Uranerz Energy Corp. (URZ)

All Comments on URZ

  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 11:35 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    @bluesmoke: sorry for the typos. and then, not everyone in the world is a native english speaker. you got my points very well. if you prefer to focus on form rather than substance - it's your choice. Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 11:34 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    @iscarethebear: you are long claims and short facts. you need not to tell me that france recycles part of the uranium. i live over here. It does NOT solve the storage problem. there are huge facilities built in germany inold mines but the problem is: nobody knows how the area will look like, from a geotectonic point of view even 200 years from now, not to speak of 5000!. then we have NO material that will last even for a mere 200 years to contain the radiating waste! so at best you have to "repack" the stuff every 200 years. pretty expensive over aperiod of 5000-10000 years i might say.
    I have my facts straight, don't worry. I was once a die-hard adherent to the theory of global warming by human CO2 emissions and used to harop at people who questioned it, i urged everyone to do something against these emissions ( i am still for doing something against them, btw). Hoiwever, I started educating myself listening to the arguments of exceptional scientists who are getting silenced these days by the mob very much like the ecologists got silenced in the 80s (what an irony). Human action has a negligiböe effect on global warming and in fact, we are just coming off a cool period in Earth's history. a few million years back ethere were similiar periods of global warming and cooling. I guess, responsible for these were the cavemen breathing too much, no?     Reply
  • commenter
    bluesmoke
    May 09 11:29 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    If fxtrader07 used proper grammar, spelled words correctly, and learned how to construct a coherent sentence, then there's a chance others would at least consider his comments with some measure of objectivity. Reply
  • commenter
    User 170687
    May 09 10:59 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    CCJ is up 10% in the past 5 days Reply
  • commenter
    Iscaethebear
    May 09 10:56 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    Fstrader07 clearly does not deal in facts as many people do when fighting a losing battle. I suggest that you look at the actual data and use your higher brain. For one I choose to have power. Second there is plenty of uranium in the world. Have you looked at the way France recycles their spent metal? For the record, my weekend home that I built in 1997 is off grid. I am well versed in alternative energy. Only nuclear power can supply our great energy demands at this time.
    Regards,
    Scarethebear     Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 10:35 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    to put in perspective: any outbreak of a larger mud vulcano somewhere in the ocean will kill ALL CO2 reduction effects achieved with hundreds of billions of wasted money.
    think about it, before calling people ignorant and promoting nuclear nonsense that has the very real potential to kill the entire life on the planet even without any majopr accident or without any major terrorist attack - just by being slowly released into the atmosphere and the oceans by leakages and waste from uranium companies.     Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 10:03 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    the only ignorants i see here are the dumb promoters and pumpers of nuclear technology. they have yet to come up with a convincing solution to store the radiactive waste. and no "some technology, some process may be found somewhen" is NOT a solution. it's wish.
    regarding Co2: there are very credible scientists (much more credible people than businessmen like al gore who just makes millions trading co2 emission rights and promoting himself) who convincingly argue that the global warming thesis is nonsense as far as making CO2 emissions responsible for it.
    a much much much higher variable are sun-activity, vulcanism and other factors while human activities account for no more than about 5% of co2 emissions. so reducing them by 20% will make a dent, huh?
    there is no need to store away Co2 somwhere. It#s total nonsense and just another hype to tax people and shuffle the money into pockets of banks, politicians and clever businessmen     Reply
  • commenter
    bluesmoke
    May 09 09:49 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    Excellent article. (It's too bad the underinformed are so adept at showing their ignorance). What many don't realize is the "storage" of fossil fuels is actually the end result - millions of tons of CO2 and particulates emitted into our atmosphere - just as deadly. Since the burning of U308 is a chemical process, the chances of discovering another process to extrapolate and reuse what is left is very high. Or, making the initial process more efficient. It just takes time.

    There is no question in my mind nuclear is the way to go, at least while we continue to develop new technologies as well.     Reply
  • commenter
    LoveShorting
    May 09 08:56 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    I am a chemist by day. Nuclear makes perfect sense to me as a better trade-off, not as a perfect solution. At $120+ per barrel, oil is draining wealth from successful, creative, hard-working countries and sending it to corrupt states with little else to offer the world (Saudi Arabia, a kingdom no less, Russia, essentially a monarchy under King Putin, Venezuela under our buddy Hugo, etc.). Ethanol is a horrible trade-off as those starving to death today would attest if they were still alive. Sure, drill in Alaska, that works for me. But if we did not have nuclear today I can't imagine how much worse life would be. Go big U ! Reply
  • commenter
    stillafewlef
    t
    May 09 08:48 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    I've heard that thorium is: (a) a safer source of radiation energy due to safer plants due to the spontaneous reaction tendency to slow down rather than escalate; (b) much shorter half life of degradation products which markedly reduces long-term safe storage requirements; (c) and inability to be converted into weapons-grade material. It is apparently widely found and easily mined. Are you familiar with it? Reply
  • commenter
    Trader T
    May 09 08:46 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    You overestimate the wisdom of politicians. They will continue to spin their lies and spend billions of dollars on fraud solar and wind power scams. Nuclear power is the cheapest and cleanest power source available, but don't expect politicians or an uneducated public to understand the engineering and physics involved. Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 08:06 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    nuclear being a "clean" energy is one of the boldest and biggest LIES that are currently circulating - repeated ad nauseum either by people with vested interests or by people who are simply ignorant and/or plain dumb Reply
  • commenter
    fxtrader07
    May 09 08:04 AM
    Uranium: Safely and Efficiently Powering the Future [view article]
    "safely" and "efficient"?... Give me a break! Before there is not really a safe and lasting (for about 10.000 years!!) storage solution found for all the nuclear radiating highly toxic waste, there can be no talk of "effcient" or "cheap" or "safe". very likely, energy companies will make billions while the societies in future (our grandchildren) will have to bear many times these amounts in costs to somehow manage the nuclear waste.
    the nuclear lobby is one of the most dangerous ones for the life on this planet.
    nuclear power neither has the potential (too little uranium available on a global scale) nor is it safe or cheap enough to serve as a reliable source of energy     Reply
  • commenter
    CrossMelon16
    0
    Apr 13 12:33 PM
    Uranium on the Rise [view article]
    buy! Reply
  • commenter
    SeekingAlpha
    Editors
    Apr 06 05:20 AM
    My Website
    General Discussion on URZ
    Is this a buy or a sell? Reply
Loading...
Symbols:
Authors:
Quick Links: