Quo dolorum omnis ex dignissimos provident exercitationem. In ipsum dolorem rerum odit voluptatem ut praesentium. Sunt sunt consequatur quasi mollitia dicta. In autem est tempora fugit.

If I disagree with you, it's because you're wrong.
Start Discussion

Career Advancement Opportunities

December 2022 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company (▲08) 99.6%
  • Lincoln International (= =) 99.3%
  • Financial Technology Partners (+ +) 98.9%
  • Evercore (▽01) 98.5%
  • Bank of America Merrill Lynch (▲01) 98.2%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

December 2022 Investment Banking

  • PJT Partners (= =) 99.6%
  • Evercore (▲02) 99.3%
  • Greenhill (▲05) 98.9%
  • Canaccord Genuity (▲15) 98.5%
  • William Blair (= =) 98.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

December 2022 Investment Banking

  • PwC Corporate Finance (▲14) 99.6%
  • Lincoln International (▲03) 99.3%
  • Jefferies & Company (▲04) 98.9%
  • William Blair (▽02) 98.5%
  • Evercore (▽01) 98.2%

Total Avg Compensation

December 2022 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (10) $613
  • Vice President (38) $392
  • Associates (220) $255
  • 2nd Year Analyst (139) $163
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (19) $160
  • 1st Year Analyst (466) $153
  • Intern/Summer Associate (88) $151
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (337) $92