More on Bears Ears: Uranium

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/uranium-firm-urged-trump-officials-to-shrink-bears-ears-national-monument/2017/12/08/2eea39b6-dc31-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story.html?utm_term=.22b0c712c3e2

Doubt this will surprise anyone.

Nope. Good to see it in writing though. 

"Well, damn the lot of them, I think, rolling down the broad asphalt trail to Moab at a safe and sane eighty-five, not forgetting to keep one eye skinned for a sign of Fred Burkett the local highway patrolman, whose favorite hiding place north of town was behind a Chamber of Commerce billboard welcoming tourists to "Moab, Uranium Capital of the World" - was, until I leveled the billboard to the ground one night with a bucksaw which I had borrowed for the job from the United States National Park Service, Department of Interior (Help Keep America Beautiful)".

-- Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire, late 1950s.

plantmandan wrote:

Edward Abbey, Desert Solitaire, late 1950s.

Ed Abbey must be spinning in his grave watching the latest shenanigans...

“The goal of the meeting . . . was not to go and advocate on the boundaries,” he said, adding that the lobbying for that was “on a separate track.” Still, the officials proposed small boundary adjustments to accommodate the monitoring stations as well as the mine, he acknowledged. And they emphasized that the company had cut its workforce by more than half since 2015 because of low uranium prices.

“They heard what we had to say about the job losses, etc.,” he said. Zinke’s deputies “were pretty positively disposed to” the idea of spurring future domestic uranium production.

The Interior Department did not respond to a request for comment Friday.

The price of uranium has recently hovered between $20 and $25 per pound. To justify mining activity, it needs to approach $40 to $50. Michael Heim, a securities research analyst at Noble Capital Markets, said Friday that the current amount “is not a sustainable price” for firms such as Energy Fuels Resources. Given today’s price, Heim said, “the idea of creating more areas to mine wouldn’t have much impact.

They want to mine when there is a limited domestic demand for uranium? Why not leave the land alone and use it as a strategic reserve like Alaska pretty much is now?

I consider myself libertarian but all the mining talk has me scratching my head and asking "why?"

There seems to be still open access to high development potential areas, even the more lucrative places in the monument are areas that extend outside the monument or not very uranium rich areas.  Something seems off.

jg fox wrote:

They want to mine when there is a limited domestic demand for uranium? 

I consider myself libertarian but all the mining talk has me scratching my head and asking "why?"

Lotsa new reactors coming online globally,and many existing reactors in U.S. need fuel.

Jim Turner wrote:

Lotsa new reactors coming online globally,and many existing reactors in U.S. need fuel.

Existing reactors are dictating a price of $25 a pound; that price is based off the current demand and available supply.  I understand global sales but how many more reactors coming online (in nations without ties to terrorists) are going to drive up the price to $40-something to make it profitable?