SXRZF: Finra deleted symbol. Pursuant to the Arrangement, shareholders of the Company other than JSC Atomredmetzoloto and its affiliates will receive $2.86 cash for each common share of the Company.

http://www.otcbb.com/asp/dailylist_detail.asp?d=10/21/2013&mkt_ctg=NON-OTCBB

Rock bottom u308 prices... Not for long...

WOW ~~~Uranium~~~ stocks are HOT right now!!!!!

USU, URRE, UEC, URA and more...

marked

WTF..Uranium one selling out to some SA co.??

For the week: -1.71%... the sector moved ahead according to PKN...

Sector observation...

Uranium Price Gap Widens

http://uraniuminvestingnews.com/11849/uranium-price-gap-widens.html

Tuesday July 3, 2012, 1:09pm PDT IBTimes reported June was a slow month in uranium as the yellowcake remained largely untraded and the gap between buyers and sellers widened.

As quoted in the market news:

“Spot prices barely budged on the 15 transactions reported in June by industry consultant TradeTech, with sellers unwilling to drop their prices and buyers not willing to pay more.

With traders comprising the vast majority of both buyers and sellers in the bulk of the transactions reported over the past several months, TradeTech notes the spot uranium price remains stuck between the lack of committed buyers and what are fairly unmotivated sellers at current levels.

Anything under $2.75 should be golden.

Strong possibility of a market bottom... link to comps:

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/candleglance.html?USU,URRE,URG,URZ,EFR.TO,DNN,UEC,URPTF,MGAFF,SXRZF,CXZ,RRI.V|C|H14,3

excellent post bud...people mark for ya!

Uranium related: Another Sign That A Nuclear Renaissance Is Inevitable - Oil Prices Rose 19% In 2011
January 3, 2012

http://seekingalpha.com/article/317065-oil-prices-rose-19-in-2011-another-sign-that-a-nuclear-renaissance-is-inevitable

Oil prices rose 19% over the course of 2011, the third consecutive year marked by a rise in the price of oil. Below is the monthly chart of Brent Crude Oil that illustrates the clear uptrend.



While currency devaluation, geopolitical tensions, and speculators are all forces that may be contributing to rising oil prices and greater market volatility, a growing factor that suggests the price rise will continue is the supply/demand imbalance in the oil market. In other words: demand for oil and other fossil fuels is only growing, but the supply of them is diminishing. The chart below illustrates.



While I believe the world will likely be using fossil fuels as a primary source of energy for some time, we are clearly at a point where a new source of energy is needed. I believe nuclear energy is the primary candidate destined to grow, for the following reasons:

1. It can provide "baseload" - meaning always on - energy
2. It is emission-free
3. It has high power density, which means it does not require an inordinate amount of land and thus is conducive to powering cities
4. It is inexpensive

No other source can really make these same claims. Wind and solar are much more expensive and cannot effectively provide baseload energy, which is precisely why they remain insignificant sources of power on a global basis. Technological breakthroughs may change this, though I don't see this on the horizon, and believe renewables will have limited roles in the global energy market until this changes.

And so, the rise of nuclear energy is virtually inevitable -- the world will demand it for survival. Accordingly, China already has 25 nuclear power plants under construction, and realizes that nuclear will be a key part of how its nation is powered as it increasingly urbanizes. Investors can recognize China as the "smart money" -- the force driving the market's demand and sending prices higher -- in the nuclear energy market.

Of course, this transition will not occur overnight - nuclear power plants take a long time to build - and so oil, coal, and natural gas will continue to play an important role in providing energy to the world. Investors will need to be patient, as this market may take up to a decade to really get going. The value network is still developing and much depends on how government participates and regulates the market, as well as what innovations entrepreneurs will develop as the market grows.

For now, the investment opportunity is simple: uranium. Nuclear power is most easily obtained through processing of uranium, and so uranium mining firms are the buy and hold opportunity for patient investors looking to participate in the nuclear renaissance. Uranium ETFs like URA as well as mining companies like Uranerz (URZ), Uranium Energy Corporation (UEC), and Cameco (CCJ) are plays that make sense from this perspective, with UEC being my favorite due to the adept leadership of its Amir Adnani - its founder and CEO with a background as a serial entrepreneur with a marketing focus - as well as the firm's focus on ISR mining which I regard as an enabling technology that will allow UEC to experience lower mining costs than traditional open pit mines.

As compelling as the uranium story is, I cannot overemphasize the need for patience. Nuclear energy is still not appreciated and the entire energy market is poorly understood. This represents a great opportunity for the educated investor, provided they have patience and conviction, and understand the economics of nuclear is really the only option barring some type of technological breakthrough that currently is nowhere in sight. As always, investors will find it to their advantage to focus on the actions of the smart money - which in this case is China - while ignoring short-term sentiment factors like the concerns about nuclear energy stemming from the Fukushima crisis.

While uranium remains the mineral to invest in and focus on, investors should also keep an eye out to see how Thorium develops. Thorium is a potential substitute for uranium in the production of nuclear power, and possesses less of a radiation risk - a common criticism of uranium. However, the value network for thorium is a bit undeveloped at the moment, and it does not appear that there is yet a "smart money" faction that can push prices higher. Thorium is also more a more expensive way of generating nuclear power, an obstacle I suspect will need to be overcome if thorium is to become a serious opportunity for investors looking to invest in the nuclear renaissance.

So get ready for a whole new energy paradigm as we move away from oil. Understand, though, the process will take time, and that the science and economics suggest the opportunity is nuclear energy unless there is some type of a big technological breakthrough. And of course, patience is your friend; while the economics will, as always, ultimately dictate what happens, the process can be slow. China is the one to watch, and so long as they are committed to the market, any sell-offs in opportunities to invest in nuclear energy, namely via uranium mining firms, constitute an opportunity to buy the dip.

Disclosure: I am long UEC, CCJ.

Ahhhhh..I guess we are waiting on China...which might be a while longer now that China is in a down turn.

A glut of $NATGAS... a cheap but temporary alternative...

what the hell happened....??, Uranium one should over 4 bucks..not under 3..lol!

Nuclear driver: Canada reaches uranium trade deal with China

Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:16am EST

* Pact allows more Canadian uranium into China

* China fastest growing nuclear market in world

* Uranium to be used for civilian nuclear program

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/09/canada-china-uranium-idUSL2E8D94O520120209

BEIJING, Feb 9 (Reuters) - Canada has reached a deal with China that will make it easier for Cameco Corp and other Canadian uranium producers to sell nuclear fuel into the fastest-growing market for atomic power.

The trade deal, announced on Thursday during Prime Minister Stephen Harper's visit to China, allows Cameco - the largest publicly listed producer - to sell uranium from its Canadian projects into China. Details of the agreement were not provided.

"This agreement will help Canadian uranium companies to substantially increase exports to China, the world's fastest growing market for these products," Harper's office said in a statement.

China currently operates some 13 nuclear reactors, with a total nuclear power output of about 11 gigawatts. The Asian country, which has 27 reactors under construction, plans to boost output to 80 gigawatts by 2020.

By contrast, the United States has 104 nuclear reactors.

Construction of reactors in China is expected to outweigh the decommissioning of plants in Japan, where reactors were taken offline in the wake of the Fukushima disaster last March, and in Germany, where the Japanese disaster led to a policy shift away from nuclear power.

In 2010, Cameco signed two deals with China to provide the country more than 50 million pounds of uranium over 15 years. Cameco has major uranium projects in Canada, the United States, Kazakhstan and Australia.

"We couldn't deliver Canadian uranium here until this agreement was signed so it opened the door for us to do that," said Chief Executive Tim Gitzel, who is part of a trade delegation visiting China this week with the Canadian prime minister.

Canada and China are working to finalize the text of the agreement and expect it to be completed within the next few months, according to the release.

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan-based Cameco, which will report its fourth-quarter earnings after market close on Thursday, plans to boost its uranium production to 40 million pounds a year by 2018.

U308 sector comparables:

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/candleglance.html?USU,URRE,URG,URZ,EFR.TO,DNN,UEC,URPTF,MGAFF,SXRZF,CXZ,RRI.V|B|H14,3

Scoreboard for the week: +17.30%

+7% for the week so far...

No joke... Here goes the U308 sector!!! Charted comparables:

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/candleglance.html?USU,URRE,URG,URZ,PUC.V,ATURF,DNN,UEC,URPTF,MGAFF|B|H14,3

Ever since my post #62 the sector is on fire!!!

wow...UUU on a roll..

I look at today as a confirmation of a very bullish reversal yesterday.

10 nuclear sector comps:

http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/candleglance.html?USU,URRE,URG,URZ,EFR.TO,DNN,UEC,URPTF,MGAFF,SXRZF|B|H14,3

I would ask that question about the whole sector... U308 prices are not moving at all.

lol..what is up with Uranium One??...geeezzz!

Unbelievable!!!...especially when I read Russia and China are going forward with their nuclear programs.

Plus the spot price for uranium is one the way up..

Down 9.47% for the week...

DOE has a new assistant...

April 15, 2011

Dr. Peter B. Lyons Confirmed as Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy

http://www.energy.gov/news/10269.htm

Washington, D.C. - Dr. Peter B. Lyons was confirmed by the Senate on Thursday, April 14, as the Department of Energy's Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy.

"Pete Lyons' depth of expertise and experience make him uniquely qualified for this role, and I am confident he will continue to serve the Department, the President and the Nation with distinction," said Energy Secretary Steven Chu. "I applaud the Senate for quickly taking action to approve his nomination, and I look forward to our work together to ensure that safe nuclear power plays an important role in America's clean energy future."

As Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy, Dr. Lyons will serve as the primary policy advisor to the Secretary of Energy and the Department on key issues involving nuclear energy research, development and demonstration, as well as international nuclear activities. His responsibilities will include managing Federal programs aimed at fulfilling the potential of nuclear power as a major contributor in meeting our Nation's energy supply, environmental and energy security needs.

Before his Senate confirmation to his new position, Dr. Lyons served as the Acting Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy since November 2010, and as the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Office of Nuclear Energy at the Department of Energy (2009-2010). Prior to this appointment, Dr. Lyons served as a Commissioner of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission from 2005 until his term ended in 2009. From 2003 to 2005, Dr. Lyons served as Science Advisor on the staff of U.S. Senator Pete Domenici and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, where he focused on military and civilian uses of nuclear technology, national science policy, and nuclear non-proliferation.

From 1997 to 2003, Dr. Lyons was assigned by the Los Alamos National Laboratory to serve as Science Advisor on the staff of U.S. Senator Pete Domenici and the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, where he focused on military and civilian uses of nuclear technology, national science policy, and nuclear non-proliferation. From 1969 to 1996, Dr. Lyons held several positions at the Los Alamos National Laboratory including: Director for Industrial Partnerships, Deputy Associate Director for Energy and Environment, and Deputy Associate Director-Defense Research and Applications.

Dr. Lyons has published more than 100 technical papers, holds three patents related to fiber optics and plasma diagnostics, and served as chairman of the NATO Nuclear Effects Task Group for five years. Dr. Lyons is a Fellow of both the American Nuclear Society and the American Physical Society. He received his Ph.D. in Nuclear Astrophysics from the California Institute of Technology (1969) and his undergraduate degree in Physics and Mathematics from the University of Arizona (1964).

-2.51% is the scorecard for the week...

For the week: 10.69%

ahhh..thx man..I didn't know UUU was available on the US market

The quote is for the US listed SZRZF and the chart in the i-Message is for the Canadian listed UUU. Same company, 2 different currencies.

he bud...well I see $4.48 for the pps. and 21.397mil day for vol...but the quote above says $4.60 with 669K vol...????

I am missing something here..lol

What is seen in the charts is delayed info... an outstanding day +13%!!!

hey..FT

If this is UUU.to on the TSE...why are the bid/ask and volume different??

thx..

US Nuclear Regulators To Vote On Proposal To Review Japan Crisis, Assess US Safety
Date : 03/21/2011 @ 12:21PM
Source : Dow Jones News

http://ih.advfn.com/p.php?pid=nmona&article=46958493

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is expected to vote today on a proposal that directs nuclear officials to conduct a 90-day review of events at Japan's Fukushima power plant and to identify potential new rules for the U.S. nuclear industry.

This 90-day review marks one of the first formal steps taken by the commission to digest incoming information on the Japanese nuclear crisis and to determine whether the U.S. needs to adopt new standards at its own facilities as a result.

In the meantime, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is also conducting "temporary" inspections of the 104 nuclear reactors in the U.S. to assess their ability to respond to severe accidents -- namely, to determine whether they can deal with total losses of power, mitigate problems associated with flooding and deal with equipment losses due to seismic events.

The commission will also outline goals for a longer-term review of the Japanese crisis and the safety of the U.S. industry.

The 90-day review, meanwhile, will include an evaluation of the ability of reactors to respond to station blackouts and severe accidents. It will also involve a radiological consequent analysis, said Bill Borchardt, NRC's executive director for operations.

The review "will evaluate all of the currently available information from the Japanese event and look at it to evaluate our 104 operating reactors' ability to protect against natural disasters," Borchardt said during a briefing Monday.

The NRC's commissioners are expected to vote on the 90-day review proposal today. The proposal should be made public shortly thereafter, an NRC spokesman said.

Within the 30 days of the review, NRC staff will deliver a "quick look" report to the commissioners that outlines the condition of the U.S. fleet of nuclear reactors. "The idea is just to get a quick snapshot," Borchardt said.

Given the time constraints of the 30-day review, Borchardt said the commission will not collaborate with the nuclear industry on its initial quick-look report.

Following both the temporary inspections and the 90-day review, the commission will determine whether it needs to adopt new rules or standards.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is also evaluating updated seismic information, from the U.S. Geological Survey, for the central and eastern United States.

As more information about the Japanese nuclear disaster becomes available, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will conduct a long-term analysis to identify possible areas of future research and potential changes to the reactor oversight program. This review could also lead to new rules.

Borchardt said he did not know when the commission will launch this long-term review but that it will welcome "substantial stakeholder involvement" when it does.

-By Tennille Tracy, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6619; tennille.tracy@dowjones.com

Bullish commentary: In the wake of Japan's nuclear catastrophe, uranium investors have taken it on the chin. Uranium stocks have sold off sharply as radiation fears spread around the world.

The Global X Uranium ETF tumbled -17% last Monday and opened down another -15% on Tuesday.

So what's a uranium investor to do? Is it time to cut and run... or double down?

If I were you, I'd listen to Warren Buffett: "Be fearful when others are greedy and be greedy when others are fearful."

I'm with Warren on this one. This is a major buying opportunity to pick up quality stocks at a discount as nervous investors unload uranium like crazy. Here's why:

This kneejerk reaction is grossly overdone. The iShares Japan index fund is down just -6% since the earthquake yet uranium producers in North America with minimal ties to the situation are down -25% or more. That doesn't make sense.

The ruined reactors consume just 2% of the world's uranium. The other 435 reactors worldwide will be as hungry as ever for uranium, even if Japan scales back its usage.

India and China are still fully on board. China plans to triple the size of its reactor fleet from 13 to 40 over the next decade. India wants 10 times as much nuclear power. That puts steady pressure under uranium prices.

No matter what happens in Japan, nuclear energy is not going away. Think about the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. Naysayers said there would be a permanent ban on exploration -- but we're drilling again. At the end of the day, our voracious energy needs outweigh the risk of an isolated incident.

As Buffett suggests, it takes guts... but taking stocks off the hands of panicky sellers almost always pays off in the long run.

So I'm a buyer at today's prices. I think uranium stocks will regain all their lost ground and a whole lot more.

Not to mention... there's a looming squeeze on uranium prices coming out of Russia that few people are aware of. When it hits, uranium could go through the roof.

Japan Nuclear Disaster Caps Decades of Faked Reports, Accidents
March 17, 2011, 11:22 AM EDT

By Jason Clenfield

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-03-17/japan-nuclear-disaster-caps-decades-of-faked-reports-accidents.html

March 18 (Bloomberg) -- The unfolding disaster at the Fukushima nuclear plant follows decades of falsified safety reports, fatal accidents and underestimated earthquake risk in Japan’s atomic power industry.

The destruction caused by last week’s 9.0 earthquake and tsunami comes less than four years after a 6.8 quake shut the world’s biggest atomic plant, also run by Tokyo Electric Power Co. In 2002 and 2007, revelations the utility had faked repair records forced the resignation of the company’s chairman and president, and a three-week shutdown of all 17 of its reactors.

With almost no oil or gas reserves of its own, nuclear power has been a national priority for Japan since the end of World War II, a conflict the country fought partly to secure oil supplies. Japan has 54 operating nuclear reactors -- more than any other country except the U.S. and France -- to power its industries, pitting economic demands against safety concerns in the world’s most earthquake-prone country.

Nuclear engineers and academics who have worked in Japan’s atomic power industry spoke in interviews of a history of accidents, faked reports and inaction by a succession of Liberal Democratic Party governments that ran Japan for nearly all of the postwar period.

Katsuhiko Ishibashi, a seismology professor at Kobe University, has said Japan’s history of nuclear accidents stems from an overconfidence in plant engineering. In 2006, he resigned from a government panel on reactor safety, saying the review process was rigged and “unscientific.”

Nuclear Earthquake

In an interview in 2007 after Tokyo Electric’s Kashiwazaki nuclear plant was struck by an earthquake, Ishibashi said fundamental improvements were needed in engineering standards for atomic power stations, without which Japan could suffer a catastrophic disaster.

“We didn’t learn anything,” Ishibashi said in a phone interview this week. “Nuclear power is national policy and there’s a real reluctance to scrutinize it.”

To be sure, Japan’s record isn’t the worst. The International Atomic Energy Agency rates nuclear accidents on a scale of zero to seven, with Chernobyl in the former Soviet Union rated seven, the most dangerous. Fukushima, where the steel vessels at the heart of the reactors have so far not ruptured, is currently a class five, the same category as the 1979 partial reactor meltdown at Three Mile Island in the U.S.

‘No Chernobyl’

“The key thing here is that this is not another Chernobyl,” said Ken Brockman, a former director of nuclear installation safety at the IAEA in Vienna. “Containment engineering has been vindicated. What has not been vindicated is the site engineering that put us on a path to accident.”

The 40-year-old Fukushima plant, built in the 1970s when Japan’s first wave of nuclear construction began, stood up to the country’s worst earthquake on record March 11 only to have its power and back-up generators knocked out by the 7-meter tsunami that followed.

Lacking electricity to pump water needed to cool the atomic core, engineers vented radioactive steam into the atmosphere to release pressure, leading to a series of explosions that blew out concrete walls around the reactors.

Radiation readings spiked around Fukushima as the disaster widened, forcing the evacuation of 200,000 people and causing radiation levels to rise on the outskirts of Tokyo, 135 miles (210 kilometers) to the south, with a population of 30 million.

Basement Generator

Back-up diesel generators that might have averted the disaster were positioned in a basement, where they were overwhelmed by waves.

“This in the country that invented the word Tsunami,” said Brockman, who also worked at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. “Japan is going to have a look again at its regulatory process and whether it’s intrusive enough.”

The cascade of events at Fukushima had been foretold in a report published in the U.S. two decades ago. The 1990 report by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, an independent agency responsible for safety at the country’s power plants, identified earthquake-induced diesel generator failure and power outage leading to failure of cooling systems as one of the “most likely causes” of nuclear accidents from an external event.

While the report was cited in a 2004 statement by Japan’s Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency, it seems adequate measures to address the risk were not taken by Tokyo Electric, said Jun Tateno, a former researcher at the Japan Atomic Energy Agency and professor at Chuo University.

Accident Foretold

“It’s questionable whether Tokyo Electric really studied the risks,” Tateno said in an interview. “That they weren’t prepared for a once in a thousand year occurrence will not go over as an acceptable excuse.”

Hajime Motojuku, a utility spokesman, said he couldn’t immediately confirm whether the company was aware of the report.

All six boiling water reactors at the Fukushima Dai-Ichi plant were designed by General Electric Co. and the company built the No. 1, 2 and 6 reactors, spokeswoman Emily Caruso said in an e-mail response to questions. The No. 1 reactor went into commercial operation in 1971.

Toshiba Corp. built 3 and 5. Hitachi Ltd., which folded its nuclear operations into a venture with GE known as Hitachi-GE Nuclear Energy Ltd. in 2007, built No. 4.

All the reactors meet the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requirements for safe operation during and after an earthquake for the areas where they are licensed and sited, GE said on its website.

Botched Container?

Mitsuhiko Tanaka, 67, working as an engineer at Babcock Hitachi K.K., helped design and supervise the manufacture of a $250 million steel pressure vessel for Tokyo Electric in 1975. Today, that vessel holds the fuel rods in the core of the No. 4 reactor at Fukushima’s Dai-Ichi plant, hit by explosion and fire after the tsunami.

Tanaka says the vessel was damaged in the production process. He says he knows because he orchestrated the cover-up. When he brought his accusations to the government more than a decade later, he was ignored, he says.

The accident occurred when Tanaka and his team were strengthening the steel in the pressure vessel, heating it in a furnace to more than 600 degrees Celsius (1,112 degrees Fahrenheit), a temperature that melts metal. Braces that should have been inside the vessel during the blasting were either forgotten or fell over. After it cooled, Tanaka found that its walls had warped.

‘Felt Like a Hero’

The law required the flawed vessel be scrapped, a loss that Tanaka said might have bankrupted the company. Rather than sacrifice years of work and risk the company’s survival, Tanaka used computer modeling to devise a way to reshape the vessel so that no one would know it had been damaged. He did that with Hitachi’s blessings, he said.

“I saved the company billions of yen,” Tanaka said in an interview March 12, the day after the earthquake. Tanaka says he got a 3 million yen bonus ($38,000) from Hitachi and a plaque acknowledging his “extraordinary” effort in 1974. “At the time, I felt like a hero.”

That changed with Chernobyl. Two years after the world’s worst nuclear accident, Tanaka went to the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry to report the cover-up he’d engineered more than a decade earlier. Hitachi denied his accusation and the government refused to investigate.

Kenta Takahashi, an official at the NISA’s Power Generation Inspection Division, said he couldn’t confirm whether the agency’s predecessor, the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy, conducted an investigation into Tanaka’s claim.

‘No Safety Problem’

In 1988, Hitachi met with Tanaka to discuss the work he had done to fix the dent in the vessel. They concluded that there was no safety problem, said Hitachi spokesman Yuichi Izumisawa. “We have not revised our view since then,” Izumisawa said.

In 1990, Tanaka wrote a book called “Why Nuclear Power Is Dangerous” that detailed his experiences.

Tokyo Electric in 2002 admitted it had falsified repair reports at nuclear plants for more than two decades. Chairman Hiroshi Araki and President Nobuyama Minami resigned to take responsibility for hundred of occasions on which the company had submitted false data to the regulator.

Then in 2007, the utility said it hadn’t come entirely clean five years earlier. It had concealed at least six emergency stoppages at its Fukushima Dai-Ichi power station and a “critical” reaction at the plant’s No. 3 unit that lasted for seven hours.

Coming Clean

Kansai Electric Power Co., the utility that provides Osaka with electricity, said it also faked nuclear safety records. Chubu Electric Power Co., Tohoku Electric Power Co. and Hokuriku Electric Power Co. said the same.

Only months after that second round of revelations, an earthquake struck a cluster of seven reactors run by Tokyo Electric on Japan’s north coast. The Kashiwazaki Kariwa nuclear plant, the world’s biggest, was hit by a 6.8 magnitude temblor that buckled walls and caused a fire at a transformer. About 1.5 liters (half gallon) of radioactive water sloshed out of a container and ran into the sea through drains because sealing plugs hadn’t been installed.

While there were no deaths from the accident and the IAEA said radiation released was within authorized limits for public health and environmental safety, the damage was such that three of the plant’s reactors are still offline.

After the quake, Trade Minister Akira Amari said regulators hadn’t properly reviewed Tokyo Electric’s geological survey when they approved the site in 1974.

Fault Line

The world’s biggest nuclear power plant had been built on an earthquake fault line that generated three times as much as seismic acceleration, or 606 gals, as it was designed to withstand, the utility said. One gal, a measure of shock effect, represents acceleration of 1 centimeter (0.4 inch) per square second.

After Hokuriku Electric’s Shika nuclear power plant in Ishikawa prefecture was rocked by a 6.9 magnitude quake in March 2007, government scientists found it had been built near an earthquake fault that was more than twice as long as regulators deemed threatening.

“Regulators just rubber-stamp the utilities’ reports,” Takashi Nakata, a former Hiroshima Institute of Technology seismologist and an anti-nuclear activist, said at the time.

While Japan had never suffered a failure comparable to Chernobyl, the Fukushima disaster caps a decade of fatal accidents.

Two workers at a fuel processing plant were killed by radiation exposure in 1999, when they used buckets, instead of the prescribed containers, to eye-ball a uranium mixture, triggering a chain-reaction that went unchecked for 20 hours.

‘No Possibility’

Regulators failed to ensure that safety alarms were installed at the plant run by Sumitomo Metal Mining Co. because they believed there was “no possibility” of a major accident at the facility, according to an analysis by the NRC in the U.S. The report said there were ‘indications’ the company instructed workers to take shortcuts, without regulatory approval.

In 2004, an eruption of super-heated steam from a burst pipe at a reactor run by Kansai Electric killed five workers and scalded six others. A government investigation showed the burst pipe section had been omitted from safety checklists and had not been inspected for the 28 years the plant had been in operation.

Unlike France and the U.S., which have independent regulators, responsibility for keeping Japan’s reactors safe rests with the same body that oversees the effort to increase nuclear power generation: the Trade Ministry. Critics say that creates a conflict of interest that may hamper safety.

‘Scandals and Lies’

“What is necessary is a qualified, well-funded, independent regulator,” said Seth Grae, chief executive officer of Lightbridge Corp., a nuclear consultant in the U.S. “What happens when you have an independent regulatory agency, you can have a utility that has scandals and lies, but the regulator will yank its licensing approvals,” he said.

Tanaka says his book on the experiences he had with the nuclear power industry went out of print in 2000. His publisher called on March 13, two days after the Fukushima earthquake, and said they were starting another print run.

“Maybe this time people will listen,” he said.

--With assistance from Yuriy Humber, Tsuyoshi Inajima, Maki Shiraki and Shigeru Sato in Tokyo, Makiko Kitamura in Osaka and Rachel Layne in Boston. Editors: Peter Langan, Philip Revzin

To contact the reporter on this story: Jason Clenfield in Tokyo at jclenfield@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Peter Langan at plangan@bloomberg.net

This hurts especially hard... -42% for the week... so far.

Corrective action underway... the broader market hit hard today.

My friends, for the week: +6%!!!

A good informational resource about uranium:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium

Nice day as most Uranium stocks went down

Still $10.63 as the P&F bullish price objective.

We finally have an uptick in Uranium prices... this will help the upward push.

...........................................

On the verge of a new multi year high...

On a big run right now...

Nice move today - +6%

The registered share holders are buying like crazy...

WOW.ITS YOU AGAIN UP HERE.
YOU MUST BE MY SHADOW BRAIN.LOL.I LOADED UP AT 2.22 AND 2.30.HEY FUTURECASH WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE RUSSIAN CONTROL.WILL INVESTORS GIVE THE GREEN LIGHT FOR THE DEAL TO GO THROUGH.
I THNIK WE CANGET 3.5 BEFORE AUGUST BECAUSE OF THE SPECIAL DIVIDEND.RIIIIIIIIIGHT.